Ordinary Meeting - 18 July 2024 Transcript

1 ATTENDANCE & APOLOGIES ¶

▶ 00:00:13

00:01:00 I'll move. Moved. We have moved Councillor Stockwell, seconded by Councillor Wegener. All in favour? Councillor Finzel: Yes. Mayor Wilkie: That's carried unanimously. Can I have a mover and seconder for the minutes of the special meeting held on 10 July please. Moved by Councillor Wegener. Quick off his feet and Councillor Wilson also getting quicker. All in favour? Councillor Finzel: Yes. Mayor Wilkie: That's carried unanimously. There are no more minutes. We have some petitions. Councillor Lorentson then. Councillor Lorentson: I have three petitions that I'd like to present the CEO. First petition I'm presenting on behalf of Bernadette Sullivan and Karen Musgrave. It's a petition signed by 1511 people opposing the Noosaville foreshore management plan. I have another petition on the same matter. We need a seconder for the petition please.

2 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES ¶

▶ 00:01:04

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

2.3 SPECIAL MEETING 10 JULY 2024 ¶

▶ 00:01:30· 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.

3 MAYORAL MINUTES ¶

▶ 00:01:46

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

4 PETITIONS ¶

▶ 00:01:49

00:02:00 I'll second. Mayor Wilkie: And then the motion is that the petition with 1511 signatories submitted by Karen Musgrave regarding opposition to the Noosaville foreshore master plan be received and referred to the Chief Executive Officer to determine appropriate action. All in favour? Yes. That's unanimous. Councillor Lorentson: The next petition I have is on behalf of Andrew McCarthy and the Friends of Noosaville foreshore management plan. The petition has 1663 signatories regarding opposition of the Noosaville foreshore master plan. I request that it's received and referred to the Chief Executive Officer to determine appropriate action. I have a seconder for that please. Mayor Wilkie: Councillor Wilson. All in favour? Yes. That's unanimous. You're doing well councillor.

00:03:00 One more to go. Councillor Lorentson: I have a petition I'm presenting on behalf of the residents of Talorm Street against amendment number two, changes to the Noosaville plan, 202 medium density residential zone. The petition with 2511 people opposing the Noosaville foreshore management plan. I have a seconder for that please. Mayor Wilkie: Councillor Phillips. All in favour? Councillor Finzel: Yes. Mayor Wilkie: That's unanimous. I have a petition I move that the hard copy and e-petition with collectively approximately 1095 signatures submitted by Nick Cook requesting that council return the people's park to a car park in Haston Street Noosa Heads be received and referred to the Chief Executive Officer to determine appropriate action.

00:04:00 I have a seconder for that please. Councillor Wilson. All in favour? Yes. That's carried unanimously. Next item is a notified motion from Councillor Lorentson. Councillor Lorentson would you like to move your motion? Speaker 7: I have a notified motion. Councillor Lorentson: That council, that council requires the CEO to reopen the community consultation. The proposed amendment number two to the Noosaville plan 2020 for an additional two weeks from 22nd of July 2024 to 4th of August 2024. We have a seconder for that please. I have a second. Councillor Phillips. We have a four. Councillor Lorentson. Councillor Lorentson: I initially made this request on June 29th but unfortunately it did not go ahead. I'm now bringing this matter to the council.

5 NOTIFIED MOTIONS ¶

▶ 00:04:34

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

5.1 Request to Reopen the Consultation Period for Proposed Amendment No. 2 to Noosa Plan 2020 ¶

▶ 00:04:36· Carried unanimously 7-0 · 3 divisions from council's minutes

00:05:00 My primary concern is that we had two concurrent consultations involving complex documents. The Noosaville foreshore infrastructure master plan and concept designs for resilience which was over 100 pages. And the proposed amendment number two over 1,000 pages. Both documents were complex and both impacted and challenged residents and businesses. The consultation was carried out by the Council for a decision. A motion for the Noosaville foreshore infrastructure master plan and concept designs closed on July 7th. It attracted significant media interest, community rallies, petitions and a record number of submissions. In my opinion and that of others in the community, this intense focus overshadowed the consultation process. The proposed amendment number two to the Noosaville plan 2020. A document of substantial importance with far reaching implications.

00:06:00 Residents and businesses. The proposed amendments could potentially impact or change residents existing planning rights, property values, businesses and the character of Noosa. Therefore we must allow our residents adequate time to review the changes and provide informed feedback. The Noosaville Chamber of Commerce held a forum breakfast on 25th June. The Noosaville Chamber of Commerce held a forum breakfast on 25th June. Which was well attended with over 120 businesses, given the significance of some of the proposed changes, the complexity of the documents, school holidays impact, and inconvenient timed pop-ups and meet in the park events, they too have requested an extension to the council's consultation period. I will now leave this to the floor for discussion.

00:07:00 Mayor Wilkie: Councillors, in the interests of good governance and given we have received submissions from all major chains of commerce, traders, community and resident groups and hundreds of submissions, I'd urge there be no political interference in what ought to be an at arm's length assessment process to allow staff the professional courtesy of the time and space to get their reporting right on what has been a thorough and already delayed exercise so we can get the amendments to the state before election caretaker period shuts down the government, potentially delaying the process. This is also a good opportunity to thank the staff for conducting such an effective and thorough consultation process. Your work has been invaluable, as has your advice. Ministerial guidelines recommend, and I'm going to talk a bit to that so we get an understanding of what has gone on. Ministerial guidelines recommend 20 business days for consultation on planning scheme amendments. Staff recommended six full weeks to allow extra time for consultation.

00:08:00 Staff recommended seven full engagements, which councillors wisely endorsed. Since submissions closed on Sunday July 14, there have been collated hundreds of submissions and have provided a fact sheet to councillors about the process. Feedback from all the major chambers of commerce, traders associations and interested community and residents groups and hundreds of residents have been received and is being assessed. Planners spoke face to face with over 250 people. In no fewer than seven public displays at different locations across the Shire, some spending up to an hour and a half with each person, including at the very popular Noosa Farmers Markets on a Sunday. Please pass on our thanks to your staff for giving up their personal time with their families to do this important work. Apart from the public advertising in newspapers, multiple press releases and Facebook posts, staff sent over 1,000 letters directly to the owners of properties where a zone change was proposed and to owners of properties that are joint sites of proposed zone changes, advising them on how to comment.

00:09:00 Noosa Council officers sent 100 emails directly to planning, design and development consultants known to operate in or have clients in the Noosa Shire. As well as alerting them to the proposed amendments, they were invited to attend an industry briefing which was subsequently held. Staff sent specially written emails to 39 business and community groups, advising them on the proposed amendments, urging them to comment and share information with their members. Staff responded to over 60 enquiries via phone and email and for walk-in customers. They have advised counsellors that some of these conversations led to submissions. Others had their questions answered there and then and felt they therefore did not need to make a submission. On the Your Say engagement page, 3,848 people visited at least one page and accessed the material.

00:10:00 1,802 people downloaded the document. Thanks to the thorough approach taken to this consultation, staff advised that the full range of views that are likely to emerge have already been captured in submissions already received. As many know, this process was already unavoidably delayed by one year when the amendments were held up by the state in their first state interest check. We have received advice from the state that with the October state election looming, this amendment package needs to be sent to the state planners by the end of August, no later than the end of August, to help ensure they can be ratified before caretaker mode shuts down the state government, before the election, on approximately September 1. We have been advised that if we miss this period, the amendments could be delayed until well into next year.

00:11:00 We need to respect that the people doing the work, that is our planners, need the space and the time to get their reporting right. Interfering in their work by re-advertising and re-opening the consultation will rush and compress their reporting timeframe, likely increase the chances of technical errors and thus unnecessary delays, and almost certainly fail to deliver the certainty to industry and residents until next year. Let's allow staff the professional courtesy, time and space for preparing their reporting without political interference that could cause unnecessary and irresponsible delays on an already extensive, thorough, effective, and time-sensitive process. Again, please accept my thanks for your professionalism, work ethic and willingness to give up your weekends to deliver a thorough and effective process and gather this feedback from our community.

00:12:00 Councillor Lorentson: I have a question to the Chair. You keep referencing political interference, can you elaborate? Mayor Wilkie: So, staff, since July 14 when the process closed, staff have been collating the submissions and doing their work as endorsed by the last Council resolution when we approved the six-week consultation period. By moving a motion, by the political arm of this Council moving a motion to interfere in that process, I'm calling out political interference in that process because it's the political arm of the Council that's interfering with the organisational arm of the Council where the work is done. That's what I mean by political interference.

00:13:00 Councillor Finzel: Excuse me, Mr Chair. Mayor Wilkie: Councillor Lorentson was on her feet first, if that's all right. Councillor Finzel: My apologies. My apologies. I'd just like to comment that online I didn't hear the question nor can I clearly understand what's being said by Councillor Lorentson. I'm just wondering, is there something wrong with the microphone there? Mayor Wilkie: All I can say is... No, it's not that one. Councillor Lorentson: We've only got one team's microphone. That's the screaming one. So, with the problem of the PPA, that's the best we can do at your office. Mayor Wilkie: Okay. I'll repeat the question, Karen, if you can hear me. Councillor Lorentson asked, what did I mean by political interference? Councillor Finzel: Thank you, Mr Chair. Mayor Wilkie: Okay. Councillor Lorentson, you have the floor. Councillor Lorentson: So, I'm just getting some clarification. So, we, councillors around the table, we politically interfere with the duties of staff.

00:14:00 Is that what you're saying? I'm just a little bit confused with the response to that question. Mayor Wilkie: I'm advising we don't interfere with the already approved reporting process. I'm advising we don't. Okay. So, I'm speaking against the notice of motion and advising we don't interfere with the process to allow staff the time and the space to get their reporting right and make the reporting timeframes that we've been advised from the state need to be met in order for the reporting of these amendments to be assessed by state planners before the government shuts down due to caretaking period. Okay. Thank you. Councillor Phillips: Can I speak? Yes. Mr Chair. Thank you. So, I just want to speak on behalf of the notified motion by Councillor Lorentson and my support for that and there's a few reasons why.

00:15:00 I just wanted to triple check the June, July school holidays. As a parent and speaking on behalf of many of our community members that are family members, parents trying to work through the school holidays, the consultation period overlapped with our school holiday period for June, July. It ran from the 22nd of June to the 7th of July and I know myself how difficult it was to work through school holidays. And the time to... To digest the information just as a counsellor, let alone the community, that we're talking about language that not everyone understands. And so it's really important to me that we give community opportunity to digest the information, talk, which our community do. They love to sit down and have a barbecue with each other, don't they, and chat about the things that are affecting them. And this is one of those things that is affecting our community and I believe that over that

00:16:00 period we probably had families get together. And chat about how this would impact them. And so then they go back and they digest that information and they go to someone they might trust with that information and take time to really understand the impacts that it's going to have. And so one thing that I'm concerned about and not to take away anything from the staff because I really think they've done a great job with the workload that I've even seen you have on. And we've discussed the workload. We've talked about it. So I want to firstly acknowledge that because I'm not taking away from that. But I want to go into reality, which is out there in our community, winter, sickness, school holidays, cost of living, like all of these are impacting our day to day residents. And so when we throw things out to them with consultation on the foreshore river plan and these amendments, I believe that takes time.

00:17:00 And I understand what you're saying, Mr. Mayor. But I really want to support the amendment to give the community some more time to chat with each other and see what information they can give us to make sure that we're making really sound decisions in here. Thanks. Mayor Wilkie: Question to staff. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Mayor Wilkie: Yes. Business groups, traders association, resident groups, community groups and residents and all the people that you met face-to-face with during the pop-ups over 250, we had face-to-face conversations. Do you feel you've been given a sufficient range of views to feel that all the issues likely to be raised are already covered in the submissions that you've raised or you've addressed or received?

00:18:00 Director Rawlings: I'll start with a response to that. We have received very comprehensive feedback. There are many very comprehensive submissions. We were just commenting this morning how incredibly impressive the submissions are in terms of their level of detail and consideration. And that's both from groups, so community groups, our industry groups, chamber groups, our consultant talent groups. And planners, architects, builders, but also residents and landowners. Really comprehensive, considered submissions that have built on conversations that they've had with staff, that access the information. We had a dozen different fact sheets, lots of frequently asked questions. So people have drawn on all of that information, mapping changes and everything and included those things in submissions.

00:19:00 So reflecting on the last slide. You know, six weeks or so of consultation and the issues that have been raised of concern. They've been raised by multiple people. So yes, we think we know what the issues of concern are in the scope of those in the amendments. Councillor Lorentson: How many formal submissions were received on the amendments and how does that compare to the Noosaville Foreshore Management Plan? Councillor Finzel: Sorry, just before there's an answer, I'm having great difficulty in hearing Councillor Lorentson's questions. Question to the Chair. I'm just wondering if you are able to repeat Councillor Lorentson's questions before an answer is provided. Is that possible? Mayor Wilkie: We'll do, Councillor Finzel. So the question was how many submissions were received for the Planestem amendments? And how do they compare in number to the submissions received?

00:20:00 And how do they compare in number to the submissions received for the Noosaville Foreshore Master Plan draft? Was that clear? Councillor Finzel? Director Rawlings: Yes, thank you, Mr Chair. Through the Chair. So today we've got about 350 submissions on the Noosa amendments process. But they are still trickling in given mail and the system. So that number is a little bit fluid. So we've got about 350 submissions on the Noosa amendments process. And like I mentioned, they're not format submissions or standard submissions or copied submissions, which we can often get in other consultation processes. These are all individual submissions and many of them very comprehensive, like 20, 30 pages. In comparison to the Noosaville Foreshore Master Plan, I haven't analysed all of those. I've looked at all of the planning scheme submissions, so I know the in-depth nature of those.

00:21:00 There's a lot more for the Noosaville Foreshore Master Plan. It's around 2,000. But we are still in the process of reviewing those in terms of whether there's some standard numbers to those or individual submissions. So what I would say is it's not just a quantity issue. It's about the quantum and the in-depth nature of the submissions that we've also received through the planning scheme, which are incredibly comprehensive. Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: I think councillors wish to speak to the motion. Councillor Wegener: Councillor Wynne. So here are the two plans, the Noosa planning amendments and the Noosa River Foreshore Master Plan. And they're two very, very different plans completely. And the planning amendments, they come after the housing strategy that took the entire

00:22:00 term last time we were working on. And the STA local laws and the fallout from that. So this doesn't come out of a vacuum. This is the continuation of longstanding work policy by Noosa Council. So the two are just different. When you go online and you make your submissions, they are wildly different things. In conversation, they're very different. So I think that the four weeks was plenty, but there's also six weeks now. There's two extra weeks given to this. So I feel in a way that the people that have been waiting for this have been waiting a very, very long time for these amendments. They were very ready for them to come out and make submissions. And in a way, I just think you do not underestimate the intelligence of the Noosa resident. They know the difference between these two. They've been waiting for this for a year. We've learned over and over, the last election being a fine example of how the Noosa residents

00:23:00 understand what is going on and make great decisions. So I'm very, very confident in the process for this too, and especially for the planning scheme amendments. So I will not be supporting the motion. Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: Any other councillors wish to speak to the motion? Councillor Finzel: I just have a question to the staff. Is there an opportunity, if the process proceeds forward, to then engage further with the community with regards to this amendment on the Noosa Plan 2020, so that it doesn't be seen to be political interference, but creating further opportunity for community to have their say on the matter? Director Rawlings: So through the Chair, the process, which is specified by the Minister's guidelines under

00:24:00 the Planning Act, is that local governments undertake community engagement on their planning scheme amendments. That's the process we've just done. It was a six-week process, and it just closed on Sunday, and we're now in the analysing submissions. The next step in the process, Councillor Finzel, is for Council to consider the feedback from the consultation process and consider whether any changes need to be made to the amendments in response to the submissions. We will bring it, as officers, we will do that analysis and bring a report to you and recommendations of changes in response to the community's submissions. That then goes back to the state government for final state interest and ministerial sign-off. So the formal process to undertake consultation and engage the community is the one we've just completed. Hopefully that answers your question.

00:25:00 Councillor Finzel: Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay. Councillor Stockwell. I'm going to look at it from a different angle. What's the purpose of the scheme amendments? So I can tell you, I know exactly who hasn't made submissions to the planning scheme in the six weeks. They're the people who've moved out of town because they couldn't afford to live here. The reason we're doing these amendments, the fact that we've had a housing crisis that's been growing since 2019. It's about the people who moved out of the Shire because their rental premises were sold for an SDA and the businesses then lost their staff. That's what these scheme amendments are about. It's about the people who've moved out of town because of the impact of short-term accommodation. And the fact that they can sell up with the increased housing prices and move elsewhere. They're people who didn't submit their response to this planning scheme because they made their decision that the previous settings of the plan didn't support the residents adequately.

00:26:00 So we can't forget that what this council and the one before has been trying to do is refresh the planning scheme to increase the availability of affordable housing and community housing. It is the number one priority in terms of planning for this council and it has been for the last several years. And we've heard that the notion of extending by two weeks is likely to lead to an extension of several months before some of the benefits of the planning scheme amendments are made. And what does that mean? Well, we know there are landowners who have been waiting for these amendments to actually look at putting in development that will provide affordable social housing built around. It will mean that there will be more hurdles to go in for some of the public housing and community housing that's in the drawing board. So is six weeks enough?

00:27:00 We've heard that every person who is likely to be specifically impacted has a letter and six weeks to respond. That's no conflict. They can play a time six weeks to look at the foreshore master plan and to look at the planning scheme amendments. We've heard that it's a complex matter. And that yes, planning schemes are important. Planning schemes are written professionally and have legislation to handle. But I've heard from industry groups and I've heard from planning consultants that the fact sheets and the frequently asked questions are very readable in plain English and easy to understand. So they've distilled all that complexity down to what we've heard is 12 fact sheets and some frequently asked questions. You have a very good understanding of the purpose and the detail of the amendments if that's all you read. I think the other key point is that consultation is not a numbers game. It's about getting the views to test the ideas that you put out into the public and then

00:28:00 consider that diversity of views. And as we've heard several times, we have very detailed submissions, not just from business groups, but from community groups, from environmental groups, from residence groups, conservative groups. We have a very good spectrum of perspectives to consider when we come to adopting and reflecting any changes in the advertised draft to achieve that primary purpose. And that primary purpose is making this place a more affordable place to live so we don't continue to get the exit of residents who are our key workers and we don't continue to have barriers on the businesses and the councils in this Shire from attracting good staff because they can't afford to live here. Councillors, these scheme amendments have already been delayed through the process of the State Government review for over a year. It's now time to proceed as was voted on by all Councillors before the advertising period.

00:29:00 I won't support the notice of motion. Mayor Wilkie: Mr Stockwell, any other Councillors wish to speak to the motion? Councillor Wilson: Yes, I will. Mayor Wilkie: Councillor Wilson? Councillor Wilson: I'm concerned on this. I'm speaking in support of the motion. I'm concerned that we're rushing to a deadline that's something that's out of our control, being the caretaker period for State election, and I don't believe that that should be our goalpost here. We've asked for community consultation, and I agree that the process was actually an excellent consultation process. It was just that it's been foreshadowed by the Noosa Foreshore Master Plan, so everyone's focus and attention has been there, and I am seeing in the community that there are people saying that they hadn't realised this was happening, or perhaps that they had only read the fact sheets and hadn't gone into the detail. So those who have gone into the detail of the scheme amendments are seeing how huge this is, and how we know how much we defend our Noosa plan, and therefore we need to make sure that plan is right going into the future.

00:30:00 Some of the feedback that I've seen in the submissions, I still haven't quite worked out whether those residents are misunderstanding what's in the amendments, or whether those amendments are actually ambiguous and need further work, and I'm just really concerned that we won't have time to actually get into all those details to try and meet a deadline that's not our deadline. It's a State Government deadline. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you, Councillor Wilson. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I have a question. Good staff outline. And it might be of particular interest to the new councillors. What is the process of reporting? Do you report back on each individual issue that's raised, and the response, and how you've reflected? Do councillors get a workshop where the detail in submissions is run through so that every councillor is well understanding of those submissions made? Director Rawlings: Yeah, that's absolutely the process. So we summarise all the submissions, and you know, at the moment the table's sitting Thank you. huge.

00:31:00 And we go through each of those issues with the councillors through workshops, a series of workshops. Those of you who have been involved before, that can be many hours of workshops. And then provide with recommendations about how we think the amendments should be changed to respond to the issues, or whether or not we don't believe the amendments should be changed, or whether or not, like Councillor Wilson just said, whether or not there is this submission has something to do with it. It's not understood, and you know, we go back and explain the situation. So there's absolutely a very thorough process to go through, both at the staff level and with councillors. We're also required to do that with the state. We're also required to provide all the issues, and how we've considered them, and how we've responded to them. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: So you're saying a report will come, workshops will be held with councillors, identifying all the issues raised and the feedback? And then after that, there will be a report back to council to be formally ratified here,

00:32:00 where councillors are free to make any changes, and then, then, and only then does it go back to the state. Councillor Phillips: That's correct. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you. Councillor Phillips: Can I ask a question? Yes. Just with the two very different plans that went out at the same time, is that a common – hang on, let me rephrase that. Yes. To have, like Councillor Wegener pointed out, they're two very different plans. Is it common for us as council to have two major plans out in community that require some really in-depth understanding around the plans? Director Rawlings: Is it common? There's been, you know, there's, as you know, the organisation does a raft of initiatives and projects. And we are consulting at various levels with the community all the time.

00:33:00 You know, whether it's on, you know, works that are happening around the footpath, works that are happening in the local park, works that are happening at our facilities, you know, to, to localise plans like foreshore master plan or Shire-wide initiatives. So those sorts of things do happen. We, as you know, given the, the time lapse, loss that we had with the amendment process, it's, it being with the state government for 12 months, there was a sense of needing to move forward on this. There are some risks associated with these amendments not proceeding. And as one of the councillors mentioned, there, we have, we have landowners and applicants waiting on, on these amendments to deliver outcomes. You know, we have very clear direction from council and many of our community about taking the next step to tighten up on short stay. You know, these amendments do that. So there are multiple drivers as to why we wanted to continue to move this process forward.

00:34:00 You know, we would have much preferred a shorter time with the state government and these would have happened, you know, earlier. But given we only got sign up from state government this year, we needed to keep those then, and then those amendments moving. It is, and as we talk, we'll talk in another agenda. Okay. So I'm going to go back to the report. The Noosaville foreshore master plan has attracted a significant amount of interest. And given the, the engagement that was done in the first phase of it, I guess there was, it wasn't anticipated that would be so much interest in that. So, you know, when we made the decision to do the amendment process, we did that in the context of these issues that are subject of the amendments have actually been in the public public domain. So it was, it was continuing a process and Councillor Wegener alluded to that.

00:35:00 You know, we had the Noosaville housing strategy out in the, in the community and consulted on that. We had the short stay monitoring report. So we've been consulting on these issues for a number of years. This is the implementation element of, of those strategy pieces. So it was about, you know, let's, let's finish what we've started and keep that going rather than delay that because people have been waiting a long time, years for some of these amendments to be in place. So, you know, it was a bit of a judgment decision to go, this, this, this, we've been working on it for so long. There's a lot, a fair bit at risk if we don't proceed with it. You know, that's why they ended up out at the same time. Mayor Wilkie: Thanks. Question. What's the risk regarding the proliferation, further proliferation or short term accommodation if these amendments are delayed, not just by two weeks, but by the months that could be incurred in this, the cut off for the caretaker?

00:36:00 Director Rawlings: So it's part of these amendments and it's part of the short term monitoring report and the housing strategy. Council provides some direction that they, they wanted to move towards making sure that short stay accommodation of whole dwellings in our residential zones inconsistent. We had done that, the, that through the low density residential zone as part of the NUSA plan. These amendments take it another step. These amendments seek to make short stay inconsistent in our medium and high density residential zones, acknowledging that those zones are residential zones and should, you know, primarily be for permanent residents. So it does take another step to try and mitigate the proliferation of short stay. If, if these don't proceed, then there is a, there is a continued risk of further applications for short stay in our medium and high density residential zones that could continue to,

00:37:00 to, to come, come in and be, and be considered as they are at the moment. Councillor Lorentson: Can I, sorry, a question. Can we not rely on the Cody principle? Can we not reply on, rely on the Cody principle to refuse applications in medium and high density, also under section 63 of the Planning Act? Can we not, again, argue need? We're in a housing crisis and there is a planning need for housing, not short term accommodation. Mayor Wilkie: Councillor Finzel, the question from Councillor Lorentson was, could we refuse, could we, could we refuse applications for short term accommodation using the Cody principle and the fact that we are in a housing crisis? Director Rawlings: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Through the Chair. Yes, the Cody principle definitely does have some weight in, in decision making.

00:38:00 As you move further down each of the steps that I outlined previously, the Cody principle is a principle where if you are making changes to a, a, a planning scheme, so it's, it's new policy or it's emerging policy and you've, you've sought first state government sign-off, you've consulted with your community and you've got a good understanding of what the, that, those issues are, you can start to give more weight to proposed amendments. So yes, it, it, it can play a role in decision making, but it depends on how far you're down that track. Can I ask a question? Mayor Wilkie: Councillor Wilson, a question. Councillor Wilson: Thank you. Um, given the number of submissions we've got to date, if we reopen this, um, process, we may only get a small number of submissions anyway. Does it actually stop the work continuing in the meantime, like the analysis of all the, and the, any further amendments, um, would that have to halt for that two weeks or, or can the two happen in parallel?

00:39:00 Director Rawlings: Um, definitely won't stop us working. Um, we will absolutely continue to work through and, and we need to. There's, there's a lot to digest and a lot to, for us to work through. So we will continue that work. What it will impact is, um, we have our first workshop planned with you next week. We would delay that, um, because we would need to have the full gamut of information. So that, that, the start of the workshops and the discussions with you would be delayed. Um, we, you know, that would then push out and then, you know, we have, we have at the moment, uh, you know, a date for a potential, um, meeting with you planned. That would be pushed out too. So it's not that the work would stop. We would continue to do that and then, and we'd understand what would come in further and analyse those. It would just push the program of, of Council starting to consider the issues and then ultimately the decisions. Councillor Lorentson: Can we miss the deadline and can we have a special meeting, um, to accommodate the deadline

00:40:00 if this extension does go through? Director Rawlings: Um, so the, there's no deadline per se, but we have sought advice from the state government knowing how caretaker impacts, um, people's workload and, and decision making in government like we've experienced, you know, here. So we have sought advice, um, both at the highest level of the department and at, at, at a, from our counterparts. And the advice is that in order for it to be considered at all, because it requires a ministerial sign off. By the minister, it would need to be with, with them by the end of August. Um, so at the moment we were already planning a special meeting around, um, uh, to, to, um, accommodate. Try and meet that, that timeframe. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Sorry. Mayor Wilkie: Question? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Um, can we just move Councillor Finzel's little box so I can see the date? So we, the, the date of 4th of August.

00:41:00 Um. Would the, you would be suggesting that the first council workshop would then be after the 4th of August? Basically, um, and if we were to keep to the end of August deadline, is that why could the amendment result in less, uh, time for councillors to actually consider all the people who put their submissions in on time? Director Rawlings: Um. What I would say is that, um, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, There's two scenarios. One is we try and continue to meet the end of August timeframe and get it to the state government and yes that would definitely mean there's going to be less time to work with councillors to try and resolve issues if we're going to try and continue to stay to that timeframe. That's one scenario, so less time for those things to be considered. The other scenario is we use the time that's needed to analyse the information and workshop with councillors so that everyone understands it and we don't meet that timeframe.

00:42:00 Mayor Wilkie: Another question, if the amendments package goes back to the state, they're not able to be assessed before caretaker, a new government is elected which has a different, perhaps a more permissive approach to short term accommodation. Could that perhaps impact on whether or not we get approval for the amendments package in relation to short term accommodation? There's political, other political considerations or a different political view about before or against short term accommodation. Councillor Lorentson: Through the Chair, and just correct me if I'm wrong, is it correct to be asking staff questions about what may be,

00:43:00 Director Rawlings: I wasn't going to answer that, so I can't, I couldn't say, I'll withdraw the question, it's unfair to ask for that. What I could say is that, you know, if we are working with a new government, I mean I can rephrase the question, what are the possible implications of working, these amendments being assessed by a new government? There, again, there's a level of unknown about that, but we would, you know, it could potentially add some time to the process is, you know, to work through where that government's policy is on a range of issues. You know, it is fair to say that the staff in the department tend to stay stable, you know, the political arm changes, the staff that we work with stay stable. So that, you know, there is some consistency still with the staff we work with, but ultimately they're, you know, the implementation of these outcomes, you know, need to align with state policy.

00:44:00 So there's a level of uncertainty there, that's probably all I could say. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Thank you. I'm going to move an amendment. The council requests the CEO to reopen community consultation proposed amendment number two to the NUSA plan for an additional, oh, I have to work out the number of days. Oh, no, just amendment to the NUSA plan from July 19 to July 28. That's 10 days. Additional 10 days. That's my amendment. Mayor Wilkie: Do you have a seconder for the amendment?

00:45:00 A second amendment. Seconded by Councillor Wegener. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I do so because it's unsure whether the proposed motion is going to be a motion or not. If it is going to get up, I think that's a far more realistic and reasonable approach. Everyone's already had 10, six weeks. This will be public knowledge. We can reopen it as of tomorrow rather than waiting until Monday. And if anyone hasn't had this chance in six weeks, 10 days is certainly enough for individuals and or groups to re-evaluate. Question. Can I say more? Councillor Lorentson: Yeah. I have no problem with the NUSA plan. I have no problem with what's being proposed. I actually put that forward as the dates and was advised those dates couldn't be accommodated. Can I ask through the acting CEO, are you happy with the dates? Because my understanding was you needed until Monday to start the process or reopen the process.

00:46:00 Speaker 2: Thank you. Yes. So we do consider. Excuse me for interrupting. Mayor Wilkie: Oh, sorry, Councillor Finzel. Councillor Finzel. Councillor Lorentson asked if these dates are doable. If you're asking the staff if they're able to reopen the process from tomorrow rather than from Monday. Speaker 2: Thank you, Mr Chair. Thank you for that. So, yes, we did consider that. One of the difficulties that we were facing is around time frames that we had a meeting today and then potentially being able to try and open something tomorrow, including advertising, et cetera. So, yes, we did consider that. I will put the question to the Director to see whether there's further thought around that. Director Rawlings: Yes. What I would say is what does open mean? So if open means putting it on your say and extending the dates, Ken is in the room, that's

00:47:00 probably something that can be done fairly easily. But, you know, councillors, what I would also, and I know you've been talking about this for a while, you haven't asked me a question about this, but I need to put this on the table just to manage expectations, is by opening, what is, opening has, it's not just that we've extended the dates. What happens is we have walk-ins, we have phone calls, we have, you know, there's a lot of work that happens during consultation. We've had five staff, six staff, almost full time on consultation in managing questions, feedback, responding to letters, responding to emails. So it's not just you're extending the dates. What you are doing is diverting the resources from analysing the current data and information to re-engaging with the community. And that's fine. We can do that. We can divert. But you just need to consider that we, we, it's going to delay the process anyway. Because we will need to divert the staff back onto engagement.

00:48:00 Mayor Wilkie: So you're saying it will interfere with the process? Any delay will interfere with the reopening. Will interfere with the staff's capacity to continue to do the work of assessment. Director Rawlings: Yeah, absolutely. Absolutely. Yeah. We've got the staff working full time now on reading hundreds of pages of submissions and understanding it. And, you know, and lots of meetings and discussions about the issues happening. If we reopen consultation, if it, based on what we've experienced in the last six weeks, it's fairly constant in terms of the engagement from the community, which is fabulous. But that's what the staff will need to then, then do for that period. So there, there will be some impact. Absolutely. Mayor Wilkie: Mrs CEO, you have the floor. Director Rawlings: So thank you. Speaker 2: What we would want ordinarily, if we were to undertake something like a reopening and consultation, is to give our communications team adequate time to prepare communications,

00:49:00 to make sure that we're doing the right thing. To be able to let the broader community know that, in fact, we have reopened consultation. Now, those, you know, that's a small team who already have work planned for the next week. So that will require them to be able to adequately respond and undertake adequate notification. It also requires them working with our partners to, our media partners, et cetera, to be able to do that. So if we were to effectively try to open, reopen that tomorrow, that would require us to do that through the community. So we, that would be something that I would suggest considering. Councillor Wegener: I'll speak to it. Yes, Councillor Wynne. Anybody have any more questions? I'll speak to it. I think that, again, we do not want to underestimate the, the, the residents here.

00:50:00 The, there's a lot of plans coming up. We have the destination management plan, we've got the car plan, there's, I'm forgetting several. The big ones here, but we've got a very, very busy schedule and we've spent, put a lot of effort into, actually, in the last few weeks behind, outside of the optics of the public, trying to manage how we are going to do these public consultations coming up for the entire next year and the year after that. So I want to, I want to say that you don't underestimate the, the public here and the price to live in this paradise is eternal vigilance and that's what it takes. We demand, actually, that the rate pay, the, the voters and the rate payers and the people that are, are making submissions, they're on top of it and they are on top of it. And you have to look at the opportunity cost of pushing it back is, well, what about the botanic garden plan? We have, we have a, a, a new plan going in there. We want to support them. We want staff to be working on that. We have the Pomona placemaking plan.

00:51:00 I think that we've run a solid foundation with what we have already submitted to us. Thank you. Councillor Lorentson: Just a question to CEO and Kim. Which dates would you prefer if an extension is supported? Mayor Wilkie: The question, Councillor Finzel, was which dates would staff prefer if an extension of some form was supported? Councillor Finzel: Thank you, Mr Chair. Mayor Wilkie: Which I think is, which is the lesser of, which is the more preferred option in a difficult situation if that was not there. Director Rawlings: Thank you. Look, I think if council is of a mind to reopen the engagement, that we should allow adequate time to prepare to reopen the engagement. And allow enough time for comms to get prepared.

00:52:00 Allow enough time for staff to, us to do reallocation. Some resourcing. So, you know, probably at least, yeah, pushing it out to a Monday would probably be better than from tomorrow. We'll be scrambling a bit. Speaker 2: Yes, so thank you. I'm very mindful of the workload that staff are under. I'm also mindful that we like to be able to achieve equality of work. And I'm concerned that putting staff under pressure to reopen something tomorrow is unreasonable. I'm also mindful that staff are working very hard to try and get this to the state so that it can be considered before they go into care-taking mode. So, there are the two things to consider, but my priority is the staff and so I think that I cannot ask them to be put under unreasonable pressure.

00:53:00 I appreciate that you have been working your triumph. Sure. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Nothing within the substantive motion of the amendment asks for any additional budget, any additional advertising, or any additional staffing. So, the only realistic option in my opinion would be that the reopening just involves, as you say, changing the dates on your site and putting it on social media. Um... That's something that, as you say, requires our staff, but that's not something that places any unnecessary burden, like whether it's tomorrow or Monday, placing the date, yes, obviously, is that likely to create stress in the organisation? Director Rawlings: Look, that act in itself is not, because you change a date on the back of the website and it updates the website.

00:54:00 So, you know, that can be done, but what that does is generate the questions and the inquiries and the emails and the phone calls and the counter, you know, that's where the work comes and we're responsive to those things. You know, if someone's on the phone saying, here, the amendments are still open, great, can I talk to you about blah, blah, blah, of course, you know, that's the work. So it's not just changing the dates on the website. It's what that then generates. Mayor Wilkie: Anyone else wish to speak to the amendment? So far we've had Councillor Stockwell speak to it, Councillor Lorentson asked a question, and Councillor Wegener spoke to it. Speaker 3: I have a question. Mayor Wilkie: Consultation periods. The budgeted, are they not?

00:55:00 Are extensions to consultation period, is there a budget for extensions to consultation periods? Is there a contingency in the budget to cover extensions to consultation periods? Director Rawlings: We, we plan. We have a project plan, we have a communications plan. That's all budgeted for. The impact of an extension. An extension really is staff time and staff are budgeted for. So that's primarily the impact and possibly some, a bit of media and comms budget, which, you know, we could cover that. We could cover that in project budgets. It's really the staff time. Mayor Wilkie: Councillor Finzel, do you wish to speak to the amendment? Councillor Finzel: I just have a question and I guess it's directed

00:56:00 to Councillor Stockwell with regards to the amendment. Can you clarify the date you've requested? Does that need to include that it's for your say only or what's your intention that it, what is to be undertaken between those dates? I think it should be included in the amendment for clarity. Can you please provide some feedback? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I was including the, I was just changing the dates in the notified motion to reduce any potential extension in terms of its impact. If your point is correct and it referred to the substandard motion, not to the amendment. Councillor Finzel: Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: I didn't quite understand what you just said. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I probably, I probably agree that a good motion for extending a town plan would consider the impact, would include identifying, giving advice to staff on how it was to be reopened, what was the advertising,

00:57:00 what other arrangements would be done, but the substantive motion didn't. So I was just trying to reduce the impact of the substantive motion. Councillor Finzel: Through the Chair. Yeah. Thank you, Councillor Stockwell. I guess then that's a question back to Councillor Lorentson for clarification on the original motion around the exact process for the community engagement. Councillor Lorentson: Councillor Fincel, again, repeating what Councillor Stockwell said, I think that's for staff to answer, not for councillors. We can't direct staff. And I would expect, I'm sorry, Kim O'Kee, would you be able to answer that question? Councillor Finzel: Thank you, Councillor Lorentson. Can you repeat the question, Councillor Lorentson? Councillor Lorentson: What form will community consultation take?

00:58:00 Director Rawlings: I guess it's about what council's expectations are. If you want to reopen the engagement, what are your expectations around that engagement? Because the first two weeks of our community consultation program involved developing and publishing 12 fact sheets. It involved three separate media releases on particular issues. I did a number of radio interviews. The staff did seven pop-ups. We had pop-ups at the library. That was the first two weeks of the consultation. So it really is dependent on what council's expectations are around reopening. Whether you expect the library pop-ups to be back up there because we had information there which we've taken down. That need to be set back up.

00:59:00 Media statements, media interviews. It really is what council's expectations are, Councillor Lorentson. And I don't mean to avoid that question, but it's council who are seeking to reopen it. Councillor Lorentson: What I would be expecting is social media, and as you say, I don't think we need to put any extra burden on staff. Excuse me, point of order, the council is answering her own question. I don't think that's the cause of this table over here. So, question to you, Kim, can we have something to do with that, maybe after the meeting? I'll ask a question. Mayor Wilkie: Is this not the appropriate forum for councils to direct staff? If there is any time and place for councils to direct staff, it's in this formal process here, through resolutions. And if councillors wanted to only have the consultation period extended notification of that through Facebook and via your say,

01:00:00 this would be the time and place to do it by amending this current amendment in front of us. Director Rawlings: Yes, absolutely. This is the time and the place to provide real clarity to the officers. As to what council would like to do during that extended period. Mayor Wilkie: Question to councillor, Stockwell, given what you've just heard is, would you be in favour of amending this, adjusting this amendment further to indicate your intention as to how this would be, how the community would be notified of this, bearing in mind that councillor Lorentson was also agreeing to it. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: According to standing orders, the whole of the council would be notified of this, bearing in mind that councillor Lorentson was also agreeing to it. I'm happy to do it or the other way we get this passed is we could do a subsequent amendment either way. I'm happy to provide guidance in terms of the limitations on what that additional period may be required to do in terms of communications and advertising.

01:01:00 Mayor Wilkie: So, for example, what would an amendment along the lines of what you're considering there, the council requests the CEO to reopen the community consultation proposed amendment number two to the Noosafille Council. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And perhaps one media release may be added to that. Mayor Wilkie: Notify the community via Facebook, Your Say, Your Say and media release. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, I would be happy to change the amendment as is, but that, as I said, would require the agreement of the whole council. Councillor Wilson: Can I take a clarification on that? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yes. Councillor Wilson: I don't think Your Say is how you notify the community, but how a submission is made. So, you would reopen the community consultation for a proposed amendment via Your Say and potentially email submissions and that would be notified to the community via Facebook and media release.

01:02:00 Mayor Wilkie: You mean the Your Say page, because there's instruction on the Your Say page. Councillor Wilson: Yeah, it's more in terms of making a submission. There's information on the Your Say page. Yes, we're reopening the community consultation in order for people to make further submissions, written submissions. Mayor Wilkie: Ah, yes. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: It is a web page, so it is public information. Mayor Wilkie: So, and notify the community via Facebook, yeah. So, let's go back to the original, let's go back to the original amendment. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Maybe cut and paste in case there's something else coming. Mayor Wilkie: Yeah. So, we'll deal with the amendment before us. For the purpose of our debate and discussion, we'll support the amendment and see where it

01:03:00 takes us. So, are we adding this amendment? No, we're dealing with this amendment first. Yeah. So, Councillor Finzel, do you wish to speak to the amendment? Councillor Finzel: No, thank you, Mr Chair. Mayor Wilkie: Any other councillors wish to speak to the amendment? No. Oh, you've already spoken to it. Oh, okay. Can I ask a question? Councillor Wegener: Are we making a mockery of our own public consultation? Mayor Wilkie: It's an unfair question. Okay. Okay. Councillor Stockwell, please. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I think, I won't take too long, because I think during the questions that everything's come out. For me, I haven't changed my substantive position for all the reasons staff and other councillors have identified. However, I do think if I am in the minority, it's important that the disruption to the staff program is as short as possible, and hence the amendment. Mayor Wilkie: Okay. We'll put the amendment to the vote.

01:04:00 Those in favour? That's Councillor Stockwell. Those against? That's Councillor Wegener, Phillips, Wilson, Lorentson. Where do you stand on the issue, Councillor Finzel? Councillor Finzel: Against. Against. Mayor Wilkie: The amendment's lost. Is anyone in favour? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'm happy to move along the lines, excuse me, no, sorry, I'm in the middle of moving a motion, Councillor Finzel, so I'll do that, and you can ask your question afterwards. The Councillor requests the CEO to reopen the community consultation proposed amendment number two to the Noosa Plan from the 19th of July to the 28th of July, and notify the community via Facebook and media release with updates.

01:05:00 Right, on the, on the, on the Your Say webpage. Mayor Wilkie: So, so it's the, it's the Council requests the CEO to reopen the community consultation for a proposed amendment number two to the Noosa Plan 2020 from 19th of July to the 28th of July 2024, and notify the community via Facebook, take out Your Say there, Facebook, take out Your Say, Facebook, and media release, and, take out the next, with, yeah, take out and notify the community, get rid of and notify the community, with updates on the Your Say

01:06:00 webpage. Speaker 4: Absolutely. Mayor Wilkie: Anyone, let's move, Councillor Stockwell, only if you're prepared to second that for the purpose of debate. Yes, I second the first item. You can second this. You can, yeah. This is Councillor, seconded by Councillor Wegener. Councillor Stockwell. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah, no need to talk. We know what we're voting on. Councillor Finzel: Excuse me, I just have a question. Councillor Finzel. Is there, is there an opportunity to add to this amendment a request also to the CEO to take a review of the community engagement policies to look at subsequent changes moving forward into the future so that we can find a greater strategic resolution to the matter of how we conduct community engagement now and into the future? Well. Is there an opportunity to add that now, or would that be a separate amendment to this motion? Mayor Wilkie: Councillor Finzel, I'd say that's outside the scope of this, this motion, and we do have an item on that. We do have an item coming up about public consultation on a couple of plans coming up.

01:07:00 Well, you could probably ask some questions there if you'd like. Councillor Finzel: Thank you, Mr Chair. Mayor Wilkie: Okay. Anyone who would wish to speak to this amendment? Councillor Lorentson: No, just a question. Question. The same question as before. Does this change your preferred option in terms of dates? Do we start tomorrow, or would you prefer to start on Monday? Director Rawlings: I, I don't know. I'd like to clarify that none of these are my preferred options. Excuse me. But that provides the direct clarity that we were seeking, so. Speaker 5: Thank you. Yep. Councillor Wilson. Councillor Wilson: I still don't think it's clear of, that the community is invited to make submissions via Your Say. Director Rawlings: So, the Your Say page does outline how to make a submission, and provides all the options on how to make a submission. So, it's really important to the community on how to make submissions to the planning

01:08:00 scheme. When you make submissions to a planning process or planning scheme, there are specific requirements under the Act to make a properly made submission. So, it is really important that the community do follow those instructions, because that needs to meet a number of criteria to be considered properly made. Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: I'll, I'll speak to the amendment. I read it. I, I really appreciate what Councillor Stockwell is trying to do here to reach a compromise, minimise the impact on staff, also give the community extra time to make submissions. I, I can't support, I'll go back to my original speech, that I, I cannot, I do not want to be on the record of supporting any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any interference in this process.

01:09:00 Knowing the work staff have already put into the consultation process, knowing the full nature of submissions that have already been received. Knowing, knowing that all these significant community groups and business groups have made submissions. Knowing that we've got advice before us from the state about the implications of possible delays. I do not want to be on the record, of supporting any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, I'm just going to say one last thing, and I'm not saying anything that could delay these, knowingly delay these very important amendments longer than they already have been delayed. And again, I want to give the staff the respect and the professional courtesy, the time and the space to reflect and review all the submissions from the work they've already done. They're the ones that have been out of these pop-ups, public displays, interacting with over 250 community members face-to-face for up to an hour and a half every time.

01:10:00 I've looked at some of the submissions. We've all received them. They are very well informed and well written. I don't underestimate the intelligence of the community to put together a well-formed submission. So, I might be outnumbered six times. There's still one on this. But I would just really urge councillors to respect the process and give staff the professional courtesy and the time and space not to be rushed or distracted from assessing this very important feedback. And allowing us to give our council the best chance of getting these amendments back from the state prior to the government being shut down during the caretaker period. Any other councillors who would speak to this particular amendment? Excuse me, Mr Chair.

01:11:00 Yes, Councillor Finzel. Councillor Finzel: Yes. I just have a question through the Chair to the CEO. Is that okay? Of course. Yes. I just have a question around when it's being discussed today about potentially political interference. What penalties, if any, are needed? Is there an act around statutory regulations or this process? Is there actually a risk to, like, you know, penalties if we move away from this process? Speaker 2: Thank you, Councillor Finzel. There are no penalties as such. What we are working towards is advice from the state government that if we are able to get these amendments back to the state government for their consideration and potential ministerial sign-off by, if we can get it back by the end of August, then we have a chance for these amendments to be approved.

01:12:00 So there are no penalties as such. We have an opportunity to get them considered by the current government and resolved. And so that is the timeline that we are working towards. Councillor Finzel: Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you, Acting CEO. I will just clarify, Councillor Finzel, I am not inferring that anything improper or illegal is happening by the political arm of the Council interfering with this process. Councillor Finzel: Thank you for the clarification, Mr Chair. Yes. Mayor Wilkie: Any... Councillor Lang, may I speak to this one as well? Of course. Yes. You haven't spoken this time. Councillor Wegener: You know, sometimes no decision is far, far worse than a failure. And I think that applies in this situation. We know that there is a risk that these amendments will get lost in the state for months and months

01:13:00 and months, if not forever. We have worked so, so very hard with enormous public consultation to get to this point. I just urge that we... Erring on the side of caution is actually to go with the process that is well ingrained with a very, very good public consultation process. Don't, at a whim, throw it away when there is so much at risk. There is an enormous amount of at risk, reputation-wise, and as for all those people that Brian speaks of, not to mention the entire future, as I have stated before, of short-term accommodation, especially in the rural and interland. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you, Councillor Wegener. Am I allowed to speak to this? You don't have to. All councillors are allowed to speak to this amendment. Councillor Phillips: Okay. I just want to reiterate my support for the extra delay. In my 38 years living here, I think I can count on one hand how many rallies I've seen

01:14:00 in town around things that are really passionate to the community. We saw that with the foreshore plan, so we've got to give some time for that, like we've spoken about, but in particular with this one, I do feel now community will have some reassurance after today around what we're doing moving forward with these consultations, and then they can digest this information and go back and get some more understanding around it and really give us some extra feedback. And I hope that doesn't, like you said, you're not overly happy with the extra time, but I feel that our community will be. Thanks. Thank you, Professor Phillips. Councillor Lewis. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you. I will speak, and I think everyone's missing the major point of the notified motion. The issue today is that we have two major consultations that have run concurrently.

01:15:00 It's not about underestimating the intelligence of our community. I know so well our local knowledge and experience is overwhelming. What has happened should not have happened. We shouldn't have had two major consultations occurring at the same time. Each consultation should have received the attention it deserved. That's what we owe our community. It's also a statutory requirement that there is social inclusion and meaningful community engagement in all decision making. That's mandated by principle three of the Code of Conduct for Councillors in Queensland. Some on this table may call this political interference. I call it doing my job. Ensuring that our community gets every opportunity to consult on matters that impact their livelihoods,

01:16:00 their property values, and the character of a new soul. Again, rushing this process to meet a deadline is critical. We need to afford our community adequate time to review and provide feedback, and it would be remiss and could underline the integrity of the amendment process to do otherwise. I'm happy with the amendment to move the dates forward, and I hope and urge the councillors to support the motion of the amendment to ensure a fair and thorough review process. Thank you. Councillor Finzel: Just for the record. Mr Chair, can I speak to the motion, please? Mayor Wilkie: I'm just on my feet, Councillor Finzel. You'll be next. Councillor Finzel: Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: Just for the record, does staff believe that the public consultation process was run along the principles of social inclusion and meaningful engagement?

01:17:00 Do you feel that this process encapsulates those days? Director Rawlings: We believe the planning, preparation, and delivery of the consultation meets all the principles of our requirements under our act, our code of conduct, and our community engagement framework. It was very thorough. It had multiple avenues. It was representative. It was both specific and broad. So we're very comfortable with the consultation process today. Thank you. Speaker 7: Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Finzel, you had a question. Sorry, Councillor Finzel was next. Councillor Finzel: Thank you, Mr Chair. I was just going to speak to the motion, but is there any questions anyone needs to ask? Mayor Wilkie: You're free to speak to, we're speaking to amendment number two now.

01:18:00 Councillor Finzel: Yes, okay. Thank you. Thank you, everyone, for the debate around the table. This is a challenging topic in terms of the engagement with the community, the number of consultations that are currently live, the complexities and the overlap. I do carefully consider the amount of time that it's taken for for this meaningful consultation to take place, and by no way minimise the amount of work that staff and community together have undertaken to engage in the process. I support the amendment before us because my approach to representation is to support inclusive community engagement, to bring accountability

01:19:00 and transparency with a proactive local focus, with collaborative solutions. And I'd like to thank Councillor Stockwell to move this motion forward today to try and find a collaborative solution, which is challenging around the table. I think we do owe it to our community to give them a short amount of time to make further submissions, but I strongly, and I will be raising it further down the track, to request a review of this process in 2024 of how we engage with our community. I think since COVID, you know, we are fundamentally changed, and I think moving forward, we have to really focus on collaborative voices around the table so that everyone, you know, feels that they are valued, that they feel that their voice has been heard, and that it matters.

01:20:00 I think, you know, we're at a transitional time, not just in Noosa, but across, you know, the state, Australia, and Australia as a whole. I think it's a challenging time for leadership as we sit in this space of uncertainty. It's unfortunate, but transition is always uncomfortable, and I believe this is where we sit today, and I want to thank everyone who is working their best to try and facilitate us through a process where everyone feels that their position is acknowledged and valued. So, thank you. Thank you to everyone who's contributed today, and I will support this amendment to, in an act of goodwill, to facilitate that every voice matters. I've heard the risks, the opportunities, and the impacts, and I know it will be challenging, but hopefully we can find our way towards equitable outcomes for all.

01:21:00 Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Finzel. Mayor Wilkie: Councillor Warren, do you have a question? That's all right. Councillor Stockwell, do you wish to close? No. Okay, we'll put the amendment to the vote. Those in favour? Councillor Stockwell, Lorentson, Wilson, Phillips, and Karen, are you in favour? You are in favour of this motion? Those against? Yes, Mr Chair. Those against? Councillor Wilkie and Wegener. The amendment is carried. The amendment now becomes a substantive motion. And every motion carries. Councillor Finzel has spoken to the original motion. Do you wish to speak again, Councillor Finzel? Councillor Finzel: No, thank you for asking, Mr Chair. Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: And Councillor Lorentson, do you wish to close? No.

01:22:00 Thank you. Thank you. We put the motion to the vote. Those in favour? Councillor Phillips? Wilson? No. Those against, Councillor Stockwell, Wilkie Wegener, sorry, Councillor Finzel, where do you sit on that? Councillor Finzel: Sorry, can you repeat? I'm sorry, I've just lost track of where we're at. Mayor Wilkie: Okay, with the amendment... Councillor Finzel: Are we leaving the original motion? Mayor Wilkie: No, with the amendment that was just ratified, that was just passed, now it becomes a substantive motion that changes the original notice of motion. Motion? Councillor Finzel: Yes, I support that, thank you Mr Chair. Mayor Wilkie: Okay, and Councillor Finzel is in favour. Councillor Lorentson, Phillips-Wilson and Finzel, the motion is carried. That's good. Okay, next item.

01:23:00 Thank you, thank you staff. The next item, we have no presentations. We have two deputations today. The first one is from Ocean For All and we have Taylor Ladd-Hudson, Albie Curtis and Jarrah Small here to speak. Would you like to come to the podium and just remind them that the deputation is limited to 15 minutes in total. Taylor Ladd-Hudson: Thank you for having us today. I am Taylor Ladd-Hudson, a 15 year old local from Sunrise Beach. Our request today is not for the public to vote, this is a moment of removal of the sharpness in the Greener Bay, but instead we are proposing a seasonal removal during our migration season. Ocean For All is a working party representing environmental groups that work within the Noosaville Shire. Each group has a shared goal of preparing for our environment and the wildlife that inhabits our beautiful Noosaville area.

6 PRESENTATIONS ¶

▶ 01:23:34

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

7 DEPUTATIONS ¶

▶ 01:23:36

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

7.1 DEPUTATION - Shark Mitigation in Noosa Shire Applicant: Oceans for all - Carolyn Lansdown, Chairperson Speakers: Taylor Ladd Hudson, Albie Curtis, Jarrah Small ¶

▶ 01:23:43· Carried unanimously 7-0 from council's minutes

01:24:00 Working together as a team, we have collaborated on the issue of the sharpness in the Greener Bay. Our team has the support of Sandy Bolton MP and have collaborated with her to survey local residents regarding their opinion on the use of sharpness specifically in the Noosaville Shire. While representing a variety of groups, our team have consulted with the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, Surplus in Queensland and a scientific expert in the field to ensure our data is current and correct. Amelia Lorentson sits in on our meetings offering advice. Sandy Bolton survey, which was released earlier this year, questioned local Noosaville residents if they supported the current use of sharpness at Noosaville Beach. 75.06% said they don't. Bond University Associate Professor McVie said under oath during a Queensland Administrative Appeals Tribunal

01:25:00 that he would never recommend a legal program. And could never imagine advocating for a legal shark program anyway. He agreed it was highly plausible that if the shark control program became non-lethal tomorrow, we would see no discernible change in unprepared shark bites, in particular fatalities. If we tomorrow decided to remove the nets and replace them with a non-lethal alternative, it would have no ramifications on shark incidents. There have been only 70 bites and 30 fatalities at protected beaches in New South Wales and Queensland since 1937. Mayor Wilkie: Excuse me, is someone filming this? Is anyone filming this or recording this? Oh, okay, we need to get full permission for you to be filmed.

01:26:00 Are you comfortable being filmed? Yeah. Filmed? Yeah. Okay. That's also our proof. Oh, okay. And councillors, are you comfortable with being filmed? Yes. Yes. Sorry to interrupt. Taylor Ladd-Hudson: At Greenmont Beach on the Gold Coast in 2020, a surfer had a fatal incident with a shark. The beach was fitted with a shark net and eight drumlines. It has been scientifically proven that sharks have a 96% chance of getting past the nets. And over 40% of the sharks caught in the nets are caught on the beach side, meaning they've already been in close contact to beachgoers and are peacefully making their way back out into deeper waters. In Laguna Bay since 2001, 576 non-targeted species have been caught and killed. This includes turtles, rays, dolphins, whales, and any known species to inhabit or migrate through our beautiful area.

01:27:00 Once an animal is caught, it attracts larger sharks to the nets for a free feed. Over the same period, only 129 targeted shark species over two meters were caught. And finally, since 2013, at least seven known humpback whales have been entangled at Noosemite Beach. I have personally witnessed and recorded three whale entanglements in the past three years at Noosemite Beach. Four weeks ago, a critter caught a shark in the net at Noosemite Beach. When it was critically endangered, gray-nosed shark was caught in one of the nets in Laguna Bay. This individual was identified by the unique markings along the side of her body. Her name was Mary, and this is the first sighting of her since April 2015. Nine years later, almost to the day, she popped up dead while pregnant in one of our nets. This program is nearly 100 years old. I've been in the shark conservation space since I was 12. I'm nearly 16. I'm a swimmer, surfer, and volunteer lifesaver for Noosa Head Surf Life Saving Club.

01:28:00 It's time for change, and it's time we see the shark control program removed and replaced with current modern technology. We are not asking for a complete removal of the nets, but asking for a seasonal removal during humpback migration season like New South Wales. One small step in the right direction. It's time we change and improve our ways to allow ocean gullies and marine life to live in our biosphere. Thank you. Captain Alvy: Good morning everyone. I'm Captain Alvy from the whale songs Noosa charter boat, and we take visitors out to see the dolphins and the whales, and we take care of our ocean environment by being a research vessel as well. We take a lot of the visitors out to see the dolphins and the whales and we take care Now I've been boating, surfing since 1970 in this area. I've been here for a long time and when I go out all the visitors and local, interstate and international that get on our boat are quite shocked that we still have nets here at Noosa, especially in Noosa's promoted as a biosphere town.

01:29:00 The scientists that we actually do our research for, we take the information to these scientists that are in the universities. There's Olaf Majonek who is a whale expert at Griffith University. We also do the dolphins. We do the dolphins through Alexis Lavengood and she's in the SCU.

01:30:00 And Bonnie Holmes, the scientist for SCU studying the bull sharks, recent research shows bull sharks in the river, mainly juvenile, and grow up to, and go up to the river system during the winter months. And the winter months is when whales are here. So we don't have the sharks out there. She says, The nets are misplaced and not stopping bull sharks at all. Nets are not needed in winter months, especially as it's very much supporting, and she's very much supporting the removal of the nets during whale migration, especially. Now all three scientists, they say there is no science or logic in the nets whatsoever. So my question is, who is advising DAF? It's certainly not the experts.

01:31:00 So let's take advice directly from the experts and not make decisions based on fear and misunderstanding. As surfers, we are apparently the highest at risk. Every day there are literally hundreds of surfers in the oceans around Noosa and the open beaches. There's no nets on the open beaches and no shark problems. The positioning of the nets keep changing and moving. We used to get the coordinates as boat operations by Coast Guard. But this hasn't happened, doesn't happen anymore. It's dangerous for boats as well as everything else as the nets keep moving. And no communication is given. So nobody's really sure where the nets are.

7.2 DEPUTATION - People's Park Applicant: Nick Cooke Speakers: Nick Cooke ¶

▶ 01:39:21

01:40:00 Noosa Council that they disapprove of the People's Park trial, they disapprove of the removal of other car parks across the Noosa Shire, and they want transparency and consultation on future Noosa Council projects. It's no secret that the People's Park project attracted immense criticism and backlash from the community, and rightfully so when it saw the loss of approximately 40 to 50 car parks in a highly valued location, and also when it was the product of no dedicated community consultation. Council have dubbed this project a success. However, this declaration doesn't seem to take into account the community's sentiments about the project, and in my opinion, community sentiment and approval should be the number one metric to gauge the success or failure of the project. This is why the community's sentiments and values must be taken into account before proclaiming any council project a success. Criticism abounded on social media, and even local news reports. One resident told Noosa today, and I thought it's worth reading out, that the People's Park was a visual and usage embarrassment.

01:41:00 How do you get your kids to the main beach and green beach with all their surfboards and wheelie boards? You're not allowed to take some surf gear on buses. How do you get old people down to the river mount? How do you get your dog down to the dog beach? They went on to say, some people can't afford to stay in Hastings Street, and choose to stay in lovely accommodation a couple of kilometres away, restricting their access options, some of which are even less wealthy Australians. That's end quote. And I agree with that, especially as a hinterland resident who is car dependent, and this project saw inequitable access to people in Noosa and out of Noosa. So we have a wide cross section of signatories on this petition, including residents, visitors to Noosa, also including community leaders such as the president of the Noosa Chamber of Commerce, and even our former Mayor, Bob Abbott, who is the new president of the Noosa Chamber of Commerce, who has signed the petition to express his satisfaction with the People's Park and the removal of car parks across the Shire. And this is why I started the petition, because I saw the very public community disapproval

01:42:00 with the project, and decided to create an avenue for people to provide that feedback through an official form of public participation that is recognised by Council, so not social media comments, and that is the petition, and today the deputation. I wanted to capture the disapproval from the streets and the social media and convey them to Council through this avenue. The aim of this petition is to inform Council's decision making post trial, including informing current and future Council plans, such as the transport strategy, the Noosa car parking management plan, which is to be undertaken later this year, the destination management draft plan, which I'll speak more about, and the Noosaville foreshore infrastructure master plan, which also proposed a reduction of car parks, the Pomona placemaking study, and the Town Planning Amendments Org, which focus on traffic congestion and car parking. Noosa Council have actually asked for feedback following the trial, to quote, inform ongoing initiatives to improve access, and also to determine the community's appetite for more initiatives like this around the Shire. When I read that, I thought absolutely this petition needs to go ahead, because the Council

01:43:00 need to know people's views on this. So I thought I'd just read quickly through the petition and explain a little bit in more detail. So, we express our opposition to the People's Park on Hastings Street and call on the Council to immediately abandon this absurd project and return the location to a dedicated car park. This speaks for itself. It's directly expressing 1,094 people's opposition to the Council's project. It also expresses that these people would prefer the space to be used as a dedicated car park, and that's important because there could be potential in the future to change that space. This must inform any future plans to remove car parks at this location, or plans to turn it into a permanent park. The petition goes on to say the project has seen the loss of over 40 value car parks in a location they are most required, made worse by the timing of the peak holiday period. This tells Mr. Council that these car parks are valued by the community, and therefore the removal of them is not in line with the community's values. People who value car parks by extension value vehicle access to Hastings Street and in Anusa. And this should inform Council of the community's sentiments in regard to limiting vehicle access during peak times, which is something that's been raised in multiple Council plans.

01:44:00 The petition goes on to say we also call on Anusa Council to publicly reveal the total cost of this project to ratepayers and who in Council is responsible. So this would ensure transparency and accountability, which are two pillars of the Public Sector Ethics Act, which Councils and Council staff must follow by law. Community wants to know the total cost of this project. This would include, but not limited to, cost of materials, the cameras, number plate recognition, the sandstone blocks, the tents, the planning and investigation if there was any, the time staff spent planning, implementing and responding to community members, and media releases. It's important because if Council implements a project, especially a failed project, the community deserves to know the cost of the ratepayer. Furthermore, in the name of accountability, people want to know who in Council, what staff, department, Councils, if applicable, were responsible for the implementation and signing off of this project. Most importantly, clause in the petition says we also object to the removal of other existing car parks around Anusa Shire. Now this was a key point in this, and I believe it's why a lot of people signed onto this petition.

01:45:00 It's not just about the People's Park, as I said earlier. It expresses the community's sentiments about car parks in general, that is, they want to keep them. And this is important because numerous Anusa Council plans and projects have proposed the removal of car parks to deal with traffic congestion. We saw the closure of the Lions Club car park, or park, that was used for car parking, which saw the loss of 97 car parks in Anusa, the People's Park, which lost 40 to 50 car parks, the Noosaville foreshore infrastructure master plan, which proposed a loss of approximately 104 car parks. The town planning amendments proposed a loss of approximately 40 car parks on Albert Street to rezone that car park to high density living. And the town planning amendments also proposed a reduction in the number of car parking spaces required for new builds, particularly affordable housing. In fact, I'll just quickly read from that town planning amendment. The proposed amendments will specifically address affordable rental premises at Noosa Junction, Noosa Business Centre and Tewantin, which are serviced by a relatively high frequency of buses. And it's interesting that Noosa Council's transport strategy talks about the inefficiency of buses. In these instances, formalised car sharing might reduce the need for a portion of car

01:46:00 parking spaces. Each car share vehicle with its nominated space can reduce the minimum car parking rate by four spaces each, depending on the number of affordable rental premises. Development can have a maximum of three shared vehicles. If car parking is unbottled from the tiles of the individual units and remains in the common property, the minimum car parking rate can be reduced up to 10%. So not only are we losing car parks in public spaces, we're actually losing them in private developments. And I think it's worth noting that in my submission to that amendment, I also called for extended community consultation, because here we have a petition with over 1,000 signatories related to car parking and not removing it, yet the planning amendments only have 350 submissions. So there's a disconnect between what Council's getting between official consultations and petitions, particularly this one, and even the infrastructure foreshore plan. In fact, 350 respondents to the planning amendments represents 0.06% of Noosa residents. This moves me to move on to the destination management plan.

01:47:00 A very important plan for Noosa, which a lot of people don't know about either. And I believe that the People's Park links into this, because I've seen it referenced many times when quoting the People's Park. And the destination management plan floats vehicle restrictions, pedestrian-only areas. Quote, make Hastings Street and Gympie Terrace pedestrian-only zones during peak times. Quote, make park road access to Noosa National Park by free bus only during peak times, so more vehicle access restrictions. Can Noosa Council advocate for restricted access in a booking system to the Shire's iconic landscapes? For example, Noosa National Park and Noosa North Shore. There's also floating of mandates on local tourism experiences and service operators to make them zero waste and zero emissions. And that's important because the transport strategy also focuses on zero emissions. I think it's also important because the DNP shows Council's potential potential for

01:48:00 outcomes that they want from this. The destination management plan link resources on the website, quote, international examples to model Noosa around. One of these articles, which is not a peer-reviewed article, it's an opinion piece, but it's presented by Council nonetheless, is, quote, reclaiming the streets, the increasing trend of pedestrianisation around the world. This was written by Rapid Transition Alliance. The co-author is Andrew Sims, who's an author, political economist and activist. He's known for writing about, quote, driving cars out of our cities, the Green New Deal in the UK, banning car adverts, advocating the removal of car parks. In fact, in this very article that Noosa Council quote, he promotes the banning of cars, pedestrianisation and removing private cars from city centres. That article says a critical element in the adoption of car-free days and protectionised zones in many cities has been the rise of activist groups pushing to reclaim public space. So it appears that Noosa Council has been driven by activism in this space. The other article that has been linked on the Council's website is Reasons to be Cheerful,

01:49:00 Spain's Happy Little Carless City, modelling, obviously wanting to model Noosa around Spain. That article says calls for car-free cities can sometimes sound like a call to end driving entirely, a lovely fantasy, but one that's not likely to materialise any time soon. Where we find advocates for saner transportation, their dream scenario usually hinges on the same outcome, making cities blissfully free of cars. To this end, the Spanish city of Pontevedra, population of 84,000, has done something remarkable. It has reduced car use in its historic core by 90% and city-wide by half, and has done it without blanket fees or bans, which is interesting because I feel like this is the road news of Councillor going down. Instead of banning cars, use clever engineering and some gentle nudging to get people out of their cars and onto the street. They want to tap the brakes on car usage, Pontevedra offers a masterclass in tactical de-vehicularisation. This seems like something the Council is going down to deal with traffic congestion, and

01:50:00 the removal of the car park seems to be in line with this, and it seems to be in line with the destination management plan. It's worth noting the Noosa Transport Strategy at this point, which is a 10-year plan, but is reviewed at least annually. I don't have time to go into it, but I think that there's some contradictions in it. It talks about encouraging transport options for the needs of both locals and visitors. It's clear that residents want parking, yet the Transport Strategy also focuses on moving people and goods rather than moving cars, so they're at odds with each other. So Council seems to be picking and choosing parts of the Transport Strategy to implement. But in that same report, it talks about the impact of transport on the city. It also talks about constraints on the dependence on active transport and public transport. For most people, driving a car is a way of life and a preferred mode of transport. A combined 44% of jobs in Noosa are within retail, hospitality, accommodation and healthcare sectors. The nature of this work, shift work late hours, means that active transport, walking and cycling

01:51:00 may not be appropriate and public transport is unlikely to be available. This is from Council's own Transport Strategy. It also talks about constraints on the topography and climate of Noosa, the hilly terrain making it challenging for pedestrians and cyclists, sub-tropical climate, extreme weather events, shortfalls in infrastructure and services. I think the quarry in the hinterland plays into this. It's not listed in the Transport Strategy, but it's a risk to the public safety, and requiring people to walk and cycle can increase those risks. It also goes on to say that buses come and go. People currently get stuck in congestion during peak periods and offer no efficiency over private car, other than not having to find a car park. So Council know these issues with relying on active transport, but unfortunately are relying on active transport to deal with congestion. It's also worth noting in this Transport Strategy that consultants, Parsons, Binkroff recommend

01:52:00 that the Noosa Council consider managing the supply of car parking rather than continuing the philosophy of supplying free parking in response to demand. It doesn't actually say to remove free parking. It says to remove car parks. The management controls that this consultant offers are control by time, short term versus long term, control by price, free versus paid, and control by type, resident versus non-resident. So removing car parks doesn't seem to be congruent with improving access or the controls advised by this consultant. The petition also further says, in future Noosa Shire residents and ratepayers must be consulted on projects like this before they're implemented, not after. The people at Noosa deserve transparency and input to decision making, and that's pretty self-explanatory. People want to be consulted and they want to be given the chance to provide input before decisions are made, not on just overarching plans and concepts, but individual Council projects which are stated in the petition. This just popped up one day. There was no dedicated consultation, and an informal consultation was eventually conducted after the project and after the community sentiment was made very public.

01:53:00 This is another reason I started the petition. As I said, the community needed a formal and simple way to have their voice heard. And lastly, we seek this petition to be presented to the whole Noosa Council, and this is actually a very important cause. It's one required by petitions, but it actually seeks that all Noosa Council staff, Councils and decision makers are aware of the views of 1,094 people that have signed onto this petition, and it's again the reason why it was created. There should be a report on the People's Park, hopefully soon. And as well as the feedback received by email, I would like this petition to be included in that report, but also as well as other Council reports and plans once mentioned, and also future plans. It's also worth mentioning, put it in comparison, the 1,093 signatures in, say, the Destination Management Plan that received 791 survey respondents. So we have more responses to this petition. And it's hopefully going to provide some balance to the outcomes of that Destination Management Plan consultation.

01:54:00 So in conclusion, this petition should be filed and referenced when making decisions about traffic management, including reviewing car parking arrangements in Noosa, but it should also be considered in regards to all Council plans, especially as the petition calls for transparency, consultation and input into decision making. I'd just like to finish on that this is my fourth deputation to Noosa Council, and unfortunately to date, I haven't received a meaningful response to any of these deputations, and I hope that this may be a change and I actually receive some feedback from Council in this regard. Thank you. Thank you, Mr Cook. Mayor Wilkie: So we're going to have a short break and we're going to move, with your permission, we're going to move question time, which is at the end of the agenda, to the next item. Because there's a confidential item before the question time, which we're going to have to clear the gallery, which would be unfair if people turned up to ask the questions. So when we return, people will be able to ask questions. Thank you.

01:55:00 Okay, welcome back everybody, we've cleared the meeting open again. We now move to public question time. And we have four submissions to public question time. The first one is from Taylor Ladd-Hudson, from the Surfrider Foundation, Sunshine Coast. So Mrs. Ladd-Hudson, would you like to join us at the podium to read out your questions, which will be responded to by our Director of Strategy and Environment, Madam Kim Rawlings. Thank you, Taylor. Taylor Ladd-Hudson: Thank you. My first question is, does the next generation of Noosa residents, being young people, deserve new, modern solutions and alternatives in the management of shark mitigation strategies? Hello, Taylor. Thank you for the question. Director Rawlings: Working closely with representatives of the State Government, the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, Council has adopted a policy position on the shark control program. In June this year. The purpose of this strategy was to support the State to transition to lower bycatch potential alternatives in waters adjacent to Noosa.

11 PUBLIC QUESTION TIME ¶

▶ 02:09:38

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

11.1 Taylor Ladd Hudson - Surfrider Foundations Sunshine Coast ¶

▶ 02:11:42

02:12:00 Information about the strategy and consultation process was made available through multiple channels including public meetings, Council websites, newsletters and local media. Over 1,200 submissions were made by the public through surveys, submissions and in person events. And the final strategy reflected this. For further information on the consultation process, please visit the Noosa Transport Strategy 2017-2027 page on your Say Noosa. Council is committed to review the transport strategy and prepare a new movement and connectivity strategy which will include further community consultation. Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you. The next item is a confidential item. And so it's not for public release. The next item is Planning and Environment Court Appeal No. 3156-2023, Application for Hospital and Healthcare Service, Day Surgery and Associated Facilities at 47 Goodchap Street, Noosaville.

02:13:00 So we're going to be moving that we close the gallery so these confidential discussions can take place. So I will move that the meeting be closed to the public pursuant to Section 254J3E of the Local Government Regulation 2012. The purpose of discussing item 10.1, Planning and Environment Court Appeal No. 3156-2023, Application for Hospital and Healthcare Service at 47 Goodchap Street, Noosaville. May I have a seconder please? Second. Second. Councillor Lorentson? All in favour? Yes. That's unanimous. So we just ask that all members of the public can leave. Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you. Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: Ok. Welcome back everyone. We're in fact in open session. We have a resolution before us. Does somebody care to move that? Move it. Move Councillor Phillips I will second it.

02:14:00 Any discussion? All in favour? Councillor Finzel: Yes. Mayor Wilkie: That's carried unanimously. Now Literally but we won't break. We will push on. Brings us to August 14. Item 8, Consideration of Committee Reports. 8.1, Planning and Environment Committee Report, 9th of July, 2024. And Committee Recommendations, Item 5.1, Unity Water, Noosa Head Surf Plan, Planning Assumptions, which is referred to the General Committee. This was the only report from this committee. Can I remove from the second of the Planning and Environment Committee Recommendations, please? I'll move it. Councillor Wegener: Councillor Wegener. I'll second. Mayor Wilkie: Councillor Stockwell. All in favour? That's carried. Yes. Yes. Anonymously. Next are the Services and Organisations Committee Report Recommendations. 5.1, Further Report, Council of Representation on Various Committees, Working Groups, Boards and External Groups, 2024. 5.2, Appointment of 2025, Shale Holiday.

02:15:00 7.1 was referred to the General Committee. Can I have a move or a seconder of the... Speaker 2: I will keep it a move. Mayor Wilkie: So that was Karen, first, and seconded by Councillor Wilson. All in favour? Speaker 2: Yes. Mayor Wilkie: That's carried unanimously. Next, the General Committee Reports. The Unity Awarded Noose and Net Serve Plans, Planning Assumptions, which was referred to the Planning and Environment Committee. 5.2 was a confidential item not for public release, proposed dedication of TMI and freehold land as Road Noosaville, which was referred to the Services and Organisation Committee. 6.1 was the Financial Performances Report, June 2024. 6.2, Recycling and Renewables Hub Master Plan, Stage 1 Process. 6.3, 2024 LGAQ Conference Motions. 6.4, Planning and Applications Decided by Delegated Authority, May 2024. 7.1 was a confidential, not for public release item, Planning and Environment Court Appeal, number D2322-2022.

11.2 Debra Walz ¶

▶ 02:15:10

02:16:00 Applications for reconfiguring a lot, 112 lots, at 111.2. Lakewater Drive, Noosaville, described as lot 4 on RP36729. 7.2 was another confidential report, 2122Q125, Contract Variation for Project Management Services, 2022, Flood Recovery and Reconstruction. 7.3 is another confidential item, CN00317B, Contract Variation for Flood Reconstruction, Average 7B, Landslide Remedial Works, 7.3, 7.4, 7.6, 7.7, 7.9, 7.10, 7.11, 7.12,

02:17:00 The next item is a report direct to the ordinary meeting, which is further consultation, municipal, foreshore, infrastructure management plan, Noosaville attachment plan, and we have from Director Tim Hawkins here, environmental strategy, Councillor Stockwell. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I do, yes, I wish to advise the meeting that for the past two terms I've declared a conflict of interest as a result of my long association with, or previous contracts as a sole trader consultant, trading as Watershed Australia, with the following organisations, Noosa and District Landcare, and its unincorporated forebear, Mary River Catchment Coordination Association, Noosa Integrated Catchment Association, Healthy Land and Water, and its pre-incorporated forebear.

02:18:00 SEQ Water, and potentially early in the 2016-2020, the Noosa Residents and Ratepayers Association. However, having now received more detailed legal advice, it is clear that my circumstances do not meet the definition of a declarable conflict of interest, because none of these organisations are close associates, nor are any a related party under the Local Government Act. This advice was based on an outline of my history with these organisations, which I have uploaded for public viewing on my website. I will not be declaring any type of conflict of interest for this matter, or in relation to these organisations, into the future, unless circumstances change. Councillor Lorentson: Can I ask a question, please? Councillor Stockwell, is the legal advice also uploaded for public viewing on your website, and where can we access the legal advice? Mayor Wilkie: I don't know if we can count the questions for currently, but I've got a question from the Council.

02:19:00 Is Councillor Stockwell's legal advice also available on his website? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: No, and it won't be. It is legal. It goes into a range of detail, and I've asked our own Council legal officers whether it should be made public, and their advice was not to. Mayor Wilkie: Okay, do we have any other conflicts of interest? Councillor Finzel? Councillor Finzel: Yes, thank you, Mr Chair. I, Councillor Finzel, inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter. As in October 2023, a petition stopped Noosa River turning into a conservation park, was submitted to Noosa Shire Council. Listed on the petition was the name Sharon Finzel, who is a cousin of my husband, with whom I do not have a close personal relationship. At that time, I was not made aware of her intention to sign the petition, nor did I consult with her on the matter. Although I'm declaring a declarable conflict of interest, I do not have a close personal relationship with her.

02:20:00 I do not believe a reasonable person could have a perception of bias, because I do not have a close personal relationship with the signatory. Therefore, I will choose to remain in the meeting room. However, I will respect the decision of the meeting on whether I can remain and participate in the decision. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. I'm happy to move that Councillor Finzel, the Council note the declarable conflict of interest by Councillor Finzel, and determine that Councillor Finzel participates and votes on this matter, as Council believes that she does not have a conflict of interest. Therefore, I will trust that she does not have a conflict of interest on this matter and that she does not have a close personal relationship with the petition signatory, and therefore a reasonable person would trust the final decision is made in public interest. Mayor Wilkie: Councillor Wilson would second that. Any discussion? All in favour? That's carried unanimously, noting that Councillor Finzel did not vote. Okay, now, Kim, would you care to give us an overview of this report please? Director Rawlings: Sure. Through the Chair, this report provides an update on two very important projects, the Noosaville Foreshore Infrastructure Master Plan and the Noosa River Catchment Management Plan.

02:21:00 And for the sake of conversation, I'll refer to them as the Noosaville Foreshore Master Plan and the River Plan. So we have just completed phase two of community engagement on the Foreshore Master Plan and as councillors would be well aware, we've received significant community interest and feedback through that process. This report therefore recommends that in light of that, council undertake a further round of consultation on a revised Foreshore Master Plan. At the moment, the project team are very much analysing and working through that raft of feedback from the community and it is showing that there are a number of issues, including a number of issues that are relevant to the River Plan.

02:22:00 So the report not only seeks council's consideration of acknowledging the significant amount of feedback from the community on the Foreshore Master Plan, but it also recommends that, given the relevance of some of the issues for the River Plan, that we understand what they are and how they relate to the River Plan before we undertake any further consultation on the River Plan. And further to that, the report also outlines that council are now a formal partner in the SEQ Regional Council of the Mayor's Resilient Rivers Initiative, which has been going for some time. And many of the SEQ Governments have been members for some time, but Noosa Council has just become part of that process, which is fantastic.

11.3 Andrew MCarthy ¶

▶ 02:22:16

02:23:00 And through that process, there is opportunity for all of the local governments to develop Catchment Action Plans in a consistent manner with SEQ Councils, and potentially an opportunity for some resourcing and funding support for council to do that. Given that opportunity, I think it's important for us to do that. We also think it's a great opportunity for council to take to revise and refresh and hopefully simplify our Noosa River Plan in line with that framework. So for those range of reasons, the report recommends a third phase of consultation for the Foreshore Master Plan, not advancing any further consultation on the River Plan at this stage. Capitalising on the... ...partnership we would now have with the Resilient Rivers and seeking some funding and resourcing support through that process.

02:24:00 Mayor Wilkie: Question. You mentioned that there would be some targeted stakeholder consultation done prior to the either of these plans going out further with the Royal Community Consultation Committee. Can you just elaborate on that a bit, please? Director Rawlings: Yeah, sure. Absolutely. So the intention in the next phase is absolutely to meet with all key stakeholders. It's important to meet with all key stakeholders. It's important for both plans and interested in both plans and further understand what their concerns are in relation to the Foreshore Master Plan, what the ideas are and, you know, workshop and work through what they are to feed into the Foreshore Master Plan before it goes back out to the broader community. And the same with the River Plan. So in the meantime, if we go down the path of developing or aligning our River Plan to the Catchment Management Action Plan framework, we would... The resolution also seeks that we meet with key stakeholders and groups that have shown interest in the River Plan today in the interim to further explore issues, concerns and also, importantly, outline what the process might be for aligning our River Plan to the Framework, Catchment Management Plan framework.

02:25:00 Mayor Wilkie: Questions, councillors? I'm happy to move it. Oh, I'm happy to second. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Thank you for the report. I endorse this approach. It gives us the time to really think carefully about all the feedback that we've received during the municipal Foreshore Master Plan process. As we've said, we are listening. None of these ideas are endorsed to proceed. They're all going to be weighed up in light of the feedback, community feedback and submissions. Thank you for the report. And then further stakeholder engagement, key stakeholders. And then a second... A third...

02:26:00 Sorry, another master plan has been drawn up for the third phase of public consultation. There's no time constraints on this. It's very important to take the time to get it right and show that we are listening. And also, with the new River Plan, the fact that we are now part of the South-Eastern Council of Mayors and have the Resilient Rivers Program, there is resourcing and funding available. It's an opportunity to update, review and simplify a municipal River Plan, modernise it. And we'll also have key stakeholders be engaged with... Before we put it out for public consultation, again, I think it's a very wise approach. And it gives us an opportunity to demonstrate to the community that we have listened to them and we're... Whatever we proceed with will be... They'll see themselves reflected in the plans. Anyone else? Just a second. Councillor Lorentson. Councillor Lorentson: Just some questions, if that's okay. In regards to conservation park concept, will it be raised with other options or is

11.4 Craig Vella ¶

▶ 02:26:02

02:27:00 it no longer considered a consideration, given that we are going down the resilient rivers model? Mayor Wilkie: Councillor Finzel, the question was pertaining to the conservation park. What is... How is that matter going to be handled? Is it still relevant? And how is it going to be handled given that we're going down the Resilient Rivers model? So, Richard. Councillor Finzel: Thank you, Mr Chair. Mayor Wilkie: Yes, Ben. Speaker 3: Mr Chair. If we're putting the River Plan out for consultation and re-grafting it in terms of putting it into a different format, re-interrogating what the values are and what the outcomes are, that should be... The concept of a conservation park or any other governance arrangement can form part of that initial discussion. And if it's sent to the... If that's seen through our community and public consultation and departmental and agency consultation prior to developing the broader community consultation element to

02:28:00 it, if that's seen as worth progressing through those areas, look, it's... It is still on the table. But it doesn't mean it's still on the table, if that makes sense. So, if we are re-interrogating it, then yes, we can consider it. And that's simply that. I think that would be a very important point. Thank you. Councillor Finzel: Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you. Councillor Finzel: Ms Kinshare. Mayor Wilkie: Oh, the staff is still answering that question. Can I... Oh, my apologies. You were next. You were next. Director Rawlings: Yeah, I guess what this report does... Doesn't do is say what's in and out of a River Plan. If what it does do is say the current draft River Plan hasn't been endorsed or revanced. So the actions in it haven't been endorsed or revanced. What this says is that we are suggesting a revised process for the development of a review and recreation plan along with the capital action plan. So it doesn't say whether anything is in order at this stage.

02:29:00 Councillor Lorentson: Karen, you had a question? Sorry, just follow up. Director Rawlings: Yes, thank you. Mayor Wilkie: Sorry Karen, Amelia's got a follow up question. Councillor Lorentson: Okay, my apology. To say that differently, Kim, so the concept of a conservation park or any other governance models will be addressed through stakeholder consultation before any redraft. Is that correct? That's correct. Thank you very much. Mayor Wilkie: So Karen, the question was the concept of a conservation park or any other governance arrangement will be addressed through stakeholder target management? That's correct. So what I would say is that we are suggesting that the project will be addressed through stakeholder consultation prior to any redraft of the Noosaville plan. Councillor Finzel: Thank you Mr. Chip. Mayor Wilkie: Okay and you have the floor now Karen. Councillor Finzel: Thank you. Coming back to my point earlier in the meeting this morning with regards to reviewing community engagement consultations, I proposed, wondering if we can amend or add to this recommendation,

02:30:00 This is a proposal to review the current community engagement policies to increase the visibility and understanding of the issues empowering communities to have their say over these decisions. Is this the right opportunity to include that now in this item? Mayor Wilkie: I was just asking if you could scroll up there and see the full recommendation. Councillor Finzel: In relation to D on this current item, I'm just waiting for the screen to come up. For Council to, sorry I can't quite read it, but comment to meet and work with the community,

02:31:00 do we enlarge on the community engagement? Do we move on that or is it a new item F to add an amendment that we request through the CEO for a review through the Council organisation to look at how we can better serve our community with more contemporary and innovated approaches to community engagement? Mayor Wilkie: So, there's probably the way forward. Council thinks I'd like to suggest you move an amendment to add an F that Council requests the CEO to organise a review of the current community engagement policy. Does that align to what you're asking for? Councillor Finzel: Yes. Yes, please, yes. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Mr Chair, that would be a motion that's outside the scope of the item in progress and I wouldn't support you as being within the context of standing orders to commit it. Well. Councillor Finzel: Okay, thank you. I'll take that on board. I just raised that because the Chair earlier said that I had an opportunity to raise this

10 CONFIDENTIAL SESSION ¶

▶ 02:31:32

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

10.1 CONFIDENTIAL – NOT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE - PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COURT APPEAL NO. 3156 of 2023 – APPLICATION FOR A HOSPITAL AND HEALTH CARE SERVICE (DAY SURGERY AND ASSOCIATED FACILITIES) AT 47 GOODCHAP STREET, Noosaville ¶

▶ 02:31:38· Carried unanimously 7-0 from council's minutes

02:32:00 matter at this item. But I'm happy to take the advice of the councillors around the table in relation to the standing orders. Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: I'll take advice from staff. Is staff comfortable with such an amendment at this point? Speaker 2: Yes. I think potentially what would be good is if we could have a workshop with the councillors to bring it up to speed on the community engagement framework that was just reviewed and to understand what's required. And that we leave this as a separate item because this is quite structured whereas a review of the community engagement framework and policies is a separate piece of work and quite boring in nature. Yes. Mayor Wilkie: So having taken the advice, Karen, the feeling is that we remain focused on the motion that's before us, which is specific in scope.

02:33:00 Yes. And that the staff have committed to a further workshop on the community engagement policy. Councillor Finzel: And community engagement framework. Mayor Wilkie: And community engagement framework. How does that sit with you? Councillor Finzel: Well, I thank everybody for your input in that. I think that's fantastic. I think, as we discussed earlier, we're definitely sitting at an intersection of where, you know, we're in transition. We want to try and minimise moving forward the impacts of, you know, community feeling disengaged. We want to really move from transactional relationships to collaborative relationships that allow everyone to feel like that their voice has been heard. You know, as we know, that's a core component of collaborative and innovative cultures. So, yeah, I'm really happy to support that workshop and look forward to seeing that in our calendars as soon as possible. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you, Councillor Finzel. Thank you. Any other councillors wish to speak directly to the motion? I want a question. Yes.

02:34:00 Councillor Phillips: I've got just my own. Sometimes I find there's a lot of buzzwords. So, can you please just break this paragraph down into, like, real layman's terms for me, please? Adaptation. Firstly, I'll tell you where it is. Noosa River Catchment Management Plan, the River Plan. Last paragraph. Adaptation of the current draft River Plan will not negatively impact the future aims and objectives of the New South Wales River Management Plan. However, it will further delay its finalisation. The values and management goals uniquely inherit to the Noosa River will still provide the foundation of a revised plan. The process for developing the ACE cap will ensure it occurs in a collaborative manner, ensuring the identification of strategic priorities and direction of resources aligned with the goals and objectives of the New South Wales River Management Plan. In addition, it will ensure that the New South Wales River Management Plan is in line with Council and the Noosa community aspirations.

02:35:00 Yes. Director Rawlings: Essentially, that means that even though we are looking to align with a state-endorsed kind of program, that it will still reflect local values and Council will still be able to have a say in that process, as will our community. Essentially saying that. Councillor Phillips: Okay. Director Rawlings: Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: Good question. Thank you. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you. Um, Councilor Morrison? Um, regarding stakeholders and community consultation, how can we be assured that this will be conducted with all groups, um, groups that have not previously consulted. And I've got a list coming up. Laguna Boating Too New North Shore Association, New Tech and Business Operators, New South Boating Fishing Alliance in terms of the New South Shore management plan, the Lions Club, Mayor Wilkie: So the question was, in regards to the upcoming stakeholder engagement, what reassurances are there that groups that have not been involved before will be involved this time, and there was a list.

02:36:00 So if you wish me to read out the list, such as Noosa Commercial Marine Operators, Laguna Boating Centre, Noosa North Shore Association, groups that have not been previously involved, Lions, Lions Club, Noosa Boating and Fishing Alliance, they weren't involved before. Do you have a response to that? Councillor Finzel: Thank you, Mr Chair. Director Rawlings: Yeah, so feel free to pass on the list. We'd be, and you know, we're happy to meet with whoever would like to meet with us about these issues. And I'm sure the team would say the same. Speaker 1: For clarity, Noosa Boating and Fishing Alliance have been engaged and are continuing to be

02:37:00 engaged. But we are revising the community engagement plan for this project, and we are reviewing the stakeholder list to update that and add anyone that was missing. Yeah, great. Speaker 5: And I think we just have to have due process and analyse the feedback and understand moving into this next phase. Mayor Wilkie: Do councillors wish to speak to the motion? Councillor Wilson: Yes. Mayor Wilkie: Councillor Wilson. Councillor Wilson: Questions. Firstly, I want to thank Director Tim Rawlings and team for the report, and also acknowledge all of the work ahead. In analysing the feedback. Next, I want to thank the community for their engagement in this matter and the submissions we've received, all of which gave really practical points based on the way each person uses and enjoys the river and foreshore. This report and the recommendations make it clear that we're listening and there are

02:38:00 lessons we can learn from this too. The first being communication and education. Personally, I think we needed to give a clear summary of what was happening and why and when. And we're going to do that in the next 20 plus years before releasing the full report. But that said, even if the master plan concept was better understood in the community, there are elements in the draft that are far from community expectations and needs. And it doesn't really reflect what we residents love about the river parks and pathways along Gympie Terrace and the various ways we all access the area. So as a new councillor, I do want to understand how we got here so it doesn't happen again. In the meantime, I fully support this motion and the recommendations in the report and hope that this restores some faith in the community that we take all feedback seriously. Based on that feedback, council will redraft the foreshore plan and engage again to make sure it's right. The river plan will also be revised and undergo further consultation as we've heard.

02:39:00 This is an area loved by residents and the plan should be shaped by residents' views. Councillor Lorentson: Given the importance of the economic impact assessment in the Resilient Rivers Initiative, will such an assessment be conducted for our river plan? Mayor Wilkie: Question was, will there be an economic impact assessment done for the river plan given its connection to the Resilient Rivers Program? Director Rawlings: If we're successful in getting resources and funding through that program, and that this gets endorsed, then we will adopt the process that the Catchment Action Planning Framework outlines and undertake each aspect of that process. Yes.

02:40:00 Councillor Lorentson: Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: Okay, so we've had myself and the councillor here. Can the councillor Wilson speak to the motion? Anyone else wish to speak to the motion? Councillor Weir? Director Rawlings: Oh, you. Mayor Wilkie: Go ahead, Gary. No, Councillor Finzel. Councillor Finzel, you go ahead. Councillor Finzel, you've got the floor. Councillor Finzel: Oh, yes. Thank you, Mr Chair. Yeah, I'd like to just take this opportunity to acknowledge everyone's hard work and contributions to this process. It's been ongoing, and it's been very tumultuous, to say the least. But I think, you know, this has brought us to a point where we've had a lot of work and there's challenges and conflicts, to a point of moving forward, I think, to a really collaborative approach and meaningful steps forward, where we've identified both risks and opportunities to do better through governance and including and bringing along the journey all voices within our community. So I'm really excited about this opportunity today to really bring all of us together.

02:41:00 I think everyone on the journey and continue to develop and strengthen our relationships with individuals and community groups, so that they feel that there is trust in this Council to actually have the agility and the capacity to really listen to what our community's saying and take those steps forward with Council staff and executives to make sure that we're able to build a really robust and resilient community that feels that their voice is heard and acted upon to help solve their needs as they identify their needs where they live, in their homes, in their streets, in their river. I just think it's been very challenging, but I think the intersection we find ourselves

02:42:00 today at is really hopeful in a parent community. We're very proud of the community, and I think it's really important for our community to have the say in the decisions that affect their lives. I just want to thank everybody for their participation and their respectful way of working together through these challenging times. So thank you everybody. Mayor Wilkie: Thanks, Councillor Finzel. Councillor Wegener. Councillor Wegener: I'm fully supportive of this report. I'm very pleased that we're going down and reassessing the activity of this Council. They have a fantastic amount of consultation and feedback that we have on this. I consider this an enormous success for Noosa Council to enjoy so much feedback from the residents, from the stakeholders, and so forth. So let's go forward with this. On the other hand, I have to lament the fact that the river is still choking in silt. We have gone nowhere with the overall river plan, which my concern is, my value in the river is a healthy river full of life,

02:43:00 full of a benthic layer, full of little crustaceans, full of fish, full of prawns, full of oysters. And we are just slipping further and further away from that goal as we do this. But it's a necessary thing to do. I'm not going to say necessary evil, because it's not. We are just marching forward. But, what is it, we're making haste very, very slowly in this case. Councillor Phillips: Another question, please. Just apologies for pulling apart the report the way. I just need to get a little bit more clarity on another part of the report, finance, improving resourcing and internal processes for engagement. It says, this has resulted in some projects not having adequate budgets to execute the appropriate level of staged engagement required.

02:44:00 My question is, how, moving forward, will we make sure this doesn't happen again? Director Rawlings: Well, that's for you to say yes to what we asked for in terms of budget allocation for a project. Firstly. So, as you know, we're having lots of conversations about, you know, making sure that there's enough time and planning and preparation in terms of the phases of consultation that is required for our community. You know, we've traditionally done two phases of consultation for our major projects. What we're now seeing is that we need to do three. So, that'll start to inform how we budget and plan going forward. And you will see that there are, there will be some financial and resource implications. Because when you add another phase of consultation in, there are, you know, costs associated with that.

02:45:00 So, yeah, that'll start to flow through. Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: Yes, Councillor Ashes, Acting Senior. Speaker 2: Yes, so, just in terms of process, those types of issues are addressed through our budget review process. And it might well be, for example, through budget review two, that the proposal is then put forward to address these field considerations. So, you would then consider it. Councillor Lorentson: Okay, thank you. Mayor Wilkie: Councillor Morris. Councillor Lorentson: In terms of external cost consultancies, will the redraft of the foreshore management plan be done in-house, or will we be going out to consultants again? And if so, what sort of costs are we looking at? Mayor Wilkie: So, the question was, Councillor Finzel, will the redraft of the NUSA or any of these plans involve, you know, going to external consultancies? And if so, will it, could it be done in-house?

02:46:00 Or if it is going external, what would be the cost to Council? Director Rawlings: Thank you, Mr Chair. Sorry, Councillor Finzel. Through the Chair, we have a project team on the foreshore master plan, which includes external consultants. And we have an arrangement with that. And we've got a contract around that. We also have some government funding, grant funding towards this project. So, and they, so there's a multi-disciplinary project team that will see this project through. And that will include the consultants that we've been currently working with. The re-scope of the process and the project is still being considered and underway. So, we can't, I can't provide you with that, what that means. It is our hope and intention and best efforts that we will keep, contain any costs within the current total project budget.

02:47:00 But if not, then there'll be a conversation through the normal processes. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you. Just a follow-up question. In terms of the work done in progressing the NUSA River plan, you mentioned that there is funding and resources available through the Resilient Rivers arrangement. Is that intended to be fully funded in this regard? Director Rawlings: Through Councillor Wilkie. We are putting a proposal to the Resilient Rivers Initiative project control group tomorrow about what that resourcing might look like. So, potentially, a casual management officer was a part of the time towards assisting us to develop the plan. Unclear at this stage what it might mean and whether it's partial or full funding or

02:48:00 support for the development of the plan. We'll have to come back with details as that, because that, you know, that was subject to today's discussion too. Mayor Wilkie: Okay. Thank you. Yeah. Anybody else wish to speak to the motion? Councillor Finzel: I just have a question. Is that okay, Mr Chair? Of course. Just on the back of the Resilient Rivers, and in response to Councillor Wegener's concerns around silt into the river and different things like that, I'm just wondering if staff is able to give us a bit of further feedback around the opportunities under the Resilient Rivers to creating, you know, a more sustainable water system. And, you know, in terms of those thriving and sustainable rivers and the part of that in the catchment where funding or support can be done to address those things around silting. Through the regional strategy. Speaker 3: I'll answer that through the Chair, if that's okay.

02:49:00 The Resilient Rivers initiative funding program, once we get to that stage and, look, I'll step back a little bit and say the first part of establishing what our priority framework will be is to start with the We've also been able to have a clear strategy, which is the catchment action plan. Once we've got that endorsed by Council, hopefully sometime next year based on this resolution, then we'll be able to prioritise potentially project funding through RRI, and that's part of the city deal, to be able to allocate funding to the different councils. Depending on what the high value priorities are, we've already done a large volume of work to be able to understand where the risks and threats and where we think the priorities should be, to be able to address those. A lot of that work will probably carry through to determining the priorities under the catchment action plan, in which case then we'll be able to say, okay, here's a suite of projects which are really closely aligned to what the objectives of the resilient and privileged funding is,

02:50:00 and potentially we can have some project funding through that. That's the anticipation of the city deal funding. $30 million over five years will be spread around the different catchments based on priority, and that's one of the reasons to be able to get a really consistent and uniform catchment action plan so that we can compare apples and puffins across the region. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you, Ben. Now, the councillor will speak to the motion. Councillor Stockwell. Yeah, I'll speak. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor Phillips mentioned that she can count on one hand the number of demonstrations, protests, and I think... Ooh, I can probably get a bit above my hands that I've done. And the river's not been a placid ground for cohesive community views. We've had flotillas of boats going down talking about the war on wrecks, okay? We've had a number of community forums that are, you know, as of Noosa Residents and Ratepayers in my time called,

02:51:00 which had hundreds of people attend because of lack of action on the river. The current flashpoints are interesting. So embedded within the community response on the Noosa Master Plan for infrastructure was the fact that we have some of the flashpoints to be mentioned today. The flashpoints about how's council going to manage the conflict between cars and people when it comes to the future planning for our green spaces. And it was mentioned that 2017 is where the community gave this council a really big indication where they wanted to go. And that was put people above cars. But since then we've probably had 30 to 50% of the residents living here who weren't there in 2017. But then when we look at the discussion paper for the Destination Management Plan, those sentiments were pretty similar. So we... But what went wrong is we had a whole lot of thinking that had years in its progression and a whole lot of technical assessment.

02:52:00 We put it out and the community didn't probably have an understanding of why we were making or suggesting some sorts of infrastructure. And it is only an infrastructure, not a land use plan. So that's one of the flashpoints. The other one that's embedded actually is residents saying, no, you're designing this for to look like a tourist town. So it's the same argument that we started in 2020 with about the sense of residents losing their sense of place. And it's probably that perception of loss of sense of place which is driving all this great feedback and input. So when you apply that, for example, to car parking, it's not about the numbers of car parks. It's about the availability of car parks for residents wanting to do what they've always done. And that could be achieved like our deputation mentioned. It can be achieved by things like different timing so that it can be done by having priorities within our car parking management plan that treat visitors different to residents in terms

02:53:00 of what's charged, when it's available, all those sorts of things. And it can be done in the future when accessibility by other forms is much easier. It's not saying that just because you need a car park now and we're not trying to say that we're going to take out car parks so that residents can't use the park in exactly the same way they've always used it. What we're saying is if we know that the population of South East Queensland is growing, just keeping what's there is not going to lead to a better recovery. It's going to gradually diminish the experience for our residents. It's going to gradually diminish the experience of our residents. And that's another flashpoint that I found in the Noosaville foreshore master plan, is when I explained to people that, oh, remember we had that coastal hazard adaptation plan, and remember what it predicted about what would happen to the Noosaville foreshore in 20, 30, 40 years' time. So if we'd gone out with this master plan and asked the question, do you think your

02:54:00 grandchildren would like a salt marsh along the Noosaville foreshore, they'd probably say no. They'd say no, let's try and get prepared for it. What we have to do in this next round is get people to understand what is the forecast, because we know that sea level is rising. The closest technical boy in Moreton Bay is telling us sea level's rising and that the prediction is that we're going to have quite frequent and increasing frequency of just tidal inundation, such as the stormwater that's meant to drain the streets on the number of times a year will actually take the river into the streets. So we have to start looking at infrastructure responses. One of the ones was about, you know, it is low key, everyone loves it, you know, I've been enjoying it for 40 years. And I saw some commentary around, why are we going to boardwalks? And then I saw a social media and I became into it. But it was from someone who's over, I think he's over 70, lived here all his life and he talked about the boardwalk that used to join up to where the caravan park is so that the kids used to go along the foreshore, walk along the boardwalk, get to the end where

02:55:00 Coast Guard is and swim across to the beach. And people were saying this boardwalk never fitted there. But we're driven by our perception of our experience and depending on how long you are. And, you know, keep it natural was a big thing. And I totally agree. But we probably didn't say, look, we've got treated pines, legal walls that we're spending probably hundreds of thousands of dollars to prop up because we're having these increased impacts of weather events, etc. So there's all these flashpoints that came together on what was a landscaping infrastructure plan. And that's what our consultation has to address. There is another flashpoint that came out really clearly in both the river plan and the foreshore management plan. And it's something that a federal minister highlighted in the press recently, well, in her presentation. And she talked about the impact of social media and the need to move to democracy 2.0. In the river plan, there was a concerted and coordinated attempt to provide misinformation

02:56:00 to the community to guide views. And it was hugely successful. And that's building out of the social media dynamic where you put incorrect information and it builds a headstand and it becomes reality for people. So it's going to be really interesting that the more we move into this social media space, where fake news and incorrect information assumes a life of its own, the more it probably drives us back to the fundamentals of community consultation, of face-to-face engagement, and really building the knowledge of those who are providing the input. So I'll give you another example. We're talking about living foreshores. And this is the example of why we would have to put off the river plan for the foreshore management plan. The foreshore management plan attempted to guide, show how we might adopt a living foreshore approach. And that's foreshadowed in the draft Noosa River Plan. Now, some people might think that's all very new and future. I remember in the Visit Biosphere Board environment sector that we put that up as a suggestion

02:57:00 from another point to, I think, the Amalgamated Council probably 14 years ago. So it's something that the community has previously said, let's look at the foreshore so we can manage the erosion influences by using more natural means other than treated pine logs and boards in the river. So the final thing, no, second thing. We've talked about groups in consultation. I think one of the great disappointments is that it's been portrayed that the river plan hence the last council was anti-fishing and anti-boating. Great misinformation campaign. I could stand here all my life and no one would agree that I was wrong. But they're wrong. So when we consult, we need to consult with groups that have a reputation for honesty and integrity. So if you look, for example, local Ausfis. Who understand that the connection between habitat and fishing. We need to engage with the young people because the young fishers is who we're doing this

02:58:00 plan for. Nothing in river systems have quick results, they're decadal responses. So when we go out, we need to look at how we consult, how we build the knowledge. Because yes, I still think that some form of conservation is needed. I think we should be talking to recreational fishing, whether they go for net free zones and things like that. These are all things that we can do as part of this next process. But finally, to answer Councillor Wegener's response, we are not deferring our decision to do better management and more environmental and catchment management in the Noosa River. Our environment strategy and the motion of December 2023 clearly showed what the priorities are. And it urged council staff to take whatever action they could under their existing budget. So deferring producing the river plan is not deferring action to get a better river. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you, Councillor Sotterill.

02:59:00 Any other councillors who wish to speak to the motion? Councillor Lorentson. Councillor Finzel, I'm just foreshadowing. I might not be able to replicate everything that Councillor Lorentson has said. Councillor Lorentson: I'll try to keep this short. Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Wegener, you referenced this great engagement as being a success. I think success for me today is this report acknowledgement that we've got aspects of the Noosa River, the Foreshore Infrastructure Master Plan and the River Plan parts of it wrong. That our communication strategies have not been what they should be and that we understand the impact this has had on our community and what we want to improve. We recognise the need for further improvement that to me is success and that's what I'm applauding today. The report we have presented shows the way forward. It represents our commitment

03:00:00 to learning from our errors and improving our approach and it demonstrates that we're ready to work with the community to ensure that our plan meets the community's needs and expectations. In terms of the foreshore master plan, further consultation and a redraft will be required. In terms of the river plan, the locals have recognised that the Wesleyan River initiatives and the catchment action planning is having a really good structure and a better approach to consistent management of our catchment, especially given the opportunities for better sources of funding beyond rate-based money. It's also seen to be fair and more importantly, it's seen to be a more equitable model for all of the community, not just some sectors of the community. By scaling back our river catchment management plan in line with the RII, we align our strategy with other catchment

03:01:00 plans across South East Queensland and we also ensure that we can leverage the $40 million investment from the SEQ city deal over the next five years. I think overall, what's been presented today is what will make us better positioned to ensure that the Noosa River remains a clean, safe and again, more accessible natural asset for everyone and not just for some. I'm supportive of this report and I thank the staff for their hard work putting this together. Thank you, Councillor Morrison. Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you. Yeah, again, thank you, staff. It's been a long journey. I think what this will allow us to do is demonstrate that we are listening, take some time, get it right, raise the bar

03:02:00 with community engagement, take community engagement to places where we haven't gone before. Third place community consultation is very rare, but I think we all believe it's necessary because we are all committed to ensuring a good level of community engagement. Thank you. We do it when it's merited and it is merited. And of course these, the Noosaville foreshore and the river are just two of things, the love of the fourshore and the river, just two things that we all have in common. And we share a lot of things in common, but the love of the foreshore and the river are two of them. And we do want to make sure that it's never just been, the river has never just been for some, it's been for all. And And we're doing this work because we want to make sure that the foreshore of the river remains to be accessible to families and to anyone who wants to use the river now and into the future. So I put the motion to vote. All in favour?

03:03:00 Yes. That's unanimous. Thank you staff. I believe that's it. We've reached the end of the agenda today. Thank you councillors for your respectful debate. I thought it was excellent. It was a really good process to deal with some really multifaceted issues. Well done councillors. Thank you everyone who came along and thank you staff.

8 CONSIDERATION OF COMMITTEE REPORTS ¶

▶ 03:14:51

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.

8.1 PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE REPORT - 9 JULY 2024 ¶

▶ 03:14:57

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.

8.2 SERVICES & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE REPORT - 9 JULY 2024 ¶

▶ 03:15:27

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.

8.3 GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING REPORT - 15 JULY 2024 ¶

▶ 03:15:58

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.

9 ORDINARY MEETING REPORTS ¶

▶ 03:17:35

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.

9.1 Further Consultation on Noosaville Foreshore Infrastructure Management Plan and Noosa River Catchment Management Plan ¶

▶ 03:17:44· Carried unanimously 7-0 from council's minutes

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.

12 NEXT MEETING ¶

▶ 04:10:43

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.

13 MEETING CLOSURE ¶

▶ 04:10:51

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.