General Committee - 14 July 2025 Transcript

1 DECLARATION OF OPENING ¶

▶ 00:00:11

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

2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY ¶

▶ 00:00:38

00:01:00 So welcome confirmation of minutes oh we're attendance and apologies so we have all councils in attendance with councillor Jess Phillips attending online I move on to confirmation of minutes and do I have a mover for the general committee meeting minutes dated 16th June 2025 councillor Lorentson and the second councillor Wilson and I'm presuming there's no conversation about that so all councillors in favour yes carry unanimously we have no presentations no deputation so we move on to items referred from committees and we had one from the planning Environment Committee on the Noosa Junction Precinct Management Models assessment and we have Cara and Anita here and one of you will give us an executive summary sure so at the ordinary meeting held on the 17th of October 2024 council endorsed a notice of motion request

3 ATTENDANCE & APOLOGIES ¶

▶ 00:01:53

00:02:00 Speaker 1: an investigation into precinct management frameworks suitable for Noosa Junction this report is in responses in response to the notice of motion the report has been prepared to compare strategies for addressing land use conflicts between entertainment venues and nearby residents the scope of the report includes a review of current mitigation processes a brief exploration of best practice precinct management models including safe night precincts special entertainment precincts and business improved improvement districts and an assessment of the models relevance and applicability to the Noosa Junction context the report focuses on frameworks designed to manage the interface between hospitality venues and residential areas while also considering broader integrated precinct management approaches involving the full range of land uses and business activities within the junction an evaluation of each option is in attachment one of the report the report concludes with a recommendation of to further explore a framework based on the business improvement district model subject

4 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES ¶

▶ 00:02:03

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

4.1 GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES DATED 16 JUNE 2025 ¶

▶ 00:02:07· Carried 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.

7.1 NOOSA JUNCTION PRECINCT MANAGEMENT MODELS ASSESSMENT (Referred from Planning and Environment Committee dated 8 July 2025 Item 7.1) ¶

▶ 00:02:36· Carried 7-0 · 4 divisions from council's minutes

00:03:00 to initial stakeholder consultation and support any framework would be adapted to the local context of the junction and specific needs of the stakeholders the investigation would also revisit the current regulatory framework including engaging with the existing liquor accord the recommendation in the report is that council engage with relevant Noosa Junction stakeholders to gauge support or otherwise for the potential establishment of a precinct management framework based on the business improvement district model within the Noosa Junction hospitality precinct subject to stakeholder support investigate the feasibility governance and funding models for the precinct management framework and then finally report back to council on the outcomes of those investigations thank you do we have questions of staff councillor Lorentson I might start we had some good conversation at the planning and environment committee so I probably want to just raise some of the questions that were raised during that committee

00:04:00 Speaker 2: meeting and the first relates to concerns about micro management and whether the recommendation in front of us over extends staff resourcing does it so this is something that has come outside the scope of our current work program so it has the potential to obviously take a staff member away from our current programmed works which are outlined in the corporate plan and where our Councillor Lorentson: priorities are there so yes it does have that in cost on our resources starting okay speaking to director Kim Rawlings she spoke to us after the meeting on Monday and explained that staff are currently engaging with the Noosa Junction Association with residents with developers almost very regularly my question is how often are staff engaging with

00:05:00 Speaker 2: the Noosa Junction Association and residents and developers and businesses in terms of the Noosa Junction Association predominantly our economic development team liaise with them on various matters and meet with them on the roundtable business roundtable and other forums I couldn't give you an actual frequency of that it might be a question I need to take on notice and speak to Ed Derk about in terms of developers that would be on an as needs basis through the the pre-lodgement process we engaged from a strategic planning sense with development assessment team when required

00:06:00 Mayor Wilkie: he mentioned that if this was to be approved it would have an impulse on the staff time and resourcing would would that have an input an impulse or an impact on our commitment to have place making in other parts of the Shire like we said last year we considered to want more Kin Kin for the next placemaking project Speaker 2: would that happen if we were to adopt this potentially it would take away resources staff and resources involved in the place area the placemaking area and we'd need to refocus and look at Noosa Junction as the priority if this was looked at yeah Mayor Wilkie: and if we were to not not approve this model would that the consultation

00:07:00 between and the collaboration between council staff and the Noosa Junction Association still continue yes thank you Councillor Finzel: thank you through the chair I've got a question to the CEO in terms of you know moving the regulation out of oh god who's the bop that did it no that the yeah the liquor licensing and moving that to local government and putting that onus back on council through our local boards you know we don't sit around that in terms of capability so my understanding is that's Speaker 3: not what we're recommending here councillor is we're looking at the business improvement improvement sorry it's a bid so that would only be if we went to the to the entertainment precinct model where we would we would then override or we will take olga we would lose their power

00:08:00 we take over that power to manage the whole precinct in terms of noise time activity everything else so but that's what we're proposing we're proposing of the of the numbers of numbers of options that we booked out we're proposing the bid model Councillor Finzel: There's a guarantee that we wouldn't be looking at moving in the space at all anywhere further down the track. Speaker 3: And that's the main reason why we've gone away from that, one of the main reasons, but certainly that's not something we could accommodate easily. So I'm not proposing that and none of us are proposing that. We're just making sure the deal is actually closed on that risk. I'm happy to confirm that with you, Councillor. Thank you. Councillor Phillips: Question please. Speaker 3: Yes, Councillor Phillips. Councillor Phillips: Thank you. Just in relation to the recommendation part B where it says engage with relevant Noosa Junction stakeholders, could I maybe get a list of who those relevant stakeholders are?

00:09:00 Is it OLGR that would be one of those? Is QPS, local police, QAS, anyone that is responsible to some of the concerns that have been raised, are they part of... are they part of the proposal through this recommendation as a stakeholder? Speaker 2: Yes. Councillor Lorentson: And can I also ask the question that Geema asked at the Planning and Environment Committee? Residents are also key stakeholders, is that correct? Speaker 1: Yes. Speaker 2: Yes. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you. Speaker 1: Can I... Councillor Lorentson: I might throw some questions that we might... ask at the Planning and Environment Committee meeting because just to provide some clarity about what's actually been proposed, can I ask, can you give a summation of this sort of framework, what a Business Improvement District looks like and why is it being recommended by staff as a proactive step forward?

00:10:00 Speaker 1: Yes. So I think it's important to note that we're not necessarily recommending that we pursue a Business Improvement District but that we use that as the framework to make it local in context for Noosa Junction given the issues that we've had with the entertainment venues and the residents, so it would be that sort of framework overall and then we'd obviously monitor to what we need locally, but... Speaker 2: Sorry, I might just add as well that the recommendation is to investigate the suitability of that model following consultation with the stakeholders, and then we'd obviously monitor to what we need locally, but... and whether there was support for us going forward. So the recommendation is to investigate it, not to actually do it. Yep. Yeah. Speaker 1: So essentially the steps for the initial setup would be having that consultation with the stakeholders and then once we've got any sort of agreement to look at moving ahead with that, you would determine the boundaries of the area, so at the moment we've got the special levy area that the Noosa Junction's already in, we've also got the entertainment precinct and they're set... they're different.

00:11:00 Okay. ...different areas, so we would look at if we chose one over the other or maybe a mesh of the two, we would explore how that levy would actually be funded, whether it's through the existing mechanisms that we've already got in place with the existing levy, and then a steering committee would be formed, so council would sit on that steering committee, but at the end of the day we would sort of step away from it and we wouldn't necessarily be running the program once it's established, we would be looking at helping with the initial consultation and setup, and we would sit on the board, but not necessarily run it. Will residents be able to sit around this table as well, Tara? So that would be part of the investigation in terms of what that make-up would look like and who would be involved, but as part of the initial consultation we would definitely be looking at engagement with the residents.

00:12:00 Councillor Lorentson: So would a business plan or a strategy, if this precinct management framework goes ahead, is the plan that there's some type of business plan? Yes. Created? Yes. And then people around the table, they sit around and say what are the issues, noise, safety, social behaviour, lighting, we need more police, etc. Yes. Something similar to the Hastings Street Association, and can you talk me through how the Hastings Street precinct, how they manage their precinct, because what we're talking about is quite similar. Speaker 1: Yes, so I'm not familiar with how the Hastings Street precinct works, I'm not sure if you've got any background on that, but we can... Yes, we'll have to come back to you on that to see what the differences or similarities are. But yes, essentially you basically come up with what the existing infrastructure and services are that has already been provided, either by the Junction or by Council, and then you pretty much set out the goals from there in terms of what additional services or functions that can be carried out through that framework.

00:13:00 And then you would draw up the business plan, the budget, the government structure through that process. Councillor Lorentson: Fantastic. So if lighting's an issue, they can sit around the table and pay for extra lighting, or pay for extra security, there's each a social behaviour, or maybe propose noise, sound, like vegetation buffers, or sound monitoring systems, is that... Am I on the right track? Yes. Speaker 1: So basically they would be identifying where those gaps are and where those gaps are. And then that would be implemented through the business plan and through the funding. Okay. Councillor Lorentson: So does the business improvement district framework, or any framework that we may be proposing, do any of those override planning laws? Do any of them override environmental laws or noise regulations? Speaker 1: No. So they would continue to be regulated through the existing, through NUSA plans, through the Office of Liquor and Gain.

00:14:00 That would still remain in place as the overarching legislative framework. This would just be additional funding and service provisions in terms of what Council's currently providing, where those issues have been identified. You would look at sort of filling the gaps. Councillor Lorentson: So this recommendation's come from staff. Can I ask why Council thinks this is a proactive step forward in my mis-recommendation? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: No, that's not going to know that answer. That's not a question. The staff are the ones who are going to have to answer that question. There was a notice of motion which staff responded to. It's not about why Council sees it in the way you suggested. Councillor Lorentson: Can I ask the question differently, and maybe can I ask the question through the CEO? The recommendation before us has been put forward to staff. Can staff have come back and just not support any investigation?

00:15:00 Speaker 3: I think what staff have done is looked at all the options, proposed, or possible options, and put them back to Council to say, here's a response to your notice of motion. If you want to go down this path, then this is an implication on our staff, on our resource, our potential cost, and time. And if you want to go down that path, then we'll follow that guideline, or that direction. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: Question for the Chair. Thank you, Chair. Can improvements for Nurser Junction that come through collaboration between the Council and the Nurser Junction Association happen to continue to occur through current arrangements? Speaker 1: I believe so. Yes. Mayor Wilkie: And would those current arrangements not involve the diversion of a staff member dedicated to placemaking? And so placemaking, as promised, could continue in other parts of the shop? Speaker 2: Yes. It would be less resource intensive.

00:16:00 Yes. Thank you. Councillor Wilson: Does Council have any expertise in managing a bid or in visit patron? Speaker 2: Yes. Well, there is a history at Nurser Junction. There was a, I guess I'm not sure what he was called, like a place coordinator who kind of established a hot precinct approach to address a number of issues some years ago. I have personal experience. Councillor Finzel: Thank you Mr Chair. Just a question around if listed as a risk in the report includes

00:17:00 the absence of dedicated BID legislation in Queensland. You don't list what those risks are. You do go on to say how LGA doesn't enable Council to establish the levies. Are you able to supply what you think those risks are? Are they perceived or are they actual? Speaker 1: So I think in terms of that comment, the Safe Night Precinct and the Special Entertainment Precinct both have very specific legislative requirements whereas the BID doesn't. So we would essentially be working outside of any kind of formalised legislative requirement but there is existing Local Government Act requirements in place in terms of collecting and controlling a levy and things like that. So there's not a specific process that is set out but there are areas that exist in those legislation that does allow for this type of process to happen. Councillor Finzel: Yeah, the levy. So, through the Chair, just a follow-on question then. So then the people

00:18:00 sitting on the board around this framework, they'll make decisions about what they want then obviously around the table which is all well and good because we want to see collaboration and outcomes where it's a good thing. It's a shared benefit to people, everyone has a say. Do they only then make recommendations to Council when we vote on it or do they, what they bring to us has to be followed? Speaker 1: So again that would all sort of be nutted out through the investigation process and the implementation but essentially it would be through the business plan and potentially Council could be signing off on that business plan but again that would be determined through the investigation of how this model would actually work. But they would sit separately. So the Junction currently has a very similar process in place where they bring their business plan to Council every year, we sign off on it, we collect the levy and then we give it back to them to disperse it in accordance with the business plan. So it would probably be quite similar to that.

00:19:00 Councillor Finzel: So just a question then, how do you think these changes moving forward will actually value add to what we currently have? Speaker 2: Again, the recommendations. Yeah. The recommendation in the report is actually to investigate it and nut it out and I guess through that process we would determine whether there was any benefit to doing it and whether the stakeholders thought there was any benefit and support for the process as well. So it would be through that investigation that we would explore that. Thank you. Councillor Phillips: Question? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor Phillips was first before and then Councillor. Councillor Phillips: Thank you. Just in relation to the additional, well not additional but the resource that will be reported to Council. I guess what I want to know is like if the, to get clarity, is the resource or allocation time to see this through going to take us to the point where the framework is sort

00:20:00 of set up or I guess what I'm, my question is and quickly I'm at the National Disaster Emergency Management Conference and we're talking about the National Disaster Emergency Management Conference and we're going to talk about lead agencies through the whole process and when I think of lead agency I think okay so what's our role as Council in this and are we potentially in this and I will get to a question to clarify, is this sort of taking the point where we're going to look at being the lead agency but then we're going to step back from that role and my concern is like if that resource we're going to allocate at the end when there's a recommendation. Yeah. So whether it continues or what, will that mean that we're going to have to potentially look for staff to continue seeing that through? Hopefully that makes sense. Speaker 2: Yes. They'll need obviously to be an initial staff member dedicated to doing the research and

00:21:00 doing the consultation and engagement and coming up with whether we go forward or not and what that model might look like. But yes there'll be a need that once, if Council signed off on it, if that was where it was heading. Yeah. Then the staff member to continue in that capacity to actually implement it and set it up as well. So there'll be a, yes there'll be an ongoing role there until really you know I guess ultimately a bid is that Council would step away and they would be you know functioning on their own but I guess it would depend on what model and how that works and what the framework looks like and what resources are required. But it would have a, you know, a resource in place. Question. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Oh sorry. Councillor Wilkie. Sorry. Well I was going to move a motion. Well there you go. You're happy for a Councillor Wilkie. Yeah. Councillor Finzel: So just a question then of equity across the Shire.

00:22:00 If this goes ahead, how do we provide that equity throughout the Shire for the other like business precincts? I mean, it's a good question. I mean, although small, we do have other precincts, you know, from there. Councillor Lorentson: Point of order. Can I ask through the Chair, is this relevant to the item that we have in front of us? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I think it is. I think it is. It's about allocating resources to a particular business centre. Yeah. Councillor Lorentson: And the question is will this. Point of order. There is no allocation of resourcing. The recommendation is to engage with these stakeholders to engage support and subject to be, then investigate the feasibility, governance and funding models. The recommendation, as I've understood, is simply an invitation. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So the motion is one that staff have suggested will require extra staff time. The question is about whether that will affect other equitable access to that staff time across the Shire. I don't believe there's any point of order.

00:23:00 We can continue with the question. Councillor Lorentson: Can I dissent, move a motion to dissent from that and request clarification? Through the CEO. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: You can move a motion to dissent, yes. Councillor Lorentson: Again. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: No, but you have to get a seconder. There will be no seconder. Councillor Phillips: Sorry, I'll give you a second. I was trying to get off mute. Okay. Sorry. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you. The recommendation before us, as I've understood, is simply an invitation to meet with key stakeholders, including residents, to ask them, are they interested in exploring a precinct management framework? There is no commitment to governance, modelling, feasibility, funding. That's not the motion in front of us. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: In a motion to dissent, I believe it's only the mover and myself to address it.

00:24:00 I'll just repeat, staff have advised in this debate that this does have resource implications as my view is that the question is a legitimate question relating to the matter at hand because the question was whether this may have an equity effect on other business centres. That's why I stand by that ruling. I put the motion. Those in favour of the motion? Councillor Lorentson: To dissent. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: To dissent from the Chairman's ruling. Councillor Lorentson? Those against? That's Councillor Wegener. Finzel? Whelan? Wilkie? Wilson? Stockwell? And Councillor Finzel? Phillips? Councillor Phillips: I was with. I'll keep off mic. Sorry. There's a delay in the mic. Sorry. Speaker 3: She's with. Councillor Phillips: She hasn't said it though. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Can you just say voting in favour of the motion or against the motion? Councillor Phillips: Voting in favour of the motion. Okay. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: The motion's lost.

00:25:00 Okay. Sorry. Councillor Finzel, would you like to repeat your question? Councillor Finzel: The question basically relating to resource capacity and in the interest of fair and equitable governance. Just wondering how this will then have an effect on the wider Shire because we are here to represent Hull Shire. Taking into note that what sits before us is about feasibility to see and report to Council. I'm interested in seeing if we broaden that out. What does that look like in terms of giving voice? I'll answer that. Speaker 3: I'm more than happy to answer that. Councillor, this has come from a, if you remember, from a notice of motion based on an issue that's raised itself over a number of years in the junction. So what we've asked the staff to do to address that notice of motion is really just to explore what the options are for the junction.

00:26:00 Yes, it's going to take some time for, because even engage requires people's time to go and talk to the various stakeholders to get to a point of whether they're prepared to support it or not. Then we investigate the feasibility, understand the governance and bring that model back to Council to see if we really want to go down that path. So that's really where it's at. It's addressing a current issue. If there was a current issue in other parts of the district, I think, sorry, of the Shire Council, then certainly that could be raised as well. But this is, this is specifically or specific to the raising of the Noosa Junction issue of noise that we've held with, that we identified or was identified by locals and GR and others pre-Christmas. So we're really just addressing that and just looking at what the options are and we'll bring that back to Council. So that's all, that's all that's happened at this point in time. Not all, but there's a lot of work that's gone into it, but identifying the different

00:27:00 options. Explore the, our, our recommendation is to explore the, in more detail, the business improvement district option and bring that back to Council for further, further direction. Mr Chair. Question. Yes. Mayor Wilkie: Sorry. Councillor Finzel. Councillor Finzel: Yeah, just in follow on then. So, um, for equity across the Shire is the process, if I want to give voice to another pre-sector like to do that, am I raising a notice of motion to bring this all to Council? Speaker 3: Is that the process? If, if there's, if there's a, if that becomes an issue, absolutely. That's, that's your, your entitlement to do that. This is really just a, a response to, um, an issue that's been brought to our attention through notice of motion and we've asked the officers to do some further investigation and that's what they're doing. Councillor Wegener: Thank you. Speaker 3: Thank you. Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you, Mr Chair. I'd like to move a motion which is different to this one. So it would involve keeping A, but changing B to read, continue to engage.

00:28:00 Councillor Lorentson: It will come up in a moment. Mayor Wilkie: Okay. Continue to engage with relevant Mercer Junction stakeholders. Okay. Including residents. You want more, Kathy? Councillor Lorentson: Yeah, keep going. Mayor Wilkie: Yeah, just... To manage, manage issues in. Councillor Lorentson: So straight after residence to manage. Mayor Wilkie: Yeah. Issues in, comma, and manage, comma, and manage. And improve, comma, the precinct. And get rid of everything that follows that.

00:29:00 Councillor Wilson: B and C and D as well. Mayor Wilkie: Get rid of C and D. Get rid of the rest of B, C and D. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Just waiting for it to come up to make sure everyone's seeing it. Mayor Wilkie: There's no C again. Yeah, okay. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Can we move the... We're going to have to build...

00:30:00 Is everyone happy? Do they understand that? Councillor Phillips: I have a question before... Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah, okay. And I have a question because it's not seconded. Yes? Councillor Phillips: Just before it moves, would Mayor Wilkie be prepared to include OLGR and QPS in the stakeholders? So we have it specific. We have it specifically there that they are too that sometimes in the past have been late in engagement and maybe they should be part of the process entirely when there's things going on and when there's not. Mayor Wilkie: I'm happy for that inclusion. My understanding is that they are consulted. So I'm happy to include that. So continue to engage with relevant risk reduction stakeholders on the ground. I'm happy to include residents, OOGR... It's changed. ..and QPS to manage issues in a precinct. Very happy with that, Councillor Phillips.

00:31:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay. Thank you, Councillor Phillips. Do we have a seconder? Councillor Wilson. Councillor Wilson beat you, Councillor Phillips. Okay. Councillor Wilkie, you have the floor. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you. As we've heard, the Noosa Junction precinct is funded by a levy paid by the businesses. It's very well resourced currently with staff giving their time and effort to working with the Noosa Junction Association and to manage issues and work to improve the precincts. As we've heard, this is the risk of notified motions. It does risk diverting attention and resources away from things and precincts that work that the Council is already committed to, such as the placemakers, placemaking program. We've had... Pomona was done... It was always understood that Tewantin or Kin Kin, two communities that are experiencing growing pains, would be in need of a placemaking process, and we're yet to make a decision

00:32:00 on which one that ought to be. But this motion allows us to continue to work, staff continue to work, with the junction traders to improve the precinct, while allowing our, allowing us to on-accelerate our work. We've had... Our existing commitments to other communities in the Shire for placemaking, because their need is just as great, if not greater. And there's nothing to say that the work that's being done will go to waste. There's a lot of very good research that's being done, and that can be any way... Any engagement with the Noosa Junction Association can be informed by the work that's being done in terms of all those other models. And I commend this to Councillors. I hope that they will support it. Because it means we can continue to support the Noosa Junction Association, manage the emerging issues there, as well as honour our commitments to other areas of the Shire. Councillor Wegener: Councillor Wegener.

00:33:00 Does anybody else think that that actually nullifies the original report, by any means? Mayor Wilkie: I can answer that. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, that would be a question of the... Yeah, no, it doesn't. You're basically saying it... You're basically saying that it nullifies the original report. You're noting the report, and you're suggesting a different way forward. Just... Councillor Wegener. Councillor Lorentson: So... Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor Wegener. Councillor Lorentson: Question again, just following up, whether it's ultra-virus and that's the original intent of the report. The report title is Noosa Junction Precent Management Models Assessment, and the recommendation is to do what we're doing. So... Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'm drawing your attention there. There is no other motion on the books. Councillor Wegener brought up the issue where there was a direct negative that only relates if there was a prior motion. There is a motion in response to a report, which is perfectly legal. Councillor Wegener: Can I have a question?

00:34:00 With COVID, the world has changed substantially. Will this... This seems like it might be an opportunity to take with a pin, to bring it back to normal, to bring the people together post-COVID, which probably haven't spoken with each other, the stakeholder groups, including the residents. Is that what you sort of see this going towards? Speaker 2: The proposed bid investigation? The bid investigation, yeah. Well, it is a collaboration process to bring people around to the table by identifying who those stakeholders are, and bringing them together, and working through and coming up with a plan and a framework. So... So, yes, it's a... Yes, it does bring people together. And it is post-COVID. Councillor Wegener: Yeah. Speaker 2: Can I speak... Councillor Wegener: Can I speak to the... Yes. Speaker 2: Oh, go ahead. Councillor Wegener: Can you speak? Okay. I see... The Mayor, you weren't here after the discussion, after the last meeting we had at the committee

00:35:00 meeting. And what I found was that there was a really quite a lot of enthusiasm by staff for this project going forward. And... I pointed out that the residents, the businesses, and the residents, the land owners of the businesses, and the renters are at war with each other, basically. There's always a conflict between those three. And it seems that they're not on the same team. But this is an opportunity to get these people around the table, where the Junction Association isn't in... That's not in their space. Especially to be dealing with the residents. The use of Chamber of Commerce. Mayor Wilkie: This isn't in their space to deal with this. Councillor Wegener: So I see that the Junction actually does need some sort of intervention with the stakeholders

00:36:00 that are normally not going to sit around the table with each other, because they're at odds with each other. They're at their goals. And so I think that this is a necessary point. And I think that we need to support the Junction to evolve itself, to have one heck of a red hot go at some sort of common vision amongst the stakeholders, because we have the civic going to start over there real soon. And when that starts popping up, I think that the Junction actually needs a bit of its own identity. So I support the original motion. I won't support this motion. Mayor Wilkie: Just a clarifying question. Question. Under current arrangements... Councillor Lorentson: Cancel. Cancel. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I missed it. Councillor Lorentson: Yeah. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: It's not a point of order. I... Councillor Phillips, you're happy to wait after Councillor Wilkie? Given the... Councillor Phillips: Can I just ask, because I've had my hand up a few times that you've missed, is it possible

00:37:00 that you could have my, the Team's on your computer so you can see me raise my hand? But in this case, I'm happy to let it slide, but it's happened a couple of times to me now. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah, so I won't be looking generally at the screen, so I'll try and do that while we talk, but yes, okay, I'll see what I can do. Mayor Wilkie: Isn't it possible, is it possible under the current arrangements for all stakeholders to be brought together to work towards a common vision? Speaker 2: I believe so. Yes, council could be a facilitator of that. Mayor Wilkie: Yeah, and that's possible under the premise of this motion that's before you? Yes. Okay. And at the same time, it would allow us to conduct the placemaking projects in other parts of the Shire that we're committed to? Speaker 2: It would be less resource intensive than undertaking a full feasibility investigation into a bid and what framework that might look like.

00:38:00 Mayor Wilkie: Yeah, which is the reason why I raised the motion, council. It allows us to do everything you've said, but also the placement. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay, Councillor Phillips. Councillor Phillips: Thank you. I just think I really need to understand what this current motion before us will do for council that is different to what we're currently doing now. And I understand there's been conversation that it changes things, but maybe I just need to understand it more. To me, it's kind of doing what we're already doing. Can you clarify? From this motion, what staff will do differently to what we're currently doing? Speaker 2: Well, I guess this motion would give a direction to probably take action to actually, I guess, move on this and engage with all the stakeholders.

00:39:00 Yeah, it might give a bit more direction. It might give a bit more impetus to what we're already doing. Mayor Wilkie: I can say, in answer to your question, Jess, the staff have done work about a variety of precinct management models which they can have regard to and apply depending on what issues are emerging when they engage with and collaborate with the Noosa Junction Association, the OLGR and QPS and residents going forward. No, the work isn't wasted. So they'll be able to engage more in a more informed way. At the same time, it will allow us to fulfil our obligations to have placemaking in other parts of the Shire because the resource that will be involved in a more intensive bid process will not be as engaged as they would be if it was the full-on bid process in the Junction.

00:40:00 Councillor Lorentson: Can I move to the end of this? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yes. You can. Councillor Forner. Councillor Lorentson: I'd like to try and amend C, that Council engage with relevant Noosa Junction stakeholders, including the wider community. That's a fine. Thank you. Thank you very much. Councillor Lorentson: To discuss potential establishment of a precinct management framework based on the business improvement district model within the Newsom Junction Hospitality Precinct.

00:41:00 Councillor Finzel: Question. From the recommendation out of the placemaking, which we invested a lot of time and money in community engagement, the recommendation was that we look at setting up and supporting town team movements. Question to the staff, through the Chair. Is the town team movement process, would this be a better framework, would it be applicable around this conversation? Or why is it not being considered? Speaker 2: It could be used in this to deal with and bring stakeholders around the table. It's a movement that Council is hands off from, so it would require someone, one of the stakeholders to commence and start that town team, sign up, sign up to the protocols and actually commence that process. But Council can certainly put on the table.

00:42:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay, so have we got a seconder for Councillor Lorentson's amendment? I think I'm going to just miss the end of it, so... Oh, I'm sorry. Councillor Lorentson: I'm going to just discuss the potential establishment of a precinct management framework based on the business improvement district model within the Missing Junction Hospitality Precinct. Speaker 2: Okay, so potential establishment... Oh, sorry. Potential establishment... Councillor Lorentson: Of a precinct management framework based on the business improvement district model within the Missing Junction Hospitality Precinct.

00:43:00 On the business improvement district BID model within the Missing Junction Hospitality Precinct. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you. Question to staff. Yes, Mr Wilkie. Would the implementation of the business improvement district model

00:44:00 within the Missing Junction Hospitality Precinct require the resourcing, Would the implementation of the business improvement district model in the Noosa Junction Hospitality Precinct impact the placemaking resource to the point where we wouldn't be able to do it? Speaker 2: I'd have to think about that to be honest as to how much time that specific task would take but it certainly would divert existing resources away from that in terms of whether they could continue to do other placemaking programs.

00:45:00 I'd have to see what the time allocation would take but it would mean that yes there would be less time to look at other placemaking projects. Councillor Wilson: Is this going further than what the original recommendation was because that was only to investigate this is now to establish and looking at funding? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So that would be a question to the mover. Councillor Lorentson: So the question is does it go further than the original motion? Councillor Wilson: The original recommendation was to investigate this is now to establish and looking at funding. Councillor Lorentson: Oh no it's not true. The council engage with the relevant including which discuss the potential establishment of to excuse me and I thank you for the correction that is not correctly written to engage support.

00:46:00 Is this one ready? Yes so we could change discuss to engage support or otherwise. Yes. So it just sits if we can just change the word to discuss to discuss to engage support or otherwise for the potential establishment thank you and thanks for the correction councillor Wilson. So the same wording as the recommendation that was brought to staff number B I would like to be reinstated. That's all. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So we'll wait to go up it hasn't been seconded so there's one more. Councillor Phillips: I'll have you second if that's. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah you may second. We're just waiting for it to come up on the screen. Oh that's right yeah.

00:47:00 Yes good. So councillors you're all aware what the amendment now says? Councillor Lorentson you have to look. Mayor Wilkie: Is this the correct wording now? Councillor Lorentson: Yes. With the inclusion of wider community so it catches all guns. That's all. With the inclusion of wider community so it catches all guns. With the inclusion of wider chambers and most importantly it catches residents that are impacted that need a seat at the table. And the reason why this motion is brought to us. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor Lorentson. Councillor Lorentson: I'll speak to this. So after the planning and environment committee meeting myself and councillor Wegener and councillor Stockwell. We sat with the director. And staff. And spoke in some detail about what was happening in the junction. And there were discussions that there are ongoing escalating issues around noise and safety.

00:48:00 And that's getting worse not better. We talked about what's happening in the junction. There is significant growth. This is not like any other precinct. We already know at the moment underway we've got the Carlisle development. We already know at the moment we've got the Newsome Drive upgrade. We know at the southern end we need the transit centre. We've got retail and housing. We know that the Coles development site. People look at it and there's potential redevelopment there. We know behind the jay. Behind the cinema that we're investigating. Council is investigating affordable housing. The precinct is currently undergoing significant transformation. In the next five years it won't be the junction that we know.

00:49:00 So community expectation, congestion, noise safety, all the issues that we're hearing today. That's just going to get worse. We have an opportunity today to plan and manage the precinct. You know, we do nothing, nothing changes. One of my favourite sayings. Doing nothing is not a strategy. Reacting to problems as they come is not a strategy. Kicking the can down the road is not a strategy. We've got an opportunity to get all the key stakeholders around a table to talk face to face. I've spoken to the residents that can't sleep at night. I've spoken to the business owners who are frustrated that they can't invest or grow their businesses. Because they're always looking over their shoulders and are terrified with compliance actions, with complaints. This is an opportunity to get people around a table.

00:50:00 And I keep stressing. It's an invitation. The people that are impacted, the stakeholders. If they don't want to progress down this path, this motion dies. If they want to progress it, then we start exploring it. Then we start understanding what's the feasibility, what are the costs, equity issues. Really great questions that have been raised around the table. But that happens after we understand whether this is a way forward. Staff have done quite a lot of work in precinct management frameworks. And they've come back and said, you know, this is an improvement of districts. That's nothing new. This has been proven and effective. New South Wales at the moment are moving legislation at a state level to legislate on bids. Because it's proven effective in high, in areas like this where there's land use conflicts.

00:51:00 So I just think we have an opportunity to plan and future proof for the new subjunction process. We need to provide certainty to the residents. We need to tell them, hey, we're listening. And your night's sleep matters. And we need to go back to the businesses and say, you guys need certainty. And you guys need confidence to grow and invest. We need to tell the developers and people that own businesses in the junction that we're going to work with them to intentionally shape the precinct. And the intention of that precinct is we want to facilitate it. We want it to be a family friendly, safe precinct where it's lively and livable. And the only way we're going to do this is we're able to future proof the junction and start exploring these established effective frameworks like a business improvement district.

00:52:00 So I really hope everyone supports CEE, which is simply an invitation to get the people that are most important. Councillor Phillips: Thank you I just really listening to everyone around the table speaking of equity I do think when current issues and trends arise it's time for us to pivot and put resources where trends occur we've done it in the past with Kin Kin Quarry and times where there's been something that has risen in our community and we've had to say well hang on that's where our focus now needs to be one thing that I've liked about notified motions is that and especially with this one it actually brought current social and local trends to the forefront of our mind because our corporate plan and our operational plans they're strategic so sometimes when these big things

00:53:00 arise in our community and pop up it gives us the opportunity to say well hang on this really is impacting our community so this one I do I don't want status quo with this I think it's really important that we do address the concerns that have been raised by multiple different groups businesses community like residents QPS there's been times where the junction's been spoken about safety concerns we've even had a deputation in the past from a community member that had you know an assault on a family member and we've heard those stories around community that is that there it is a highlighted to us that we need to do something about it status quo isn't working I want to see the people that that have a voice for that precinct have a say including the widest community

00:54:00 if they feel they want to you know have a voice there as well because it is becoming more popular there's definitely changes happening there so for me I just want to make sure today we come out of this report that gives staff and really quite clear parameters that we want to see them hold that forum and have people at the table that are being impacted and come up with a solution together whether it means that then council step back and and a lead agency takes or there's multiple groups that take the lead on it but I certainly think if we just say oh you know well it'll go away I

00:55:00 think it's probably only going to get worse and then we'll have maybe down the track it will cost us even more so for me I'm happy today if we just say like we need to do something about it that's pretty obvious because of the there's certain things we've heard that have been that I've addressed so yeah I'm happy to support that we engage with the groups and that CEE comes through I agree with Tom what he said as well that it's certainly been brought to our attention so thanks look all the initiatives that have been mentioned around Mayor Wilkie: the table about getting every all the stakeholders around the table taking on board all the things we've heard in today's meeting I think it's really important for us to be able to get on board with the council about the noise managing the noise conflicts all that can

00:56:00 happen under the arrangements that we have in place which are already quite advanced for a business precinct like the junction which has its own levy and a well-advanced and well-developed business association under the current arrangements all those issues and collaborations can occur the difference with this one is it would commit the council to a level of resourcing that would be a level of resourcing that would be a level that would include other precincts missing out on some level of attention there is developments and evolution and changes happening in other areas like Tewantin which will get 32 social housing units on the block behind the main CBD another block in Merindal Street is being purchased by the state government parking is an issue there we've got a new hotel there access is an issue there they've been calling for placemaking as well so I think it's important to look at that as well as Kin Kin, Kin Kin has its issues one of the reasons why Kin Kin

00:57:00 was put forward as one of the potential areas for placemaking was because of all the communities in the Shire it rated the lowest on the livability score Noosa Junction, Noosa Heads very high all these issues about the new developments that are occurring in the junction there's already a collaborative model in place they're very well serviced. This is the risk with Notified Motions it diverts resources away from commitments already in place and from other areas of need so all very good points made by councillors Lorentson and Phillips about what we've all heard collectively the point I'm trying to make is that we have a model for already dealing with that effectively that can be ramped up but it would not preclude us honouring our commitment to other areas of the community. We have a model for a new business that is not well developed, don't even have their own levies, don't even have well developed business associations but they might have

00:58:00 community associations which are in need of help and we'll be able to do that if we don't commit to see. But we'll be able to implement the principles of the business improvement district that can inform the discussions had with the Noosa Junction Association and relevant stakeholders. It doesn't stop that happening, it doesn't stop people coming around the table, it doesn't To honor our commitments to ESWO and the Shire. Councillor Wegener: This is a response to a notice of motion to investigate precinct management in the Noosa Junction. And that was passed. That was a notice of motion that was passed. Staff have come back with a way forward. And this way forward, in response to the notice of motion, brings an opportunity to help stakeholders to face off with each other.

00:59:00 And staff said last week that the Noosa Junction Association and the Chamber actually aren't set up for this. And that this actually will help them do what they want to do. Going forward, to get, as a clear facilitator in this, to bring the stakeholders, including the residents, to the table. The Noosa Junction Association doesn't, the residents aren't a stakeholder. And the Noosa Junction Association, anyway, blah, blah, blah. I appreciate, and I really enjoy the enthusiasm of the staff, that they really support this thing. They can really have a red hot go at this. And of course, it's just a, an investigation. It's not, we're not, the resources last time that we spoke at the committee meeting was not reflective of what we're talking about today.

01:00:00 Just stopping placemaking someplace else. This is stuff that is already happening, that the staff is already doing, like you said, they're already doing it. But it gives them more of a direction. And I think that the precinct may be best served with cooperation. And this is an idea to, to have a try at cooperation amongst the residents, all the different people. And if it doesn't work, back up. I suspect that you're not going to force it. This isn't going to be served at anybody's throat. Is it going to work? No? Okay, if it doesn't work, it's an investigation. It's not committing resources, you know, other than a few, other than a handful of hours that came out last time to see if this is going to work. So I'm in support of the staff recommendation, which is to see here. Thank you. Councillor Wilson: I was supportive of the research. So thank you for that. And given the history in the area, this is definitely good.

01:01:00 But I don't support further action on a bid. The report aims to compare strategies for addressing land use conflicts between entertainment venues and nearby residents. And to manage the interface between hospitality and residential areas. I'm not clear from the report how a bid will have any clear impact on that interface. Most complaints and issues arising from licensed venues fall under the Office of Literary Gaming. And we already have the CALM NUSA Likert report. In terms of frameworks, the evaluation makes it clear that most of those are not relevant to NUSA function. The proposed bid is a business model. This is not legislated or currently applied in Queensland. It goes beyond the scope of the Welsh Government Services. NUSA Duction businesses already pay a levy and see no reason for Council to find additional ways to levy businesses to fund another layer of micromanaging and meetings in an area where Council doesn't have resources or funding to support it. And it isn't really in our usual core business.

01:02:00 If this is an initiative for the business community, Council is supposed to get involved. And the NUSA Duction Association is already working on a number of initiatives. The report says the bid model presents strategic and co-operative solutions. The framework for managing the precinct, empowering local businesses to jointly invest in initiatives that boost the area's vibrancy, safety and long-term economic resilience. I can't see how this is a welcome beyond what the NUSA Duction Association is already doing or how it offers a potential pathway to address persistent land use tensions between hospitality revenues and UI residents. Or how the bid's collective mechanism would be used in potentially resolving long-standing land use conflicts through coordinated management. Nice words. Not really sure how they are. We're supposed to be finishing what we've started, with no new initiatives. And this is not an emerging issue. The report refers to the well-known long-standing land use conflicts. But even this investigation into the suitability of a bid could take six to twelve months,

01:03:00 which does not help us to resolve those conflicts in any meaningful time frame, especially when the local business association is already working on initiatives to manage the precinct. We're supposed to be finishing what we've started, with no new initiatives. In the absence of dedicated FIT legislation in Queensland, raising expectations about Council's ability to fund administrative support, infrastructure commitments and stakeholder engagement costs. In Attachment 1, the Evaluation of Options, there is no mention of any advantages or improvements for residents in managing amenity issues. In fact, the only mention of residents is in the disadvantages, with a risk that businesses and residents in proximity, outside the precincts area, may feel excluded from decision making that will impact on them. We've funded and resourced Council to deliver the 2025-26 Operational Plan, and that's where staff should be focused. The businesses and all the inter-register work regularly. Councillor Lorentson: Can I ask some questions through the Chair please? Sure.

01:04:00 Reference was made that the motion was proposing a bid model to sit within the Misadjunction Hospitality Precinct. Is that correct? Because my understanding is... Deputy Mayor Stockwell: No, it's not a question. You're trying to debate. Sorry. I'm not accepting your question, so if you want to move on to the next one. You were debating your point, trying to use a question. Councillor Lorentson: My question is, a precinct management framework for the Misadjunction, can it be specific to the needs of the key stakeholders? Yes. Speaker 2: Yes, it can. Councillor Lorentson: So, a business improvement district model is the intention of the motion, that we set up a business improvement district model for the Junction.

01:05:00 Speaker 2: The recommendation in the report? Yes. It's initially to gauge support, or otherwise from stakeholders, on a... a bid-like framework, and then, depending on that support, then undertake an investigation and feasibility of what may be suitable for Noosa Junction, based on, you know, that kind of framework. But it would be adapted to a Noosa Junction context. Thank you very much. Councillor Finzel: Councillor Finlayson. Oh, yeah, I just want to say, look, I think, you know, a lot of work's gone into this. And I thank everyone. That's really put valued contribution and the conversations around the table. I feel we've missed a step if we want to stage this and have it inclusive for everyone. I feel like we've narrowed it down a bit, especially when we've had a strategic, you know, our corporate plan speaks to what we're doing. We've set a budget. We're on our way.

01:06:00 And, yes, I don't think we're supporting status quo, because we're having a conversation around the table. I'm just questioning, is there a better way? Now, recommendations, in my opinion, out of the Pomona placemaking, and placemaking, you know, where we're heading across the Shire, a recommendation after investment in that resource, hours of community engagement, a recommendation was the Tewantin movement. Now, all the things that have been said around the table today, I think fit that. So, you know, when you look at it, they're looking at people coming together, the business community, the residents and local governments. They talk about context, community development, urban design planning, economic development, engineering and infrastructure, sustainability and caring for place, arts, culture and innovation, and community development. So I think it ticks. All the things we've talked about today fit that. We've invested in that. We've got outcomes from that. Been a huge investment from council and staff and community. I think it provides equity. And I think what we've done today is we might be missing a step preceding

01:07:00 heading towards the big model, which, you know, fine, that's what we're discussing before us here today. I think missing this gap, to me, if you analyse it, there's a gap there that answers all the questions, in my opinion, that have been raised around the table today. I would like to see that we put something up that actually looks at supporting the Tewantin movement. Staff have told us today that that's no impost at council at the moment, which seems there's been huge discussion at the table today. May I suggest we put this forward and debate that as an opportunity, as a stepping stone towards the outcomes we're seeing. Because I think, you know, the whole of Shire, yes, it's been raised, we understand this development and these impacts are Shire-wide. Yes, I take on board that before us is the Noosa Junction, but I feel like we've missed a step in progressing this forward. Is there an opportunity? We've heard from Councillor Nicola today that this could take six to 12 months.

01:08:00 Is there a way we could use the time better in the next six months to perhaps support a Tewantin collaborative approach to allow the voice of our beneficiaries to bring to the conversation what they would like to say? You know, they're not here today telling us exactly what all these stakeholders have in mind. You know, we want to hear what they're saying. We want to support them. The reason we're here and seeking good governance and investing in placemaking is to give voice to the people we are serving. How can we do that better? Is this the best way to do that? How do we bring their lived experience and their voice to this conversation? I think the recommendation, the Tewantin movement, which came out of strategies, engagement, investment and time to hear what our communities have to say. So I would recommend something that if we actually didn't come up in the report,

01:09:00 it may have, I don't think I read it, around that as one of the options that we could do to gather information along the way and inform models including the BID and other frameworks. So that's... That's what I would like to raise today. And together, we're all here supporting our community. We understand the impacts. We understand the congestion. The struggle is, is how now do we implement new ways of being and have collaborative leadership where every voice and our lived experience counts? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: We can look at this from a number of different angles. I'm going to start from the perspective of what Councillor Phillips raised in terms of lead agency. These issues are matters controlled by the Queensland Police Service and Office of Clicker Gaming and Licensing. That's why the notice of motion.

01:10:00 It was about issues that were... We didn't have the lead agency role. Certainly, everyone around the table wants to ensure that Lucid Junction goes through its growing pains and its re-evolution into a hospitality precinct that is good for all ages and also good for the residents around. But principally, the issues are ones that we aren't the lead agency. And then we look at the other concern about is it by passing this of continuing from a notice of motion into a further assessment of the Business Improvement District framework or something akin to it? Is that a wise use of staff resources? And is it equitable? So we have... Councillor Wilkie's talked about its potential impact on the placemaking, but we know we've got a small strategic planning team and they have multiple different projects going.

01:11:00 I'd like to remind you that in 2019 there was a significant outcry in Pomona about the lack of protection of their heritage. I think it was over 100 signatures, maybe the petition may have been individual. We undertook to do an amendment of the planning scheme to further reflect the community's desires to protect heritage. That's five years ago. When we got that scheme approved by the Minister, there was a requirement there to document a process of how we were going to incorporate the latest climate change model. Still hasn't happened, five years ago. If we continue to have good ideas and go into areas which are not necessarily our lead responsibility, it means our important work just continually is to be put back and put back. I agree with what Council said at the beginning in their talk to amendment. There is a lot of things happening in the junction. And there's probably a tool that we could use to address it,

01:12:00 and that is the placemaking approach. But that's a decision that we have to compare against the previous commitments to other towns for, and compare and contrast. I'm with Council Wilson, is that the motion has suggested a way forward, but continuing to investigate is something that at this stage I don't think is a priority for Council to change what it's already suggesting it wanted to do in a longer term fashion in terms of the operational plan. I do think that we can continue. I think the difference between the two approaches, if I agree with Councillor Wilkie's initial motion, I think the difference is one could probably do with existing resources potentially, mainly within the economic development team that works with the business associations to focus and start driving it. The other one would mean that there'd be an allocation

01:13:00 of strategic planning time to actually develop this, to take the consultation to create the collateral and the communications materials that would be required, noting that I don't think there's any budget in this financial year for that. And so that's why I don't support the addition that I've received. I'll put... Councillor Lorentson, you can go. Councillor Lorentson: Councillor Wilson. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor Lorentson. You had a question? Councillor Phillips: No, it was earlier I had my hand up for a point of order. I don't know if it's allowed after the moment. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: For point of order, you'd need to say, but you can. Yes. If it's something relating to something I said. Councillor Phillips: Yes, it is. I can't sit online and listen to the tiny voice you use at Councillor Lorentson anymore, Mr. Chair. There is a way we can address each other respectfully at the table and I don't believe the way

01:14:00 that you are dealing with it is appropriate. So I'm just going to ask that that's the last time I hear the tone of voice you used at Councillor Lorentson. You can address the issue without the extra aggression. Thanks. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So I'm perplexed because I have no thought of... Well, actually, I thought that it was... Did anyone perceive any aggression? I've got the time. Councillor Phillips: In the recording, we can go back to it later. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: OK, I'll have a look at it. But certainly, Councillor Phillips, there was no aggression and I thought my tone and voice was typical of me. It may have sounded worse, but I take it. I don't believe there was a point of order. So, Councillor Lorentson. Councillor Lorentson: Yeah, so I'm just going to address a few things that were raised just in discussion. But, first of all, notified motion diverts resourcing.

01:15:00 Notified motions are Council's rights to raise emergent and current issues in the community. I need that said. Secondly, what's in front of us is not... We're not proposing a bid model. We're proposing a Noosa Junction-specific precinct management framework. And we're looking at proven models such as a business improvement district model and asking, are they applicable for this Junction? Third, conversations. Again, I revert back to in-depth conversations with our director, Tom, Councillor Wegener and myself. Councillor Wilkie also sitting at the table.

01:16:00 They made it clear and they were enthusiastic about this way forward. Sorry. Mayor Wilkie: Councillor Wilkie also at the table. Councillor Lorentson: Oh, excuse me. Councillor Stockwell, excuse me. Yeah. And their words were that this way forward would make the job easier. It would allow certainty and collaboration. It would allow all the key stakeholders, including the residents that are involved in the project, to be impacted. You can't sleep at night. It would allow them to sit face-to-face and talk it out. She also said that they deal with these issues in the Junction daily. And at the moment, there's conversations going left, right and centre. This model brings all these conversations together. Also, there has been quite a lot of conversations with the University of Sunshine Coast. In fact, this morning, we had a conversation with the University of Sunshine Coast. This morning, I received an email from the University keen to come on board and help us with

01:17:00 the Pre-Center Management Framework. We have met with past members of the New South Junction Association keen to explore the Management Framework. I can't say that with the current. There's a new board, so I can't speak on their behalf. I've also spoken in the last few weeks with residents who don't sleep at night. I've also spoken in the last few weeks with residents who don't sleep at night. I've also spoken in the last few weeks with businesses who are scared of putting live music. All are keen to do something more than what we are doing at the moment. Councillor Phillips, Councillor Wegener, I agree with you guys. We can't maintain the status quo. Our job as a Council is to future-proof. It's strategic planning. And sometimes, we don't know what's happening. Until it happens. So, keep coming back to, we've got two choices.

01:18:00 Kick the can down the road. And do what we're doing, which is reactive planning. Or do what we're supposed to be doing, which is strategic planning. Planning for the future. Mention around the table was that we need to respect and give our community, the people that we represent, a voice. How do we do that? How do we do that? How do we bring their lived experience to this table? That's exactly what this motion, or amendment, is proposing to do. It's proposing to respect the people that have come here through deputations, telling us we can't sleep at night. It's giving the people, the businesses, the small businesses, who spend, who employ our kids, who just want to earn a living, it's giving them a voice because they need certainty. They need confidence to invest in their business and to employ people, our kids.

01:19:00 So how do we bring their lived experience to the table? It's around the table. It's by establishing or discussing the opportunity of a precinct management framework. That could look like a business improvement district model, or it could not. So. So. So. We've got an opportunity to provide certainty to those businesses, to those residents, we've got an opportunity to be proactive and collaborate, and we've got an opportunity to, you know, deviate from the status quo, because if we do nothing, councillors, nothing changes. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'll put the motion, those in, the amendment, sorry, those in favour? That's Councillor Lorentson, Wegener and Phillips. Those against? That's Councillor Finzel, Wilkie and Wilson and Stockwell. The amendment has been lost. We go back to the original motion, which I believe Councillor Wilkie has talked to.

01:20:00 Do we have anyone else wishing to talk to the substantive motion? Councillor Lorentson: Could we have a look at the motion, Chair, please? Councillor Phillips: I have a question too, please. Sure. Just in relation to the placemaking, can either, through the CEO, just a reminder where we're at with placemaking, where, have we allocated the next place that would be allocated that resource for placemaking?

01:21:00 Speaker 3: I don't believe we've allocated it specifically. I think we've focused on Pomona. There has been some, there was some discussion around the next one, but I don't believe that we've had a final decision on that. Speaker 2: Correct. Previously it had been discussed Tewantin or Kin Kin. Yeah. But a decision was still pending. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I believe in the motion accepting Pomona, I think there was a part of that that identified those two as the next two priorities. Yeah. Councillor Phillips: Follow-up question. Can you just remind me how they were prioritised, please? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: That would be? Yep. Speaker 2: There was an assessment done. It was probably about four years ago now, three or four years ago, to determine the greatest need based on some criteria, and it came out that Pomona, and readiness for a placemaking program, Pomona came out on top, and then it was Kin Kin and Tewantin which followed in terms of that prioritisation of greatest need.

01:22:00 Speaker 3: So it was a council decision. Speaker 2: Okay. And that went through council, yeah. Councillor Phillips: And, sorry, so it only went through to make Pomona the first one, but that was three or four years ago, and then the decision now about the next one is coming to us again. Is that how that will work? Yes. Speaker 2: At the moment, the program is focused on implementation of the actions out of the Pomona plan. Is that how that will work? Yes. And with limited resources, that's determined that would be the focus to make sure the plan is implemented and it's a success. Councillor Lorentson: Question through the Chair. Placemaking at the time of the decision, my recollection was that it would be annual, that we would designate an area and budget for placemaking every year.

01:23:00 Is that still the case? Speaker 2: There's been no budget allocation for the 2025-2026 placemaking. So there was, in the 22, 23, 24, 25 budget, a rollover amount. The project was over two years, so it was a pilot. It was about making sure the process was right and the community were engaged and the outcome was delivering what it was aimed to deliver. But, yeah, there's no allocation in this year's plan. There's no budget. Speaker 3: Thank you. Other than, as you're aware, Councillor, there's a resource. We'd like to have a resource for placemaking. And then the projects come through, you know, major projects and other works that are happening to deliver against the placemaking plan. Councillor Lorentson: So the Pomona placemaking project is expected to be complete in two years?

01:24:00 Speaker 3: Well, that's the thing that we need to consider and bring back. It's my understanding that the implementation phase is not as simple as putting a date to it. I think it's one of those ongoing. At some point, we need to then say, well, that's, we've now got to a point. Now we can move on to the next. But we haven't got to that point yet. Speaker 2: It's in a phase of the short, quick wins. Some of the, just the two-year actions supporting the Tewantins movement, which is now establishing from the community. But it is, the plan itself is a longer-term plan. There'll be actions that are, you know, rolled out over a longer period. Can I ask you a question? Councillor Lorentson: Placemaking project in smaller villages? I can see it's application in places like Perugia. But in an area like Moosewood Junction, where, is it suitable for a visitor to come in?

01:25:00 Is it suitable for a visitor to come in? Is it a place where it's a Christmas precinct? Um, and residential precinct, which is really quite different to any other beach or precincts in the Shire. Um, is the placemaking project actually suitable for Moosewood Junction? Speaker 2: Absolutely. Um, mostly, placemaking projects are centred around a village. A town centre. Um, because that's where the community comes together. And that's where all the activities are. And supported by residential around it. So, absolutely, Noosa Junction, as is all of our centres, villages, right for a placemaking project. Councillor Finzel: Can I test if we added a C under here to include going back to all the people we're representing to see if they would consider the framework of a town team?

01:26:00 Or is there an option to put together what they want to say to bring that to the next step? Can we move to that for a debate? Well, yeah, because I think, you know, what I'm hearing around the table, I think we're sitting at an intersection of the pains of change. And I think it's being identified, it's an adaptive challenge of how we provide leadership in this fast-moving space. I don't know. I just feel that we've had a recommendation sitting up town. Can I take that to the debate? I don't know. They're not here, those people, so I'm just looking at an option to move this forward to see if that's relevant. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: You could move an amendment to that effect suggesting a town team, but you'd need to have the words. I'm going, could I suggest, if you would like to go down, write down what you think. I'm going to try something else.

01:27:00 As an amendment? And we could deal with yours after that, unless you were ready to move an amendment in. Councillor Finzel: Oh, here we go. Thank you. Here we go. Happy. To add, to engage with relevant Noosa Junction stakeholders to gauge support or otherwise for the potential establishment of a town team's model within the Noosa Junction hospitality precinct. Should that be more worth it? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Well, the town's team model wouldn't be, I don't think, limited to the last within the Noosa Junction hospitality would be in the local area. Is that your view? Councillor Finzel: Yeah, I think what I'm hearing is we need to get everyone at the table. I feel like we've just got a gap in our steps towards where we want to be. And I think, you know, these pain points... Deputy Mayor Stockwell: You're debating the amendment, so I'm just... All right. Mayor Wilkie: Question of staff. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Can I just work with Councillor Finzel to get to what's on the screen?

01:28:00 My suggestion would be to finish it instead of within the Noosa Junction local area. Oh yeah, so you've changed that. Are you happy with that wording there now? Councillor Finzel: With the area, because I think that also gives inclusion for, you know, our residents and everyone. I think it's also... Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay, so I'll just get you to move that. Councillor Finzel: Yeah. Yes. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And I'll second it for the purpose of debate. And if you can talk to it now. Councillor Finzel. Councillor Finzel: I think this may have the opportunity to address all the issues raised around the table today. I'd like to just put it to the debate to see if, you know, in my opinion, I think there's a gap where we are and where we want to go. Now, I think we probably don't have all the language around the table, around what we call six between technical and regulation, where we've got to sit, and also looking at adaptive leadership to where we want to go.

01:29:00 And we've got to facilitate that and bring everyone on the journey, and everyone's voice does matter. And in doing that, I think it gives us opportunities through this process to honour traditions, history, heritage and culture, and that through the suffering that everyone's had at the moment, we can still engage with our identity and our connection to each other in our place. So, I just think I'd like to bring this to the table to hear about questions to the staff and or debate around this as a stepping stone that is inclusive, that goes beyond the status quo, but also honouring, you know, the strategic work that we've done up to date. That's it. Yeah. I'm happy to test that if everyone wants to join me on the journey. Councillor Phillips has her hand up. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor Phillips. Councillor Phillips: Thank you. Question, Karen.

01:30:00 I think I get the intent. Can you please explain to me how this is different from what we saw with Councillor Lorentson's amendment to see if there's appetite for exactly what you were suggesting? Can you just explain to me how this is different from what we saw with Councillor Lorentson's amendment to see if there's appetite for exactly what you were suggesting? Councillor Finzel: Well, I think it's not prescriptive on the bid. I think it addresses a gap where we give a broader opportunity to have voice at the table about people, what they want to say. And I just think the town team model has come out of a placemaking project that was recommended as a stepping stone to, I think, a better place to be. I don't think it's going to address all the issues raised today. I just think it parts a bit of that technical framework, which would do, you know, no recognising

01:31:00 the need. However, I think this might provide, I don't know, if you want to call it a middle ground or address a gap towards that, where we want to go. Councillor Phillips: I'm just sort of sorry to clarify, though, to be less descriptive, I'm not, I still need to understand what town team's model, if it was going to be a suggestion in, or it is a suggestion in the Pomona placemaking, how that will bring everyone that, because the Junction Precinct has different stakeholders with our LGR and, well, I mean, they do have some licence venues at Pomona, but there's different needs in that Junction Precinct that I don't believe were raised in the, you know, the, you know, the, you know, the, you Councillor Finzel: I'm happy to let the staff answer that, but my limited knowledge around the town teams is exactly about bringing the community together as a collective to address the needs that everyone has around the people and the place.

01:32:00 I'll put it over to staff to give us probably a better description actually. Speaker 2: It is about bringing people and place together. Town teams is a model that was developed out of WA and it's, I don't know the specific detail, but broadly speaking they have set protocols to which how people deal with each other when they come together. It's driven by the community. They set it up. They develop the framework. They develop the protocols as long as they meet the overarching town teams movement. It's supported by the town teams movement and they can assist in developing the framework for them or whatever model that they work out for their town.

01:33:00 It is a collaboration model of bringing people in the community, different issues together. Working through. It could be anything from some of the examples at Ips which was one of the examples. They had community gardens and some actions that they can collectively bring, but they also had actions and advocacy to state government around various issues. So it can be wide reaching, but it really depends on that community coming together and working together. And having a, you know, I guess a plan and a common goal and actions and where they want to spend their time. There's no levy associated with it unless, of course, they came to council and wanted a levy implemented through the means that we have.

01:34:00 But, yeah, it's a little bit different, but it's still about collaboration and place making, which is not just about infrastructure. It's also about bringing people together. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Does that answer your question, Councillor Phillips? Councillor Phillips: For now, I think. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah. Basically, the key difference is town teams are community led and organised rather than council being involved as a form of organising or the investigator. It's about the community and the stakeholders being self-organising. Councillor Lorentson and Heather. Councillor Lorentson: Yes. My question is, so the notice of motion, and I'm reading what it actually said, is that council seek or prepare a report outlining options for managing land use conflicts between entertainment venues and residents. It was an exploratory report that investigate best practice in precinct management to assess relevance and suitability.

01:35:00 Why wasn't town teams model or place making model, why wasn't that included and investigated as part of the report? Because is a community lead? I'm just asking the question. Speaker 2: I guess the scope was kind of discussed and mapped out to be a more formalised kind of, or what the motion maybe was getting to being more of a structured framework, and that's why those kind of examples were included. And it looked at current regulatory frameworks, so NUSA plan, which is a land use management framework, and deals with those, I guess, potential conflicts between residential and other business uses. You know, having measures around times and amplification, and requirements for noise

01:36:00 reduction, you know, and things like that. So, the report maps out what's the current, you know, statutory framework that we're working with. And then, you know, including, you know, licensing arrangements, and then it was, well, what else can we do? Which of those other precinct-based frameworks? So, I guess that's where the investigation was led to. Why town teams specifically wasn't included. So, I guess that's where the investigation was led to. I guess it was looking, as I said, more about those precinct, more structured arrangements around precinct management, where council was, you know, a potential lead agent in that as well. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I think Councillor Wilson had her hand up first. Councillor Wilson: Just a question on the engagement with stakeholders.

01:37:00 How would you envisage that would happen? Or would it be the method of engagement? I don't think it would be the method of engagement. Councillor Finzel: Well, that would have to go back to the staff, because I don't know the process of how to set that up. But I think if we do try to put this together, I would have to ask the staff, what is that process? But I think this, as I said, could be a stepping stone that addresses the pain point, which is the struggle, that I've identified, between the technical aspects and actually giving adaptive leadership and voice to our community. That is going through a huge change. So I feel there's a nice collaboration between those two conflicts. And I'd throw the chair back to the staff to go, how would the process, to engage community in this, how would that work? Councillor Lorentson: And what are the resources and implications? Speaker 2: So, because it is a community-led movement, they might not be aware of it.

01:38:00 So I guess we can make, I guess, misadjunctions. I don't know. I don't know what the stakeholders are aware of the movement. We can be a facilitator between the movement organiser and, I guess, misadjunction association to actually have a presentation, let them know about it. But ultimately, it's up to them whether they want to engage in it. But we could facilitate the knowledge and provide advice around the movement. But it is a smarter and there you go type thing. Councillor Finzel: Yeah. Just a question. Oh, sorry. So does that still put value on the work that's being done currently around the really regulatory and that type of work that, you know, the commitments to regulations and,

01:39:00 you know, planning and all those strategic things? That is, that comes along with it. Right? It's not falling off the table if someone moves forward with the town team framework. Speaker 2: Well, those legislative frameworks exist regardless. The plan, the town plan exists. All those regulations that currently work would continue. It would be up to the team, the town teams and whoever was in that and joined that movement as to what their issues were and how they wanted to move forward. It's not up to them to address it outside of that regulatory framework or however they wanted to do it. So, yeah, it really is driven by them. What are their issues? What do they want to address? You know, what role do they want to play in it? Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: Just a question. Councillor Lorentson: Professor Phillips has got her hand up. Councillor Wegener: Yeah.

01:40:00 Councillor Phillips. Councillor Phillips: Thank you. Question around the town teams again. Was that decision to explore that as an option came out of the consultant or the, I've just lost my word, through the consultation process for the placemaking? Is that how that recommendation came about? Speaker 2: It came through staff research and networking across placemaking models and the town teams movement providing information to staff that we thought, well, here's a great model for the community to actually pick up and run with post council's involvement in facilitating a place plan. Because, I mean, I guess ultimately with placemaking, it's really about the community coming together and running with it so that we can say, well, you know, great, so that, you know, it's not

01:41:00 all about council resources. It's about the community. It's about the resources and time and funding. So it was just seen as a good model Australian developed that was one model that the community could pick up and run with. But they may decide on another model. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor Lorentson. Okay. Oh, sorry. Have you got a supplementary question, Councillor Powell? Yeah, I did. Are you happy with that? Councillor Phillips: Yeah, I'm fine. Just, I'm trying to work out the cart before the horse part. Yeah. We, we, the placemaking, placemaking was done on Pomona. Tannin Teens was explored as part of that. But we haven't done placemaking on the junction. So I'm worried about making decisions that didn't come through the recommendation, even though I understand the intent now behind the motion. But I feel like we're making a decision.

01:42:00 So my question is, if the junction was put on a placemaking list of ones that identified that needs a placemaking, would that not then come out of the recommendations that town teams is explored, but because of issues that were raised through deputations and things that we've heard, that what we're exploring now is actually just trying to bring a community issue to the front and resolve it through the recommendation that you put in front of us? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yes, I heard. Okay, Councillor Lorentson. Councillor Lorentson: The town teams model. So we're still at pilot stage at Pomona. Have we...

01:43:00 Can you say at this early stage whether it's working and effective, and should we wait until we have some data saying that this is an effective model, that it does address issues such as noise, and again, go back to similar to what Jess just said now, what I raised. If this was an effective, proven model, why wasn't it brought to us as part of the report? Because there's a lot of information, a lot of work has been put into investigating pre-centre management models specifically to address the issue or the reason the report was originally brought to council, which is to address noise issues and safety issues in the junction. So is it too early with the town teams model?

01:44:00 Is it too early with the town teams model to decide that it is an effective pre-centre management tool? Speaker 2: I guess that would be up to the community to determine, you know, if they had interest in it. In terms of whether it's successful in Pomona, the fact that the community have come to, or members of the community are starting a town teams movement or model is successful. Because the community have embraced the work that was done through the placemaking pilot and want to take it further and want to, you know, lead a future process. You know, you don't necessarily need to have done a town, a placemaking exercise for a town team to start. So is it going to be able to address the key specific issues where this motion arose?

01:45:00 Is it going to be able to address the key specific issues where this motion arose? Quite possibly, if they came together and all the stakeholders came together and they talked through how they might manage those issues. The report was specific around frameworks that had a bit more structure to it, and that's where that focused. So, yeah, I can't answer that off the top of my head. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor Wilkie. Mayor Wilkie: Can this proposal be put to the Nurse Adjunction Association? Can this proposal be put to the Nurse Adjunction Association? And if they go for it, would it be initiated without dramatic impulse on staff resources? Speaker 2: Yes, because it is largely a community-led process. They might invite council to sit at staff or be involved, but it's not something we're leading. Mayor Wilkie: Yeah, OK. Thank you. Councillor Lorentson: So can you explain that? So the Nurse Adjunction Association would then have to reach out

01:46:00 to the entire Noosa Junction precinct and ask if they want to be involved in a town teams model. Is that how it works? Speaker 2: Well, it depends on who picks it up. It may not be the Noosa Junction. It might be the residents that actually pick it up and run with it, or it might be other stakeholders. So it doesn't necessarily have to be business-led. It could be resident-led. It could be some key community members wanting to take the lead on it. It's nonspecific. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor Pindell. Councillor Finzel: Yeah, can I just, you know, people are questioning the validity, I suppose, of the town teams as an option. I'd just like to add that in 2024, the Minister from Local Government, Sport and Cultural Industries, they won the Minister's Place Innovation Awards. So just to give some credibility to that. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So Councillor Pindell, you weren't debating it, or you had to open the address, that's not appropriate.

01:47:00 Councillor Wilson: Oh, okay, so can I ask a question, my apologies? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: No, because you've already answered it. Councillor Lorentson: I'll speak to the motion. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Speaking. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you. I'll speak to the motion. I won't support the amendment. I think it, we've got a report that's come to Council, and with, in respect to the staff that put in considerable times looking at precinct management models, I don't have enough information, I don't know what we're really sort of making a decision on. I just think that it's, at this stage, just, you know, hasn't been considered enough, and, um, I think we have a specific question. A report came back to us with specific recommendations, and they are data driven, um,

01:48:00 and I respect, again, the work that the staff and their recommendation, their recommendation didn't raise the potential establishment of a town to this model within the Noosa Junction local area. And I respect Council Finzel, her intention to get some middle ground, but I think the middle ground might have been in the original amendment, which looked at all precinct management frameworks and would have captured the town team's model. This is too specific. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay. Others wish to talk to the amendment? Council Wilson. Councillor Wilson: Um, I'd like to support it. I think the engagement part is, is too vague. It probably puts Stillinghouse back on the staff to manage that part. So, I mean, it should actually be a community-led, um, project. I can see how the town's team model would influence your plan, but I don't think it's appropriate to implement a plan for something that's got, like, common issues in terms of, um, legal licensing and that kind of thing.

01:49:00 So, I don't think it's an appropriate one for the project. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay. Anyone else wish to talk? Speaker 2: Yeah. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Oh, no, you have to close. Speaker 2: Oh, I'll close. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah. Is there anyone else? Councillor Wood. Mayor Wilkie: Yeah, look, I've, uh, the reason why the, uh, Pomona placemaking team, uh, town team's model is working is because we had a very successful placemaking process that proceeded with very clear actions and outcomes and good community engagement. And I think that needs to happen before the town team's model can be raised about, at the implementation stage of, um, of any planning process. So, I think it's a good idea, but just a bit premature for the junction. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor Phillips. Councillor Phillips: I just wanted to speak to it as well, because I just want to thank Councillor Finzel, because I, I believe in the intent behind it as well. Um, but I just can't support it at this point, because I feel like it's probably locking us into something specific at this point too.

01:50:00 Um, whereas the original motion gave us, um, exploring, but also an end that might end up being. I think that status quo or, like, it explored those options where, um, but yeah, I just want to, as ever, I know that the challenge of putting an amendment on the floor at the time, so I never want it to be missed to that, um, I commend you for having a, a go to bring us all together. So, thanks. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Um, Councillor Wegener, do you wish to talk? Oh, oh, cool. The, the town team's model is, is good if we could get a, um, unified vision across residents and the business owners and the land owners. I wonder with starting from a position of conflict over, over a particular issue, whether it would fit. I do think where everyone's in their mind, well, where I've got to in my mind is we, as a set of councillors, need to review our place making priorities.

01:51:00 Um. And that includes our, our budget, you know, there may be over coming budget time, uh, an option to look at, uh, some incoming revenue we weren't expecting. We may be able to increase our investment this financial year, but at this stage, we're not starting anything new, but it may be that during the term of this financial year, we, uh, do have a look at our place making priorities. I think it's pretty clear that Noosa Junction, as well as Kin Kin and Tewantin would need to be considered. In the light of current situation, and it may be that we can, uh, look at taking steps, and it may be a suggested step for all three that, uh, the town team's model is where you start, and then we'll build from there as budget, um, becomes available. At this stage, I, I, I just think it does, um, tend to just, uh, continue the investigation in a way that would just still create that staff time.

01:52:00 So, Councillor Finzel. Councillor Finzel: Right. Thank you. Um, just to reiterate, I do believe, um, that the people can initiate this without lots of council staff time and resources. So, I'd like to rebut that firstly. Um, I think that, um, perhaps maybe, obviously around the table, people don't consider this as an opportunity to actually really hone in on, um, beneficiary-centric leadership that is addressing complex issues, um, during a really challenging time of growth and, you know, conflicts. Um, I think the pains of change are going to, like, be with us for this whole Shire. And I'd like to, you know, think that we can do some bold leadership and, um, meet up with

01:53:00 our people in the middle. Um, I think that we need to look at how we understand and engage with our community when there is also a resistance to change. But I think that's our challenge on this term. Um. To actually go, how do we facilitate that? How do we give voice to our community that's relevant at the table? How do we address and measure their lived experience? Which, to me, is data that can inform these decisions, not the one exactly, you know, before us today, but at a broader sense of strategic leadership. And how do we want to position ourselves as leaders around this table moving forward? And it's going to require discipline, change, and definitely giving a place at the table, voice to our community. And I just put this forward today because I thought it's a great stepping stone. Um. I'll accept it's unsupported.

01:54:00 But thank you, everyone. It was good to bring it to debate. Um. When we talk about status quo and change, I mean, that's our challenge. We've invested in strategic plans. We've got a community. We've engaged. We, you know, we're committed to this. We're committed to change. Um. You know, this is the challenge in local government. And I've said it in my whole terms. It's like, you know, we're trying to move the Titanic. It's a big beast. And then how do we be really agile, um, and have appetite to be, you know, bold and step out? Um. And, you know, that's going to be challenging, I think, for the rest of this term. Um. I will support my own motion. Um. If I didn't, that's problematic. Um. But, yeah. I won't give up on, um, really honing out a place for our community to have relevance through their lived experience, to find that balance between the technical issues and the fiduciary requirements, the environment in which we live, and meet those demands which

01:55:00 are challenging. That's our first couple of levels of government. But I advise, I would like to bring to the table, we had a third level of governance where we really give voice to our people. And that's what we're here for. That's who we're serving. And, um, thank you, everybody, for your contribution. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I put the motion, the amendment. Those in favour? Councillor Finzel: Oh, me. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yes, that's me. Councillor Finzel: Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: That's Councillor Finzel. Those opposed? Is Councillor Lorentson and Wegener. Me. Phillips, Wilkie, Wilson, and Stockwell. We go back to the suspended motion. And I believe only Councillor Coffey has talked to it. Does anyone else wish to talk to the motion? Councillor Wilson: I will. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor Wilson. Councillor Wilson: Um, this motion doesn't kick the can down the road at all. Um, it means that we can actually start having these conversations prior to them already having them. It means that we can talk to anybody who's a relevant stakeholder, um, immediately, and start trying to get some ideas to address the situation.

01:56:00 Conversely, investigating a bid takes time. Um, implementing that bid takes time. I'm just going to quickly read a bit of the report again. The timing for this initiative would depend on stakeholder readiness and resource availability. However, a preliminary phase, including engagement and concept testing, could be initiated within the next six to 12 months. Budget and resource implications would need to be carefully considered to peer out staffing to support coordination, facilitation, and plan development for the next six to 12 months. Initial costs may include consultancy support, stakeholder workshops, and communications, with funding potentially sourced through existing budget allocations or external grants. All of those things take time. What we have today is something that we can actually immediately start by supporting this motion. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Others wish to talk? Councillor Wilkie. You can close. No, no. Ah, sorry. Councillor Lorentson: Um, I won't support the motion in front of us because, to me, this is a difficult

01:57:00 thing to do. It's not working. Um, so, to me, we, lots of, lots of words around the table from bold leadership and these things take time, but good planning does take time. Bold leadership is pushing to do better. Bold leadership is not supporting status quo. Bold leadership looks like respecting the voices that have come to this room and said, we want a good night's sleep. The businesses that have come to us and said, we want to play live music, and we want to employ, and we want to run our businesses without worrying about constant complaints. So, so, to me, you know, in front of us, it's, it's retaining status quo.

01:58:00 Um, and it's not going to improve, it's not going to improve the situation. Um, I think we can do better. So, I won't support what's in front of us today. Councillor Wegener: Yeah. Councillor Windy, you want to talk? Yeah. Um, going back to the committee, committee meeting, it was, it was clear to me that, that this report and this recommendation were meant to facilitate, you know, that, that it would facilitate the junction. Um, and she said that this, the recommendation here before us, the original recommendation, will make their job easier, make staff's job easier in the junction. And so, I'm just sticking to that because that, um, that was explained then. And so, I won't support this because I think this, this, this doesn't change the status quo where the original recommendation was supported by staff and would make their job easier overall.

01:59:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah. I think Councillor Phillips was next. And Councillor Finzel? Councillor Phillips, you've got the floor. Councillor Phillips: Thank you. At the risk of, um, continuing this, I was wondering if I could try an amendment to this motion. Councillor Wegener: Yeah. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: It's always an option available to you, Councillor Phillips. Councillor Phillips: Thank you. I was just trying to write some notes so I didn't, um, that's C. Okay. Through the engagement with the relevant stakeholders. Oh, I'm just waiting for it to come up on the screen before I spoke. It takes a little while to come up. Yeah, that's okay. Yeah.

02:00:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: You can continue your proposed amendment. Um, okay. Councillor Phillips: Um. So, um, through the engagement with, like, with relevant stakeholders. That the. Ah, I'm just trying to think of how to word this. Sorry. That the future framework implemented

02:01:00 adopts a proactive future planning model. That's all, I think that needs to end it. . Director Walsh: . Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I don't know if that's a sentence. Councillor Phillips: . I'm just trying to end it. . Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Is your intent that a future framework be identified through the engagement with relevant

02:02:00 stakeholders? . Councillor Phillips: What I'm trying to achieve is shifting. I don't mind that there's an inclusive of the other that we've included in the framework. The amendment gives us, when we look back at this and we go, okay, that went through, if that goes through, what I want to see is that something changes. And I think most, I thought there was sort of consensus to some point around the room that all of us can agree there's an issue, something needs to happen. Most of what we're doing is reacting, and I'm trying to put an amendment together that gives us a change in the direction to look from a proactive planning model with our engagement, rather than looking backwards.

02:03:00 Again, I'm probably speaking to it before I've even finished my amendment. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Is it something along these lines, Councillor Phillips, through the engagement with stakeholders, that agreement to a proactive future planning framework to achieve a proactive future planning model be proposed? Something like that. Councillor Phillips: Yes. And then I can speak to it. And if someone wants to make it... Yes, we've got... Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Through the engagement with relevant stakeholders...

02:04:00 A future framework be implemented that adopts a proactive future planning model. Does that make sense? Mayor Wilkie: Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Councillor Phillips: Yes. Yes. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'm going to ask you to move to the next item, which is the amendment that's been moved on Thursday evening. No, we don't have one. Thursday. Councillor Phillips: I can only do that if this motion goes. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: You can make an amendment. You can draw the... As we're having difficulty getting to a point where the amendment actually is something

02:05:00 that staff could implement, it's probably better to put it on hold and see if there's something that can be done before Thursday. Okay. I respect that. Okay. So, Councillor Finzel, I think you were the next person wishing to speak. Speaker 2: On the motion. Councillor Finzel: Before us, this one? No. No. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: No. For the substantive motion. So that lapsed from one to the second. Councillor Finzel: Right. Okay. Right. So we're talking about this one. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Finzel: Yeah. I've got nothing to say to that. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay. I'll speak to it. Yes, Councillor Phillips. Councillor Phillips: Tough. I'll just speak to it if there was no one next. The reason why I can't support this is because I truly believe we need to have something we can...

02:06:00 We talk about KPIs. We look at things so we can actually measure the success of decisions we make around the table. And for this one, I feel that it won't be able to give me something I can say. I can look back and go, yep. I can... There's... We said we'd do this and there's an outcome. Even though I appreciate that, again, there's intent, but I still believe it probably just doesn't set me up for clarity around whether we've been successful for that precinct or not. And I think we owe it to them to say we're actually being really clear in what we want to achieve. Councillor Lorentson: Can I move an amendment, please? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: It's always open to you. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you. So, C, that council convene a round table discussion with stakeholders, including residents.

02:07:00 I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: That's been moved. Do we have a seconder? Councillor Lorentson: Happy to second to the debate. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor Finzel. Councillor Walton. Councillor Lorentson: I'll make this brief. When we talk about what's the next important step, and I speak a lot about I don't want

02:08:00 to go back to what we're doing. This, to me, is a proactive next step. And it's a critical, important step. I think... Thank you. When we talk about community-led solutions, it starts with people face-to-face talking about issues. I think it's... If this motion is going to get supported by the majority, we need to support, at a minimum, this round table discussion with OLGA, with QPS, with the business owners, with the association, and, most importantly, with the community. The residents that have spoken directly to us. This is a minimum. This is a minimum. This is what will give voice to the people that we represent.

02:09:00 And it's also impetus, or change. Something great will come out of this. And I always use the analogy, five years ago, when there was so much conflict in the waters. And I always use the analogy, five years ago, when there was so much conflict in the waters. When the oilers and the stand-up paddlers and the longboarders were all in conflict. We're at wars. And we decided not to go through a regulatory route. We decided to go through a community-led route, which was getting everyone around a table and talking it out, neighbor to neighbor, friend to friend, because we are all neighbors, and we are all friends. So I hope everyone will, at a minimum, support C, which is to convene a round table discussion with key stakeholders.

02:10:00 And it means that we're taking a first step, and an important step. Councillor Finzel: Question. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Question. Councillor Finzel: Yes. Just a question. I felt there was already discussions going on with all this Dave Carvers, including residents. Is that, in summertime, if that's true or false? Councillor Lorentson: I can answer that. They are, but no one's at the same table. Their staff, from what I've understood from Director King Rawlings, is the same. They're having 100 conversations with planners, investors, developers, residents that are getting complaints, business owners that are in conflict with OLGA. They talk with the association. They talk with liquor and gaming. But none of these people are talking to each other or around the same table. And that was one of the many reasons why, in our discussions and conversations after the planning and environment meeting, it was made clear.

02:11:00 It was made clear by the director that this was the most effective and efficient way forward, exploring precinct management frameworks. But the answer is no. This doesn't happen at the moment. Mr Chair. Mayor Wilkie: I will be brief. The motion says engage with key stakeholders, including residents, QPS, OLGR. This is what would happen under that framework. It's continued. It's consistent with it. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Councillor Wilson: I'll speak against it. I think there needs to be a purpose to that. The original motion was looking at, we all accept that there's a problem at the junction. This item is really about, do we need a formal framework to manage the junction? I've already asked no. The item has already addressed how else we can deal with that issue without a formal

02:12:00 framework. In terms of equity, I don't know how we decide who will increase our dollars and who gets invited and how many people can sit around a round table. I think it's just superfluous to ITB. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Anyone else wish to talk? Councillor Finzel: Yeah. I'll just quickly talk. We just had a huge debate when we talked about frameworks, how we could get a measured voice from all stakeholders, including residents. It was voted down. There would have been actual KPIs and data, in my opinion, through that framework. We could have had some measured information to inform our decision-makers. To convene a round table, it's pretty broad. What does that mean? How are we going to measure people's voice? Rightly so. How do we get the right voices at the table? Again, who drives this?

02:13:00 I like to see that we see our community, our beneficiaries, the central reason why we're here. I support that, the idea that they drive that forward. I think this doesn't meet... There's sort of no framework. They don't inform any decisions moving forward, and it speaks about inclusion, exclusion. Who do we know as stakeholders? Who actually wants to have a voice there? When we talk about status quo, how do we widen out to people that may like to have a voice, but currently there's no way for them to have it? I think there's better ways to do it. I think this is trying to address issues on the hop. I won't be supporting this motion. I think there's better ways that we can actually engage for meaningful conversation that doesn't sort of give this idea of tokenism, ticking a box. I think we want to talk about meaningful engagement and how we measure that to make that data informed. That comes to us to really inform our decisions and underpin where we want to head, and making

02:14:00 sure that our community and our residents, that the work they put in is actually valued for. I think that's what we're trying to do through the data collection and giving real voice to their lived experience. Councillor Wegener: Council Wigner. Okay. I'm looking at what council's doing on a very wide scale here. We have the destination management plan. We're going into a different mode of council. We're going into council 5.0, where we really actually have to communicate and get out there on the offensive, no longer in the trenches and the defensive. The hard hat's on. And that's going to be dealing with stakeholders across the board. And I'm putting my rose-colored glasses on firmly now, and I have for weeks now, because I am completely in support of council being proactive, doing the destination management plan, looking at the junction, and actually standing in and saying, let's have a roundtable.

02:15:00 Let's have a chat about this. It might not go anywhere. Small little thing. But it's going there because we know it's going to happen. We know that staff want it. And that, to me, that carries a lot away. If Kim Rowlings is behind it and staff is behind it, that actually carries a lot away. This is a good middle ground between the recommendation and what the mayor suggested. So you guys put some rose-colored glasses on. Think positive. And let's see if we can kind of calm the nerves of the junction, because it's a changing place. They need to talk to each other. We need to talk to each other, because it is changing radically. Speaker 3: Yes? Councillor Phillips: There's probably not much else I can say, because Tom kind of summarized exactly similar to what I wanted to say. So I'll just, yeah, I think we're in a different stage where we have to probably shift to this really. But bring community in earlier.

02:16:00 So this gives us that one, you know, a type of, I don't know, I don't know, I don't know, a discussion at the beginning that can give us an idea of where to go and any opportunity that I think they can come in earlier. Maybe that will save us in the long run from maybe jumping into something that the community don't actually want. And then we only find out once we're already too far down the track. So I believe it's different to maybe what Councillor Finzel's put up, even though I think the intention is different. I think it's probably similar. I think it's just a step forward to give us, to actually start moving in a direction that maybe we can find a middle ground for everyone. So I'll support it if that didn't come out in that statement. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay. I'm the only one who hasn't spoken. I agree with both sides in that it is a mechanism, one step to engaging the stakeholders in item

02:17:00 B. I think some are interpreting it as a single round table, which is, I think, a reasonable way to start that process. Others may see it as a ongoing round table, which then is suggesting a framework, which is probably not what we're looking for. I think that's a good point. Thank you. I'm happy with a single round table, but I think the existing motion covered it, so I won't support it, but I'm happy for that to be the starting point. Councillor Lorentson: I'll close, because I do think everyone may be overthinking this. This is not a complicated process. In fact, it's already happened. So, I have sat with businesses, with the University of Sunshine Coast, with our director, Kim Rawlings, the Noosa Junction Association,

02:18:00 and we were all talking about the next step was to invite residents to come and join the meeting. It was possibly one of the most proactive, wonderful meeting. It was wonderfully chaired by John. Dr Lenny Banks from the University of Sunshine Coast, who has, like I said, written to me this morning that he wants to be involved in this process. I think we overthink and overcomplicate things. This is not maintaining the status quo. Getting people and community to sit side by side with each other is one small step, but a big step forward. We need to do something, Councillor. So, I hope everyone reconsiders their vote and supports this, because doing something is really, really better than doing nothing.

02:19:00 So, I hope everyone supports. See it's an important first step, and see what happens. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'll put the motion. Those in favour? Yes. Is Councillor Lorentson? Yes. Wegener, Phillips, Wilkie. Those opposed? Councillor Finzel, Wilson and Stockwell. The amendments carry. It becomes part of the motion. And I'm the only one who hasn't spoken, but I think enough words have been said. So, I shall pass back to Councillor Wilkie to close. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you, Councillors. I think collectively we've arrived at a motion that allows Council to engage proactively and strategically with all the stakeholders, including the residents. QPS, Office of Liquor and Gaming, Police, to future-proof this precinct. Rather than lock the Nurser Junction into any one management model,

02:20:00 the discussions can now proactively and collaboratively have regard to all relevant principles in all the models that came through the report. It's work that is well worth doing. Nothing is wasted. And it allows the Junction Traders Association and the residents to help set the future course according to their unique needs. This is not status quo. The Nurser Junction is not the same place as it was last week. Change is relentless. Nothing is status quo. And in terms of measuring success, the Nurser Junction Association will set their own KPIs, not the Council, as to how they are progressing. Thank you, Councillors. I think we've arrived at a great outcome. Yes. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I put the motion. Those in favour? Councillor Phillips: Yes. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: That's unanimous. Councillors, it'll surprise you to know that we've been going for over two hours and 20 minutes. So we have a 15-minute break. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you, Mr Shannon.

02:21:00 Thank you, Mr Shannon. And good job, guys. Speaker 5: Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you.

02:36:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay welcome back councillors, we move on to the item of the financial performance report

02:37:00 and welcome the director and the manager to the table and I presume the manager of finance Pauline Coles will be giving us an overview of the report. Welcome. Speaker 6: Good afternoon councillors. So the financial performance report for June 2025 shows the interim position at year end, however councillors should note that financial adjustments are still progressing as part of the end of the financial year process. A further report on council's final 2024-25 financial performance will be provided to council in November 2025 following the finalisation and independent audit of the financial statements in October. Thank you. Operating revenue for the year is $1.8 million above budget which is being driven by interest income of $2.8 million, sales of goods and services of $538,000 and other revenue of $652,000. This has been offset by lower than forecast revenue from rates of $567,000, fees and charges

8.1 FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE REPORT – JUN 2025 ¶

▶ 02:37:20· Carried 7-0 from council's minutes

02:38:00 of $1.4 million, lease income of $449,000 and operating grants. So this is the final report. In respect to operating grants it should be noted that council did receive a 50% prepayment of its 2026 financial assistance grant in June 2025. Operating expenditure is $5.4 million underspent with $931,000 of this underspend relating to employee costs. An estimate of the back pay payable in respect to council's in principle certified agreement offer has been accrued in these numbers. However these results are still subject again to year end adjustments and the final report of the year. Materials and services expenditure in under budget $3.6 million which relates to $1.4 relates to levy funded programs, $900,000 relating to grant funded programs, $200,000 relating

02:39:00 to commercial operations for waste and holiday parks and $1 million relating to general operations. Levy and grant funded underspend will be held in reserve for future utilisation in delivering those associated programs. A detailed breakdown of the materials and services spent has been provided in attachment forward to the report. Tourism and economic and economic development expenditure is currently shown below target. The quarterly legal cost summary shows legal and associated costs $126,000 over budget with the majority of this relating to development appeals. Also included is the quarterly consultancy expenditure summary which shows consultancy costs $194,000 over the full year period. Some of this overspend is due to timing as well as project budgets being worded against contract services rather than consultancy expense. It should be noted that these summaries only include operational consultancy costs and not consultancy costs relating to capital projects.

02:40:00 Overall Council's interim operating position at June 2025 is a surplus of $7.3 million with the main drivers of this being additional interest revenue, waste and holiday parks surplus operating positions, and the overall cost of the project. Employee cost timings and the timing of materials and service expenditure on grant and levy funded programs. As mentioned, further approvals and provisions and accounting adjustments will continue to be made over the coming months as the financial position for FY24-25 is finalised. Excluding disaster projects, Council has expended 59% of its full-year base capital program which equates to $27.3 million of the full-year $46 million capital program. With a further $48.5 million spent on curating funded disaster projects. Council's cash holdings at the end of June was $107.9 million with the $25.8 million of these funds invested in higher-yielding term deposits. This month's report also includes the quarterly dissection of Council's cash holding which

02:41:00 shows $49.2 million in restricted funds, $15.2 million relating to capital projects which have carried over from prior years as well as current years that will be used to fund projects that are still to be delivered. $29 million is equivalent to a three-month cash cover which is a requirement to ensure Council can meet its financial sustainability requirements. $7.7 million in working capital to pay for operations through to the next rating cycle run. And $6.9 million in unrestricted cash which is available to fund emergent or new capital works. Overall, Council has finished the financial year positively and is showing a surplus position. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Do we have questions? Mayor Wilkie: In the statement of financial position under non-current assets, property, plant and equipment value has increased from $1.23 billion at the end of 2024 to $1.38 billion,

02:42:00 which is an increase of $153 million. Could you explain what we've invested in to account for that increase in value of those assets under that category? Sure. Speaker 6: So just to clarify, so at the end of financial year 2024 it was $1.2 billion. It's actually currently $1.28 billion. The forecast was $1.3 billion or nearly $1.4 billion and that related to the QRA disaster program and the timing of that and the original forecast that we've seen. In terms of the financial year, we've invested $1.2 billion. In terms of the delivery of that, that's still ongoing. However, some of those forecasts are lower in terms of the actual spend required for those projects than what we're seeing, essentially. Mayor Wilkie: So the investment in the roads and infrastructure, that's accounted for under property? Speaker 6: Property, plant and equipment.

02:43:00 Mayor Wilkie: Correct. Yes. Speaker 6: Roads, bridges. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So it's all assets other than the natural assets, is it? Speaker 6: Correct. That is correct. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you. Are there any financial purchases of plant and equipment that account for that increase? Speaker 6: There's a circa, I think, we've spent about, yeah, about $4 million. I think we've actually expended in this year about nearly $3 million. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Just a question to follow on. So as assets depreciate, the value goes down. As we do upgrades and we do renewals, it goes back up. Do you think that's a good thing? Yeah. So when we say it's overall increasing, that means it's not just $8 billion, $800,000 or whatever, it's actually a lot more that work has been done to get to that net positive figure. Is that right? Speaker 6: Correct. Council should also note we also undertake regular revaluations to ensure that our assets

02:44:00 are maintained at fair value so that we can replace them and that we're essentially generating sufficient cash so that we can renew our assets and maintain those for the community. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. And Councillor Lorentson. Councillor Lorentson: The ferry revenue seems that it's quite below budget, like $432,000, so I sort of want to unpack that and try and sort of understand why the revenue is down and how the new operators are performing. Speaker 6: I can't speak to the operators, but I can. Speaker 4: I'm happy to take all those questions through the Chair. There has been an overall reduction in the ferry revenue. We've seen significant numbers, almost to the, we were just doing the final tally-up for the year, of about 20% less than the previous year, so there has been an overall reduction, largely as a result of cyclone Alfred. You'll be aware in March we had a substantial impact with a ferry that's actually not operating

02:45:00 for an extended period of time, and that's sort of followed through to the following months. We haven't had the numbers coming through, but overall in the year there's been significant reduction. There's been an overall reduction in the ferry revenue from passengers heading across the ferry compared to the previous year. Councillor Lorentson: Can I request, and I know that it's getting late in the day, but can I request a discussion? Yeah. Or a report, perhaps? Yeah. Come back to Council. I'd really love to understand community sentiment around the new ferry operators and how they're going. Yeah. That'd be great. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay. And another question here. Councillor Lorentson: Similar question in terms of local laws revenue. Again, significantly below budget. $418,300 below budget. I'm linking this with perhaps, not perhaps, because of industrial dispute. Speaker 6: So it largely would have been due to protected action that was occurring, as well as you

02:46:00 would have seen that in some of our other areas, like the natural areas as well, some of the more outdoors areas, in terms of either delivery of the ferry, or the delivery of revenue-generating items, or delivery of the expenditure and impact maintenance. Councillor Lorentson: And in terms of, you know, the new processes, again, in collecting infringements, our camera cars. We'll... Car. Car. Sorry. Camera car. So, again, probably a discussion, a workshop, or a report, again, maybe coming back to Council. I would love to understand the effectiveness. If that's equated to... Yeah. If that's equated to more infringements, less infringements, the pros and cons of using technology. Sure. That would be great. Thank you. Another question, and I'll make this brief. Tourism NUSA agreement. And maybe a question to the CEO. When can we expect to see the final agreement with Tourism NUSA, including the new KPIs?

02:47:00 And can we also get an idea or an update on the roadmap? Sure. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, we're dealing with a report on finances. Yep. That's a separate item. It's not relevant. Councillor Lorentson: Yeah. Speaker 3: I might be able to talk to you about it offline, if you like. Councillor Lorentson: No worries. I appreciate that. Okay. I've got a whole bunch of questions that I'll just... I think everything else I can take offline. Thank you very much, guys. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay. Any other questions? I'd like to move the staff recommendation. Councillor Wilson. Second. Councillor Phillips. Second. Councillor Wilson. Councillor Wilson: Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Councillor Wilson: Thank you. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Anyone else wish to speak to the motion? Do you want to argue with yourself in the close? Okay, I put the motion. Those in favour?

02:48:00 That's unanimous. Thank you. We move on to... Thank you. While we're working. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: We now have the next item, which is the Operational Plan 2526. Is that what you're talking to? I am talking to that. Speaker 3: Thank you, Mr Chair. The Executive Officer is on leave this week, so I'll speak to it. And I'll just go through the Executive Summary initially and then give a couple more points. The Local Government Regulation 2012 Section 174 requires that a local government prepare and adopt an annual operational report, or plan, sorry, for each financial year consistent with its annual budget and to progress the implementation of the five-year corporate plan. The Garton Eastern Council Operational Plan 2526. It's structured to align with the five themes of the Council's Corporate Plan 2328, and identifies the significant initiatives and key operational services that will support the delivery of the strategic objectives.

8.2 OPERATIONAL PLAN 2025-2026 ¶

▶ 02:48:23· Carried 7-0 from council's minutes

02:49:00 The operational plan has been developed in parallel with the annual budget with careful consideration of Council's long-term financial sustainability policy and objectives, the organisation's delivery capacity, established service standards, and community expectations. Just some key points. There are 98 initiatives on this plan. Last year there were 107, so we've dropped a few, but this is in keeping with our plan to deliver what we've started, but it's also, the operational plan, whilst it's an annual plan, it relates to the five-year corporate plan, so it's, there are some things that carry through, a number of things that carry through over more than just one year. So, I think it's a good thing. It's still an ambitious undertaking, and there are two new policies or plans and strategies, integrated water catchment management plan for Burgess Creek, including in response to

02:50:00 the secured funding, and the event strategy included as part of the ongoing review of arrangements with Tourism Noosa, are the two key new ones. This was normally in the past done at the same time as the budget was delivered, but what we've done this year is, because we wanted to make sure that we were able to deliver and make sure that the budget was delivered, if there were any changes to the budget before we presented this, so the budget was two weeks ago as we know, and this operation plan relates strictly to the budget for the year of things that we can deliver. Just the other piece to understand is that we have the corporate plan as our overarching framework and parameters that we work through for the five years as an approved plan. Underneath that is our annual operational plan. And underneath that is the branch plans, which relate to the operational plan. So there may be some things in this operational plan that people look at and go, hang on, what about? And they generally will get picked up in the branch plan as opposed to the operational

02:51:00 plan. So I put this to you as a, and we have some of the directors here as well, if there's anything that you want to discuss or ask questions about, but I put it to you as a recommended for acceptance. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Do we have any questions, councillors? Director Walsh: Councillor Lorentson? I just know there's a note on the screen that's shut down. I mean, that's all right. I just don't know if you've got that. Thank you. Councillor Lorentson: In terms of the performance measures, I'm imagining there's more specific details than that just provided in the report, or are the performance measures as stated that, for example, we're going to have to go back and look at some of the performance measures that have been written indicating that flora and fauna species remain viable. They seem like really burned.

02:52:00 Yes. So I'm imagining underneath this there's another layer, more specific KPIs. Speaker 3: So we report to you on a quarterly basis with those, and then on an annual basis for the whole as well. So there's a quarterly and then an annual report against this, and it comes in the form of comments as opposed to just ticks, red, yellow, green, dots, whatever it may be. So we give more information as it goes through, through each quarter, and you've got the opportunity then to question the advancement, if it's on track, if it's delayed, and the reasons why. Councillor Lorentson: And my other question, and I've got a lot more, but I'm only going to ask two. Corporate performance measures versus community performance measures. So do we capture both in this planning? Or are they two separate documents? And if they are, can we look at, you know, down the track, just sort of capture lived experience? So, yep, we've maintained our parks, but does that equal community being satisfied

02:53:00 with parks, that they're accessible, clean, maintained to a level that's suitable for them? Speaker 3: Hmm. Well, I guess that's done through... Mayor Wilkie: Community satisfaction survey. Speaker 3: Community satisfaction survey, which we do, and we've just undertaken that. So those results are being analysed as we speak. But also, I guess, from our own... You know, we're not a huge shire, so we're out and about, and we do hear and we see, and we get plenty of feedback. No question of that. So we understand exactly where we, you know, I think where we're lacking, where we're not. But, yeah, we also operate against our service levels. There are agreed service levels as long as you meet those levels, and that's what we've proposed, that's what we've agreed, and that's what we're aiming to deliver against. Councillor Lorentson: Does that answer your question? It does. Is there opportunity for the two measures to be captured at the same time?

02:54:00 Speaker 3: Well, I guess... I guess that comes to... It's difficult to do because of... You know, to do a survey, you do it once a year, once every two or three years sometimes. And to capture all that information, because this is very broad, it just shows the extent to what we do as an organisation. To try to capture all of those and get feedback on all of those would be extremely difficult. I think what we could do, and I think this is something that councillors have mentioned before, is to look at it from an outcome point of view. What is the outcome that we've achieved? Rather than just the fact that we've nearly okayed the eyes and we've, you know, we've picked up the bins as soon as... Over the course of a week or a month or a year. But what's the outcome of that is that we have a clean and healthy Shire. So I get what you're saying there, so maybe... Councillor Lorentson: I want to take a little bit more of a twist though, Larry. So not we've got a clean and healthy Shire, but have we made life better and safer

02:55:00 and more inclusive for people that are paying rates to maintain those premises? So mine is more capturing how residents feel about the services, so that's... Speaker 3: It is our livability, but I guess that's a... It's a bit of a... Tricky one. Tricky one, and an entanglement where we go in, because not everybody's going to be, you know... Satisfied. Satisfied. Because their expectations are different. Councillor Lorentson: Kerri is in here. Speaker 3: Kerri, putting it up as well. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Kerri, have you got a response to that question? Speaker 5: Hello, I just thought I would add to that, yes. So at the moment, councillors, the way that we're measuring... I guess not so much community performance, but community perspective is... On their communities is through both our livability survey and our community satisfaction survey. So that's... Which once rolled out, it will be alternate years, so we should be getting survey data

02:56:00 each year on our community's perspective. Councillor Finzel: Fantastic. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Finzel. Councillor Finzel: Yeah, following on from that, and I've raised it on several occasions around... That's all good, the social aspect of it. I'm interested in the economic impacts, given with the increased weather events, with... It's come up before. How do you envisage moving forward? That we're going to be more efficient in the economic impacts of these increased weather events, which take our staff away from maintaining parks and gardens, and moving them to working in other spaces that need immediate attention and balancing books, given the increase of the weather events? Speaker 3: Oh, yeah. I've got to say, I think we do a pretty good job of it already, to be honest. Yeah, because it's difficult, and you don't know when they're going to happen, so I can't have a whole team of people sitting there with a lot of time on their hands, really, and waiting for an impact or a disaster, so we have to deal with it as we can, and I think

02:57:00 we do do a good job. We're lucky that we're funded well, and we've got a great relationship with QRA and the federal government, in terms of funding these recoveries. So I think it's one of those ones where you've just got to plan for it, but you hope it doesn't happen, and then, you know, if it does happen, you've got to then deal with it. Well, I think we do a very good job of that at QRA. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Just to clarify, generally, our staff working in immediate post-disaster recovery, even before the recovery stage, that is something we claim, so we'd have the economic impact of that. What we probably don't do overtly is to say, well, this program, is this thing going to start behind because of that? And that might be something we look at, is what was, because having disasters is going to become more the business as usual, so measuring the impact on delayed achievement of other

02:58:00 programs might be something we think about in the future. Yeah. Director Walsh: To the Chair, I could also note that, for instance, after the wet weather event in late March, we didn't have the capacity to do the reactive grading program, so it was contracting that. So I think we've learned a lot from that. And I also know that some of our core service deliverables, such as mowing and cleaning toilets, is already contracted out, and that provides us with tremendous scope to, you know, really deliver upon community expectations, you know, outside of staff, staff reaction to various scenarios. Councillor Wegener: Okay.

02:59:00 Other questions? Yeah, it's a winner. So, on the other, the flip side is being, you know, you've got a lot of, you know, looking forward and having plans ready to go, but when funding comes, you take that out and say you're ready, you know, kind of that proactive thinking. Is that sort of the opposite side of the operational plan, which is, you know, that forward thinking, getting, looking down the track of projects that may or may not happen with funding appropriation or with other things? Speaker 3: Well, I think, again, that's probably what Shaun was alluding to, is this thing, is that we've just come off the back of a black mountain, or that floods of 22, and we were lucky with the cyclone, but a couple of weeks after that, when we got the flooding event, then we were able to activate our external providers very, very quickly and have that in place, and through the, you know, through the process that we put forward here, able to get that, those contractors up and running quicker than you'd ordinarily do. Because, you know, we didn't have to go through all the hoops.

03:00:00 We were able to, we had them on our books, basically, so we had them ready to go, and we're able to now deliver another $20 odd million worth of activity very quickly. So, yeah, we're planning that, and we've now got a good relationship with these external groups that we can activate, you know, as needed. I think that's a good thing. Also, to support what Shaun was just saying is, the good thing with the QRA is that, you know, when we do go out, outsource it, it's not, it's, you know, what we would normally do as a small council, what we would do is try to use our own resources, our own people to deliver stuff, but if we know we've got funding from external, then we can afford to go and engage external contractors to deliver and help us. Councillor Wegener: That's right. There's a target date, or a deadline. Yeah, there is. Speaker 3: But it's also, you know, it's a big amount of money, so if we had to go and do $20 million worth of work ourselves with our own people, that's $20 million that we'd have to redirect

03:01:00 our staff to deliver, and then they can't do the stuff that they normally do. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay. Moved, Councillor Wilkie. Seconded, Councillor Wegener. Councillor Wilkie. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you. I've written a few notes on this because it's an important document. The Noosa Council Operational Plan is the Councillor-endorsed blueprint of how Noosa Council directs its resources over the financial year. It identifies the key projects and actions aligned with the corporate plan, which itself is approved by Councillors after community consultation. Council staff implement these actions under delegation, and the document sets the parameters for the recommendations staff bring to Council meetings for further Council endorsement. The operational plan also progresses Councillor-endorsed strategies and plans, including the Environment Strategy, Housing Strategy, Social Strategy, Transport Strategy, and the Noosa Plan 2020, all of which were drafted taking on board community input after extensive consultation. The operational plan outlines last year's initiatives and projects that will continue

03:02:00 into this financial year, and the proposed Capital Works Program. The CEO will report on progress of the 98 operational plan initiatives quarterly, and the Councilers and the community get a snapshot of the immense workload this small Council delivers upon and how each action is progressing. Key performance indicators are reported to Council by the CEO on the quarterly basis. The CEO also reports annually on the progress of the corporate plan. There are also periodic subject matter reports to Council providing in-depth reviews on specific subjects. Other regular reports are provided, such as the monthly financial performance reports, which show how Council is tracking according to budget. Any changes in funding allocations are reported to Council as part of the budget review process, which occurs several times a year. Progress on the delivery of the Capital Works Program is reported to Council quarterly. To strengthen oversight and management, Council has also established a Capital Works Executive, which Councillor Lorentson and Chairs and Councillor Wilson and I are also members.

03:03:00 Valued at $51 million, it highlights this year's Capital Works Program, focusing on core services and community services is the Doonella Bridge Renewal at Tewantin, the Shirewide Road Resill Program, the Shirewide Pathway Upgrades Program, Shirewide Gravel Road Resheeting, upgrades to the Noosa Aquatic Centre, Shirewide Noosa Trail Network Upgrades, Affordable and Social Housing Project Site Preparation and Subdivision at Cooroy, the Noosa Coastal Pathway and Cycle Street at Bridgian, the Shirewide Wayfinding Signage Project, Exterior Refurbishment of the Jade, Expansion of the Sports Complex at Cooroy, Shirewide Park Furniture and Shelter Renewals, Renewal of Pioneer Park Playground at Cooran, Stamford Top of Park Amenities Block Renewal at Pomona, Mirindal Street Amenities Block Renewal at Tewantin, and the Main Beach

03:04:00 Seawall Renewal Design at Noosa Heads. Under the theme of Environment, we will continue to monitor and improve the health of waterways and natural areas in the Shire. Implement the Noosaville Foreshore Infrastructure Master Plan, requiring grant funding of up to $10 million. Implement the Eastern Beaches Foreshore Reserves Management Plans with public education to the fore and the Shirewide Encroachment Policy. Complete the Noosa River Catchment Action Plan within the Resilient Rivers Initiative Framework. Ensure all Council capital civil and maintenance works are delivered in accordance with best environmental practice. And one of the key measurable outcomes under the Environment is that by 2028, 48% of all the land in Noosa is managed for its environmental values. Under the theme of Livability, we will continue to implement the Noosa Housing Strategy with a focus on partnering with the State and community housing providers and industry to deliver affordable housing. Investigate the feasibility of affordable housing over Council-owned car parks. Continue to implement and monitor Queensland's first and only short-stay letting local law

03:05:00 to manage the impacts of short-stay letting and manage illegal camping. Progress design development of the Beckman Road duplication in collaboration with the State Government. Undertake investigations into the Croy and Shire Transit Hubs to improve public transport in the Shire for residents and visitors. Complete investigations into the Noosa River Catchment and Noosa Woods jetty as a potential ferry stop location as a means of improving public transport. Undertake staged implementation of master plans for the Croy and Noosa District sports complexes to improve sport and recreation facilities and increase participation in sports. Continue planning for the future of the Noosa Leisure Centre and Noosa Aquatic Centre to ensure the community needs are met and increase the amount of social and affordable housing in Noosa. That is immeasurable. Progress on these will be measured through community liveability survey ratings through the Liveability Survey. Under the theme of Prosperity we

03:06:00 will progress the Noosaville Resource Recovery Area Waste Master Plan as funding becomes available for new waste diversion facilities and innovative waste practices such as composting and biochar. We will audit Council-owned land parcels such as the Garra Street Croy and progress planning of a circular economy precinct as part of the Renewal Energy Hub at the Noosa Waste and Resource Recovery Centre. Complete stage four of the proposed new regional art gallery including investigating funding options. Under the theme of Future we will continue to engage with our traditional owners and ensure cultural heritage and indigenous values are incorporated into key projects. Complete the Destination Management Plan and begin delivering key actions, programs and partnerships. We will review and manage the Tourism Noosa Partnership Agreement to align with the Destination Management Plan. We will work with local service providers to support Noosa's youth. Trial a new pilot community engagement panel which have already in the process of being convened to further enhance

03:07:00 our community engagement processes. We will deliver disaster preparedness, resilience and recovery activities to support the broader community. We will progress the development of a program of revenue diversification and a strategic investment approach for alternative funding streams for Council to reduce our reliance on rates revenue. We will increase Council and community awareness and preparedness for climate change and extreme weather events. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: On the theme of excellence we will implement a customer experience program to improve responses Mayor Wilkie: to customer requests. We will continue to drive emissions reductions and cost savings for Council through implementation of the Emissions Reduction Program including solar batteries, lighting upgrades, energy waste, fleet monitoring, electrification and fleet transition as well as advancing the large-scale solar feasibility study at the Noosa Waste and Resource Recovery Centre. Progress investigations into solutions for staff workplace accommodation. This will

03:08:00 be measured against increased level of community satisfaction with Council services compared to previous survey results in the Community Satisfaction Survey. This was just a small snapshot of the community and Council endorsed actions that are planned to be funded and delivered by the 2025-26 budget. I commend the staff of the small but hard-working Council who will be implementing it and the Councillors who have improved it. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Other Councillors, is there anything you missed? Probably. Councillor Lorentson. Councillor Lorentson: I also want to acknowledge and thank the staff for their diligence and commitment to preparing this year's operational plan and not just their diligence for the work that they undertake in delivering the plan. It reflects a significant body of work and a deep commitment to delivering to our community. I'm going to sort of just talk a little bit about the questions

03:09:00 that I asked the CEO and what I would like to see in the future and it's something I hope we can further discuss and that's how we can continue to elevate accountability, not just as a procedural step or as a corporate performance measure but as a lived principle embedded in everything we do. We have robust performance measures in place and as Council Mayor Wilkie mentioned, we've got our community satisfaction and our livability surveys and they offer meaningful insights. Yet there's an opportunity here still to ask whether those measures fully reflect our community's experiences and priorities. Are we truly capturing how residents feel about the services and infrastructure that we deliver? Can we measure satisfaction, inclusion and trust, not just through inputs and completion rates? And are our most vulnerable

03:10:00 voices being heard in how we define success? As we move forward, I'd like to explore the future and discuss the development of maybe something like a community-facing performance tool, a dashboard that combines and reflects our community survey, our KPIs and reflects lived experience, not just internal efficiencies. Something that asks, have we made life better? Have we made life safer? And have we made life fairer for the people of Noosa? And most importantly, do our current priorities reflect the needs of the people of Noosa? And what do our communities align with our communities' priorities? And simply, have we got it right? So I hope we can discuss and work on this together. Thank you to the staff. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Who's wished to talk? Council, Wilkie Wilkie, do you wish to close?

03:11:00 Mayor Wilkie: Thank you, Mr Chair. Look, of course, the Council operates on the principle of continuous improvement, and one of those is the convening of the deliberative community development engagement panel, which reflects the demographic profile of Noosa. We'll be asked specific questions on some of the plans as we go forward. It's a way of reaching elements of the demographic that we don't normally get, traditionally attract, where we just rely on your, say, surveys or pop-ups. So that's an example of how we're continually trying to improve the reach of the community. And things about safe, are we living in a safe, inclusive and connected community, which are core principles for many of the plans. They're reflected in the liveability surveys and the questions that are asked in that. So we'll be looking with interest as to the results of those surveys, Mr CEO. Yes, I know all councillors are very interested in them. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay. I put the motion. Those in favour? And Councillor Phillips?

03:12:00 Councillor Phillips: Yes. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: That's unanimous. We now move on to the third item in this section of the agenda, which is the 2025 LGHU conference. Conference motions and attendance. Mayor Wilkie: Mr CEO. Speaker 3: Yes. Okay. So the LGHU, the Local Government Association of Queensland, has its annual conference. And at the forum, councils are at liberty to raise notices of motion to be then debated and or voted on on the floor to take forward through to the next meeting, through to the bodies that they're guided towards, and generally the State Government. What we've provided here is four LGHU motions. And what we need to know is to get the endorsement of council on each of those four. So I think we could work through each one of those separately, and then get the endorsement on all, on the ones that are accepted, which we will then

8.3 2025 LGAQ CONFERENCE MOTIONS & ATTENDANCE ¶

▶ 03:12:27· Carried 7-0 · 1 division from council's minutes

03:13:00 take forward to the LGHU annual conference. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Question? Councillor Wilson: I have a question. For part B of the recommendation, we've actually got approval from the mayor and to council and to attend the conference under mandatory funding. We haven't actually had a conversation about that yet. So what's the process to actually determine who, the consistency of that? I don't know. I don't think we should discuss that, because I don't know. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So you're asking the CEO? Speaker 3: Generally, it's associated with who takes the, or which motions go through, because the people who put those up tend to be the delegates, and the voting delegates at the time.

03:14:00 But I think that's something... Mayor Wilkie: Pardon? It's not policy. Speaker 3: It's the process, though. It's been... I don't know. Is it policy? I don't know. I don't understand myself. No. Anyway, I think this is something that we can discuss after this meeting. Yeah. No, that's right. Councillor Wilson: Yeah, I'd like to see some rotation. I think the council's getting at this. Mayor Wilkie: I'd like to suggest that we won't make a decision on that aspect today. Yeah. We'll have a discussion between the two meetings, and by the ordinary meeting on Thursday night, we'll have arrived at some delegates. Councillor Lorentson: Okay. Mayor Wilkie: Yeah. Councillor Lorentson: And I'll note also, in the spirit of equity, I agree with Councillor Wilson, and I'm happy to step away from this, the mandatory spending at least. Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: Can I move a motion? You can. Yeah. It's coming. Yeah. So basically, it's the motion as... It's the motion as... The recommendation as provided...

03:15:00 Councillor Lorentson: We won't be able to see you all on screen, sorry. Mayor Wilkie: Go back to the start of that, please, Pat. Could you change that to three motions instead of four motions? Yes. In A, the following three motions? Yes. Yep. So the first motion being investment in New South Wales. Motion proposed motion to increase state government investment in community dispute resolution and motion 3 being trial of non-lethal shark mitigation measures during whale migration season with the exemption of lobbying the federal government for urgent action on plastic pollution.

03:16:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Motion. Do we have a seconder? Councillor Wegener is second. Councillor Wilkie. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you. I thank all councillors who have worked on putting these motions together and the attendance of all councillors in refining them during workshops. The reason why the National Plastics Plan draft motion, I've omitted that, because it it's a very roundabout way of getting action on something that's

03:17:00 happening already. The National Plastics Plan has been in place for five or six years and the motion that was there calls would have required us to go to the local government association conference, get endorsement from the floor that required the local government association to then lobby the state government, to then lobby the federal government, to accelerate implementation of the National Plastics Plan roadmap. It's a very roundabout way to get something to happen. I spoke to the president of the LGAQ yesterday who said that he already sits on the National Environmental Ministerial Council where these issues are raised and all Noosa council would need to do is write a letter to the LGAQ policy executive and they'd be progressing that at the national level. So this is all about effective advocacy, getting results in the quickest way and most effective

03:18:00 way possible. And that's through writing directly to the LGAQ and they can effect this change and accelerate something that's happening already at a federal level without going through the process of having a delegation argued on the floor, get the floor to endorse the LGAQ, to lobby the state government, to lobby the federal government. The LGAQ can go straight to the feds and get the results. The other sticking point is the involvement in that the Queensland government in that chain of advocacy, proposed chain of advocacy, because under the National Plastics Plan roadmap it mentions that at the 10th of December 2024 environmental ministers meeting, all ministers except Queensland's, except the new Queensland minister, agreed to basically endorse this national roadmap and work together on it and have coordinated interventions. So it's a very consistent action. So we don't even know if the Queensland government will be on board

03:19:00 with the national roadmap, the new Queensland government is on board with the national roadmap. So I'm proposing that we leave that out as far as a motion because there's over 100 motions that go to the LGAQ conference. We write directly to the LGAQ president who has agreed to raise it at the National Environmental and Ministerial Council and raise it at the next policy executive without having to go through the rigmarole of having that endorsed on the floor. It's about effective advocacy, effective use of resources and getting things done in the most efficient way. And as we said, the National Plastics Plan is happening at the national level already. And if we're just going to be effective at this just to ask them to accelerate action on it, that can be done by other means. It's not like we're asking them to introduce a new policy which would require more resourcing. It's just asking the LGAQ to make sure that this policy is pushed along at a federal level.

03:20:00 Otherwise, and motion three, I support the inclusion of that because it's consistent with and is a good complement to a motion, a mayoral minute, I'm hoping I can get councillors support for on Thursday night, where we put forward Noosa Shire as a potential trial, ask that Noosa Shire be considered as a potential trial area for the LGAQ. Knowing that this is a non-lethal, evidence based shark mitigation strategies, as recommended in the KPMG report on the Shark Control Program and that is always linked with education and community consultation. So it's a complement to that. This actually will test whether other coastal councils have appetite for that sort of thing as well. So it's worth taking to the local government conference to see if there is appetite for that.

03:21:00 Councillor Finzel: I just have a question. I would have liked to have seen this sort of debate, but I don't know why you didn't let us do that, because having been someone that's attended a number of these, I find a really important element is actually the debate on the floor, because it actually, you can learn from what other councils render to the debate and things like that. Mayor Wilkie: Is this a question to me, Councillor? Councillor Finzel: Yes, it is. So I'm wondering why you just didn't allow us to proceed before and not have opportunity to discuss it further around the table before you just removed it. Mayor Wilkie: Well, this is a perfect opportunity to discuss it. This is why I've drawn attention. It wasn't one of those ones that came to our workshops. It was added later. So this is

03:22:00 our first opportunity to actually debate it in an open session. Councillor Lorentson: Through the Chair, that's actually not correct. The motion was circulated some time ago, and we didn't have time at Council discussion forum to discuss it. Mayor Wilkie: Yeah, that's the point I'm making. Councillor Lorentson: And it was circulated early and went through the due process, reviewed by Council officers and the CEO, and was approved. Mayor Wilkie: I'm answering the question, Councillor Finzel. We had two workshops set aside to discuss these proposed motions. This was circulated via email. So I know councillors didn't, compared to what we can do in a councillor workshop, looking at a motion via email is not ideal. And so we haven't had a full opportunity to test the robustness of it. And as, when I looked into it in my own time, I discovered that the LGAQ president said, we don't need

03:23:00 a motion for that sort of, that sort of issue, because they've got access at the federal level already on these sort of things at the Environmental and Ministerial Council. Councillor Lorentson: Can I ask a question to the Mayor? Yes. You returned from your holiday today. Yep. When did you call the LGAQ president and ask this question? Mayor Wilkie: I had contacted him yesterday afternoon. Councillor Lorentson: Yesterday afternoon, specifically on that motion. Yes. And can I ask why? Mayor Wilkie: Because it's my job to apply a bit of rigour to all these draft motions about which ones will stand up, which ones are necessary, which ones are in good use of our time, which ones, what is the most effective advocacy for each one. Councillor Lorentson: And, yeah. Through the Chair, can I ask a question to the CEO? My understanding, I think, is that, having gone to five years in a row, every ELGA conference, every LGAQ conference,

03:24:00 I've also submitted motions for five years in a row, twice a year, on issues that are important to this community. And I've had, just recently, one of the motions knocked back by the LGAQ and ELGA. Your experience, CEO, if this motion was adopted by the LGAQ and the LGAQ, what would you say was accepted? Would you have any problem with it, understanding that? Mayor Wilkie: Point of order. We don't drag an officer into a political debate. Councillor Lorentson: Okay. Through the Chair, my question is, can you explain the process? What happens once the motion is ratified at Council level? What happens next? Does it automatically get accepted as a motion for these conferences? Speaker 3: No, it still has another process to go through, through the LGAQ, before it gets accepted to go into the LGAQ.

03:25:00 Okay. So it's still another step. But, to be honest, in terms of this debate, or this process right now, the Mayor has put up a motion, but you're more than entitled to put it back in, if you want the support of your council and councillors, you're more than entitled to put it back in and debate it. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you. I'd like to move an amendment, please. Certainly. Thank you. Thank you. Sorry, if I can. Councillor Finzel: I'm happy to second the debate. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you. I'd like to move an amendment to reinstate my motion.

03:26:00 I'm happy to second the debate. This is urgent action on plastic pollution, a call for acceleration of the National Plastics Plan and Roadmap that the Local Government Association of Queensland calls on the Queensland Government to advocate to the Australian Government for the expedited implementation and resourcing of the National Plastics Plans and National Packaging Roadmap and to work in partnership with local governments to address the escalating environmental and financial impacts of plastic pollution. I do this because I found out today at 12 o'clock through an email that the Mayor decided to personally call the LGAQ to discuss my decision. I have worked through, spent considerable time on, had it reviewed by staff who provided

03:27:00 their feedback and input which I incorporated and have gone through the proper process. So, am I a little bit disappointed? Absolutely. It seems to me, out of the ordinary, that the Mayor made this phone call to discuss the LGAQ, specifically this LGAQ motion with the President. It seems out of the ordinary and to me raises questions about process. I believe it's important for this motion to go through and allow the LGAQ to make the decision whether or not it's relevant or not. And for the reasons that the Mayor actually stated, the fact that Queensland has not agreed to come on board with the National Plastics Plan. That's the exact reason that this motion should be put up there.

03:28:00 When you bring a motion, when a motion is ratified by Council, it becomes a formal document, a formal record of our commitment to an issue. So, on the worse side of it, it doesn't even get accepted by LGAQ, at a minimum, we will have a formal record that this Council thinks plastic pollution is not relevant. A formal motion also raises the visibility of this issue and over the last 12 months we have had microplastics thrown all over our beaches. We know that this is compounding and becoming an issue for our waste and our landfills.

03:29:00 So again, formal motion whether it gets supported or not supported by the LGAQ raises the visibility of this crisis. And once you raise the visibility of the issue, whether it's through local council or whether through the LGAQ. It makes it more likely that that issue will be prioritised. The more attention we give to this motion, the higher the chance that it's going to be addressed effectively. Again, I'm still taken back that this is actually happening. I'm still sitting back thinking, why would you not be supporting something so important? We have an opportunity to amplify the voices of our community. This is, we are different by nature and we have to walk the talk. We have to make a noise when things matter to this community.

03:30:00 We have the opportunity again to amplify our voices by saying not just New South Council thinks this is an important issue, that 77 other councils in Queensland think it's also an important issue. That's the whole purpose of advocacy. That's why we spend time and effort. You know, us writing to the LGAQ, that's one council. I want 77 councils to say, we agree with you. This is not good enough Queensland. Jump on board. You guys are too relaxed. And we need to do something about it. So, you can hear in my voice, like I said, I didn't expect this. I didn't expect this to happen. Maybe I have a different idea of leadership. I have a different idea of how things should work. But I know how much effort and time and passion is involved in and courage is involved in

03:31:00 putting these motions together. And I would expect at a minimum support from our leaders and staff, supporting councillors who take the effort and time to put these motions together. Thank you. Thank you. Not cutting them back and telling them it can't be done. So, I hope everyone can support the amendment in front of us because it's the right thing to do. And even if it gets rejected at the LGAQ board, we are still making a noise about something that's important. We're calling it out. And that's action. That's how change happens. By prioritising important things. And that's how change happens. Even if we know it may not get put up. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: That's awesome.

03:32:00 Councillor Wilson: First question. The LGAQ motions protocol said that motions should not relate to a matter considered at a previous annual conference in the last five years to avoid duplication. Does anyone know of a discussion raised in the last five years? Mayor Wilkie: I'm pretty sure it has been. Support for the National Plastics Plan. Yes. That's why the LGAQ president has an ongoing discussion about this at national level. Councillor Lorentson: So that could be a reason it gets rejected. That's right. So, for instance, I had a motion on emergency, a medical reserve, an emergency medical reserve for the Australian Local Government Association to support the doctors that I'd spoken to here in Noosa. That got rejected. So, if it's something that needs to be done, it needs to be done, it needs to be done, and if it's something that's already been raised over the last five years, the board will reject it. That's part of the process. I couldn't find it anywhere. I couldn't find it either.

03:33:00 But that's part of that process. Mayor Wilkie: But the question to the CEO is, the purpose of this report and this item on the agenda is for the Noosa Council to decide which items it supports. Yes. So it's perfectly legitimate to question any of these motions. Yes. I might not be the only one who has other questions. Director Walsh: Yeah. Mayor Wilkie: Yeah. Speaker 3: It's the decision of the council. Yeah. These motions are the decision of the council to go through. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you. Can I ask, through the CEO, I have requested a review and feedback on this motion, and revised the motion quite a few times after receiving feedback from Director Kim Rawlings and her staff, Jordan and Cheyenne, and to yourself. Do you have any comments on that? Is that also due process? If there was any reluctance? And I actually had two other motions which, on request by the staff, it was advised they weren't appropriate or relevant, and they weren't advised or recommended to progress.

03:34:00 So can I ask, did, from your information, did the staff have any issues with the motion that I put forward? Speaker 3: To the best of our knowledge, we've dealt with this one. We've dealt with this one. This is probably a new knowledge that we're not aware of, so. Same. 12 o'clock today. That's for you to take forward, but that's okay. We've done our piece, to the best of our knowledge. And then it's up to council to debate and decide whether the award is correct. Thank you very much. Yes, I'll come to it. Councillor Finzel: Is there opportunity, given what was raised by the council at Wilson, which I also was aware of as I reached out to the LGAQ, with the five, you know, has it been raised within the last five years? It seems like we haven't got a definitive answer for that. Before the meeting, can, I don't know who does it, the Mayor perhaps? I'm not sure. To actually find out, has it been before the LGAQ?

03:35:00 Before. Within that five, within the last five years? Or is it because it might have been six years ago and it's already up there? We don't know. So it's really hard to, you know, debate that if we haven't got, like, what the facts are. Mayor Wilkie: If I remember rightly, there's something on plastics almost every year. At the conference. Councillor Finzel: So, there might be opportunity, though, that you could reword this to make it, like, perhaps more specific. Yeah, a change. It's been raised before, for example, like construction of boat ramps. Yeah. As we know, how that all ended up on our beaches because of construction of that. I mean, maybe if that's the case, that we need something more specific. At least that gives Council and Monastir the opportunity to, you know, make it perhaps more specific so it fits the guidelines. Councillor Lorentson: Can I ask, can I ask the question, if that's the case, would every other motion that's been put forward by other Councillors have to be, do we ask the same question with every

03:36:00 one of them? Because I know there's been similar motions, because I've attended five years in a row, on all the motions that's in front of us. I just think we're... Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay. I don't think we can have an answer to that question. I think it would be up to whoever is interested to find out. But we go back to addressing the amendment, which was in relation to the reinclusion of that motion. So, at this stage, Councillor Lorentson has spoken. Councillor Wegener: Councillor Wegener. You all know that I really dislike micromanaging. And Councillor Lorentson has put a lot into this motion. Let it go in. I support it going in, because if it's... She put a lot of work into it. We've all supported it overall. And, you know, I don't know. It's the LGAQ.

03:37:00 Well, they can make a decision on it. But I don't think... I don't think we should stop it after it has momentum here. And a lot of work has gone into it. I don't like to micromanage. Mayor Wilkie: I'll rebut that. I think this is micromanaging. This is stating the obvious. All it's doing is asking the federal government to get on with the National Plastics Plan. And if we're interested in getting an outcome, genuinely interested in getting an outcome, through the most effective means of advocacy, we've got a pathway directly through the LGAQ that doesn't need to go through a conference. All these things can be achieved through another means. I'm not saying don't do it. I'm saying it can be done by a more effective means. This is about effective use of resources and time. Councillor Lorentson: Can I ask... I haven't finished speaking. Mayor Wilkie: I agree with what's in the National Plastics Plan and the roadmap.

03:38:00 I agree. We should get on with it. It's a motherhood statement. That's what I'm saying. It's not a motion that brings about... Like the other ones, other motions talk about real change, real advocacy that will bring about something that's not happening currently. This is already underway. And we can give the Federal Government a no. But we can tell the community we're doing it through a press release or whatever, or through reporting on this meeting, that we want greater action at the Federal level, that we want the LGAQ. And the LGAQ have said, send us a letter and we'll do it. They're doing it already. So it's not about just being seen to be doing something, it's about actually getting something done through the most efficient and effective means. And that's... Councillors, you're free to include it. There's no harm in doing it. There's absolutely no harm in including it.

03:39:00 But I'm saying, we've got three other very good motions that talk about real change, that will have impact, and bring something to a conference that hasn't been brought before. Every year there's something on plastics and about the National Plastics Roadmap, the plan. And that's it. We're all passionate about this subject. There's just another way of achieving the same result without it being an endorsed motion of Noosa Council. It can be an endorsed position of Noosa Council, and we write to the LGAQ about that, and they will have the same conversation with the Federal Government as they would if it was endorsed at a conference. That's all I'm saying. I'll accept the majority here. Councillor Lorentson: Councillor Lorentson. Question. Can we do both? Can we write to the LGAQ President and also present the motion?

03:40:00 Mayor Wilkie: Yeah, of course we can. Thank you. I've moved this motion for debate to subject these motions to some sort of rigour. We can still be supportive of the concepts within it. It's also about deciding the most effective ways to get results. It's a combination of the two. I'm happy with that too. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Hey. How's it going? Councillor Wilson. Councillor Wilson: I think we could argue that from a motion to speak advice, a letter to the Minister or a letter to the LGAQ would advocate that way, but this conference is about how to get support for all 77 million councils across some of the issues, and with state-wide relevance. So I think with all of our motions, there's maybe questions about whether they can be presented to local government business. But I prefer the LGAQ to make those decisions.

03:41:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor Finzel. Councillor Finzel: Yeah, I'd like to reiterate that too. I think, you know, I think this whole process actually supports good democratic process. I think it's, you know, it's really last minute. I don't even see the 12 o'clock email. I think that, you know, to make the decisions around, like, adherence to process and regulations and all that at the midnight hour, when we have been taking these motions to LGAQ and LGA. And, like, as long as Councillor Lorentson and myself have been here, I think we've represented this council nearly every time. The whole process gives voice. It's like, you know, we can't really debate the process now, because officers or whoever didn't give us clear delineation of what that is. So we have, in good faith, followed the process. Councillor Lorentson has given a lot of time and effort, been supported by the staff.

03:42:00 And also, as I raised earlier, it is raising it to the General Assembly, unless it does not fit the requirement of the five years. We have a right to raise that issue across 77 other councils, to reiterate the urgency of that and move that forward. We are in a biosphere. For all those reasons, I support we reinstate it. Also, we don't want to be micromanaging on stuff that we don't even know what the guidelines are at this stage, to actually, like, debate it. So I think it should be given opportunity to be heard and raised, and I say, at this late stage, we allow LGAQ and their own committee and their process to actually adjudicate that and make the decision if that goes forward. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Councillor Phillips? Do you wish to talk? Councillor Phillips: I think it's all been said. I know the effort that goes into these motions.

03:43:00 And I think it's only just absolute respect for everyone around the table that we see. The work that goes into them goes through to the next stage. So, yeah, I'll support absolutely for it to go through. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So I'll have my say. Councillors, I seem to recall the outline from staff that the first workshop on this was a desire to get it down to three motions. So independent of what Councillor Wilkie's done. We talked about it. My consideration was about what are the three most important. Do we want to prioritise, or do we just want to be a clearinghouse? If it's just a clearinghouse, we don't really need to be voting. We just have individual councils. But this is about what's most important and what's most relevant to the LGAQ conference. And we have tended to go like this up until 2020. For most motions, it went up to two from Noosa Council. You know, up to a high last year of eight.

03:44:00 So I do believe there is wisdom in us deliberating about what are the most important and effective motions to be put before the General Assembly rather than, you know, individual councils. I've done a couple at a time. One, the outcome was achieved. One, it hasn't. And if you look back, a lot of them, the response, other than what might happen during the conference itself, it hasn't been achieved. It's just written as the only advocacy that comes out of it. So to me, I support the original motion. I think there is wisdom in trying to refine our, what we put up to the three most important. I put the motion, no, the amendment, those in favour. Mayor Wilkie: I think Councillor Lorentson has a right to. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Oh, you do too. I've been missing that all the time. Councillor Lorentson. Councillor Lorentson: I wasn't going to speak, but I am. I'm still going to be going home tonight and asking the one question.

03:45:00 Why at the 11th hour, one hour before general meeting, was this, were we all notified that this motion was going to be pulled out? And I'm going to be asking why at the 11th hour was a call made to the LGA conference on this particular motion? Again, we should be encouraging hard work. We should be leading by example. We should be applauding those councillors that put in the extra effort, time and dedication and commitment to these causes. Advocacy is part of our role. It's not mandatory, but it's a powerful tool. And as we've heard around the table, especially by those councillors that have submitted motions, have gone to every LGAQ conference and every LGAQ conference. That it gives us a chance to raise, not our voices, our community voices on issues that

03:46:00 are important to them. So again, tonight, I'll be going home wondering why. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay. I'll put those in favour. That's Councillor Lorentson and Wegener, Finzel Wilson and Councillor Phillips. Councillor Phillips: Yes. I said yes. Sorry. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yes. And those opposed, is there a motion? It now becomes part of the motion and Count Wilkie has the only one to have spoken to the motion. Would others like to speak to the motion generally or any aspects of it? Councillor Wilson. Councillor Wilson: Hi Will. Just in relation to the kind of trying to shortlist motions that go to the conference. I think we were at 14 at one point so there has been some robust discussion around this table and the councillors you have put to work in these motions have done so very thoroughly

03:47:00 and we did come to some agreement on some that they weren't quite relevant or they weren't worked through enough. So to actually get that down to four motions is already a good achievement. As I said before I'm not convinced on some of them being necessarily that relevant to local government business but I still think it's worth having the discussion about them and all the research that goes into it. And then for LGHU to make that determination as part of that robust process. So I think we had to get well to get from such a large number to begin with to something that is actually quite high. And I think we will kind of proceed with the work into it. Councillor Finzel: Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor Lorton. Councillor Lorentson: I also want to take a moment. To acknowledge those that have put or taken the time to prepare these advocacy pieces.

03:48:00 We're often reminded that once a motion is brought to a table and ratified by full council it becomes the motion of full council. And there's no disputing that. But I think it's important as leaders to recognise that without the initiative and effort of that individual councillor that motion wouldn't even be here on the table. So I want to take a moment to acknowledge Councillor Phillips and Councillor Finzel for the time, the research and dedication. These motions don't appear overnight. They tackle real concerns that have come from community. Fencing disputes, mental health, trial of non-lethal shark mitigation measures during whale migration season. I sit with community almost monthly. I cancelled a meeting with Sandy Bolton this afternoon. A group of us went to meet with her later on this afternoon. Plastics.

03:49:00 It's plastic free July. We are different by nature. That's not a mantra. It should be a state of mind. We should be doing everything to amplify we are different by nature. So, yes. These are issues that deeply impact our community and are important. So thank you to the councillors who have stepped up. And thank you to the councillors around the table that also acknowledge the work and dedication that goes into preparing these motions and how important they are to this community. Advocacy is a tool that we need to all use. One voice is one voice. Seventy-seven councillors across Queensland is a really, really loud voice. And they're happy to stand with us to prioritise the issues that matter to us because we find

03:50:00 out in these conferences there are issues that matter to them as well. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Other councillors. Councillor Finzel. Councillor Finzel: Yes. Thank you. I think it's all been said around the table. I reiterate what Councillor Emilia has said today. Everyone's worked hard in the space. You know, we're a democracy. I think that's our role as councillors to bring to the table, you know, and represent the people that placed us here and trust us to hear their concerns and raise them at whatever resource or tool currently sits at our hands to deliver. The motion I bring before is around youth engagement. Now, they're our future. From the federal to the state to the local level of government, we're all aware of the impacts in this complex society in which we live. You know, I'm so honoured to have the opportunity to represent those young people.

03:51:00 A strategy was put out at the federal level to engage a strategy to include young people in the decisions made by government. Now, how many young people know the process to access not only their councillor, but let alone around a decision-making table in local government and right through to all levels of government through our pink body? So, I think, you know, that's our role to advocate and give voice to our people at whatever tool that we can access in this elected position. I don't know how many young people know the process to access not only their councillor, but I don't agree with either that really we should be trying to limit this to the number because I think we have opportunity if within the LGAQ guidelines to meet them, of course. I respect that. But to bring voice to a vast majority, and I will tell you, every one of those conferences

03:52:00 I've been to, that debate across that conference is so relevant because everyone brings a different voice. You can even find anyone who has a different voice. You can find answers for your own community within that. We can connect with other government officials, their CEOs, their mayors, they're all there. And you can do access any one of them and have conversations. This is a valued resource and opportunity for us to give voice. Particularly around what I've raised, I'm giving voice that's going to listen to young people, empower young people to advocate and engage with the government, and allow them to be alive with the federal policy that says we will support government to work with young people. To facilitate their voice. And I think all of us here are passionate about what we've worked hard to deliver, to give voice to our people in this community and what we're voted here for.

03:53:00 So I commend all the councillors and staff who have supported us to this point, to be able to pull on this mechanism, which is one of many, to reach out to young people. And to represent our community. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Others? Councillor Phillips. Councillor Phillips. Councillor Phillips: Thank you. I'll just keep mine pretty brief. I just want to firstly thank Richard for his assistance with my motion, as he knew my intention behind it and helped me get to the point where it really, in my opinion, if supported, will really impact council staff. Thank you. And community and other stakeholders. The thing that I've seen in my 15 years policing experience is how often community just get to the point where, is it a council issue? Is it a police issue? And they sort of get bounced around a little bit because there's conflict in neighbourhoods.

03:54:00 And I actually think the issue is probably going to get worse before it gets better. And for me, one of the reasons why I looked at the motion was because I thought it was really, you know, the motion in the first place was to say, well, you know, this is really costing council a lot of money. It's also really inefficient. It's really disheartening for community. If you've ever been, heard, spoken to someone that's been involved in neighbourhood sort of disputes, it really impacts their mental health. Everyone's got the right to live peacefully in their homes. And I think if this can, you know, I don't know how many times I've sat around the table at a table in policing and spoken to people that are having real conflict with neighbours and just watching them, you know, really they end up saying, I'm going to have to move out of my home if I can't resolve this. And I just think, oh, what can we do? And that's why from this position, I thought if there's an opportunity to bring this, because

03:55:00 it can't be just us that feel how many customer service requests come through. And if this helps us and any other council, if it goes through, I think it's fantastic. But ultimately, it means that community can feel a sense of someone getting involved in helping resolve an issue before it ends up going through a court process, which can just be lengthy. And often the people I speak to know that it could even cause more stress in the end going through that process. So there's a lot of research that's been done around mediation. And, and. And early intervention in dispute resolution and things like this. So if that ultimately comes out and helps our community and our neighbouring communities and Shires, then I hope that it goes through. And I'm looking forward to going to the first conference and seeing it all unfold. Thanks to everyone else that's put in the efforts as well.

03:56:00 Yeah, it definitely takes a lot of time, additional time to our current role as just councillors. And so for me, it was, yeah, it was extra time. And I'm glad that we got there in the end. So I'm happy to support it all. And thanks everyone around the table. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you. Can I ask a question through the chair, please? Sure. Question to the CEO. In terms of limiting the amount of motions that are presented, we had some discussion around the table. Can I ask maybe just information to be brought to the ordinary meeting? Where in the councillor, just under our code or understanding orders, probably the question I'm really asking is, is limiting the amount of motions eroding or reducing our rights as councillors? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Can I?

03:57:00 Yes. This doesn't appear to be a motion in regard to what's in front of us. It appears to be a more general procedural motion. Is it in relation to this specific? Councillor Lorentson: It is. It's in reference to conversation that would be made around this table, that there is an understanding or a right to reduce the amount of motions that get brought around this table. My question to the CEO is, for Thursday's meeting, can I have some information about what our rights are? What our rights are as a councillor and if in fact that will be eroding or reducing our rights? That would be a reasonable question. That would be great. Councillor Finzel: Thank you. Can I ask a question? Sure. For the chair and CEO, is there a policy that sits in council that enforces? Speaker 3: That's part of my response. I don't believe there is, but I agree. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you very much. Thank you. Mr Wegener, did you want to talk to us at the end of the motion?

03:58:00 I shall. I think if you read the background to each of the motions, in all four of them there's a real issue to be addressed. Interesting, I think in all four of them, well, at least three of them, there are approaches that we, well, I think we can, that may not be in line with the priorities of the new government. For example, the priorities in youth for the new government was more around putting in, you know, getting adult time for adult crimes, whereas what we're suggesting is the other end of the spectrum, as Councillor Pindler suggested the motion in regard to preventing them. And I think that's a really important message to get out there. I also know, I was surprised to find out from Councillor Phillips' experience that community mediation is no longer occurring. Many, many moons ago, I know, it resolved a neighbour dispute that I had and made me go off to the community mediators and do their mediation course and other courses like it, because it was so effective.

03:59:00 So it is a, you know, these preventative measures invested by the state, and it's clear in that background that, you know, because there isn't, our local government officers are being the de facto neighbour conflict mediators and taking us off our own work. But obviously, despite the previous debate, you know, the two other measures that we've made, measures are key, of key interest to the community and of, worthy of further debate. So the, they're all addressing issues that are, as Councillor Lorentson talks about, addressing issues that are relevant to our community. And I'm happy to go with the majority in terms of the inclusion of all four. Councillor Gookey, would you like to close? Mayor Wilkie: Yes. Well, of course. I'm in favour of that. I'm in favour of including all four. Thank you councillors for indulging me with the debate and testing my motion.

04:00:00 This is a democracy. And any councillor is within their rights to raise any issue on an item that's on the agenda that councillors may not have heard before. I did go to the, the extent of actually circulating the alternative motion before the meeting. I didn't have to. I could have just raised this before the meeting. I could have just said, in the meeting, let the motion be moved and moved from the amendment, removing that particular item and expressing my reasons for doing so. You need not, if there seems to be confusion around why this has happened. There's a number of reasons. One is, this is an open forum and it's a democracy where ideas are tested. I was applying a lens of the most effective form of advocacy in this country. For each of these. The three, the other three, are new ideas and worth testing at the conference.

04:01:00 The one about the National Plastics Plan, I learned through my own investigation, which I encourage councillors to do, about the most effective forms of advocacy, is that this is already happening at a national level through the LGAQ and they, as I've said before, they can, we can write to them. They'll pick up the issue again at the federal level and ask them to move it along, which is essentially what it's doing. Accelerate what you're doing already. I too have, I appreciate this councillor's work on motions. I've done some before in the past, worked with staff on motions in the past. So it's not as if it's something I don't appreciate, but it's about really looking at the most effective means of advocacy for this Noosa Council and I will still write to the LGAQ president and ask that this be moved along at the federal level because it

04:02:00 is an important issue and I hope councillors were not offended by a contrary view about the best form of advocacy for these issues or that one particular issue and I'm happy for that particular issue to be pursued through both avenues. Thank you for testing it. That's all that's happened. It's a democracy. Nothing terrible has happened. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'll put the motion. Those in favour? Councillor Finzel: Yes. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: That's unanimous. We move on to the most important item of the day, when to have the Noosa show holiday. That's right. Speaker 3: Let's have a good one. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay. Speaker 3: So every year we have to write to the LGAQ. We have to write to the Office of the Industrial Relations requesting the holiday for our show day. We're proposing that that day be the 11th of September, Friday the 11th of September,

8.4 APPOINTMENT OF 2026 SHOW HOLIDAY ¶

▶ 04:03:00· Carried 7-0 from council's minutes

04:03:00 2026. And I'm looking for endorsement to do that. We actually have the endorsement of the Show Society to do, to support, the Noosa Show Society is supported at that date, on the 11th of September. I'm just looking for endorsement. I'm looking for the council to formally approve that, so I can write the letter to the industrial relations to get them to approve it as well. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'm happy to move the staff recommendation. Councillor Wilson: I'm happy to move it. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: It's a procedural one. We don't get much choice. It's when the show's on and the Friday of it, and we all go out there with our comfy hats on. Okay. Anyone else wish to talk to the motion? I'll then put the motion. Okay. To the vote, those in favour? And councillors? Yes. That's unanimous. Councillor Phillips: Well, I was actually going to ask, what if we said no?

04:04:00 Councillor Lorentson: People might not be happy with the list. Councillor Wilson: Sorry. It's late on Monday afternoon. No. Councillor Wegener: It must have been no. Sorry mate. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay. So, section 19. Section 19 is a confidential item. It's about a contract award report, a contract number CN24802 for 62 Lake and Thomas Drive Remediation and Subdivision Works. Have I got someone who's willing to move the standard motion about going into committee? I'm happy to move it. Council? I'm in. Okay. Lawrence? And seconded was Councillor Phillips. All those in favour? Councillor Phillips: Yes. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: That's unanimous. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. We've only got staff in that gallery here.

9 CONFIDENTIAL SESSION ¶

▶ 04:04:14

06:24:00 Councillor Lorentson: Okay. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So welcome back. We've had a confidential discussions and it is my intention to move a procedural motion, which is that the general committee item agenda 9.1 be deferred to the ordinary meeting on Thursday.

06:25:00 Director Walsh: Sorry. Councillor Lorentson: It's just... I like that. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I think we need to give a date, or just say the July ordinary meeting, for further consideration. Have I got a seconder for that? Councillor Lorentson: I'm happy to second, thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor Lorentson, no need for discussion. Does anyone wish to discuss? No? I put the motion. All those in favour? Councillor Phillips: Yes. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: That's carried unanimously. The meeting, thank you councillors, it has been a well debated general committee. I thank you for your time and your concentration for the six and a half hours.