Before the first item ¶
00:00:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay, so welcome councillors. We are opening the General Committee for December in 2025. We have all councillors present acknowledging that Councillor Finzel is currently attending via the things function. I wish to open by acknowledging and respecting Australian First Nations people and their deep and abiding connection to country. We recognise the Kabi Kabi people as the traditional owners of the lands and waters of the Noosa area and offer gratitude for their careful custodianship of this unique environment over thousands of years. We pay respect to the Kabi Kabi people past, present and emerging. And we have got a rather large gallery today. I welcome you and also note that as you walked in you would have noticed that we are flying the flags at half mast in recognition of the
1 DECLARATION OF OPENING ¶
Nothing was transcribed under this heading — a stretch of the recording with no speech the model could make out.
3 ATTENDANCE & APOLOGIES ¶
Nothing was transcribed under this heading — a stretch of the recording with no speech the model could make out.
2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY ¶
00:01:00 tragic events that happened in another iconic coastal location one day. And from the council we wish our family and friends of all those impacted by that event our condolences. And we acknowledge that it's a particularly appropriate list. We have taken the time of the year to reaffirm our own commitment to respect the differences in our community and to approach these differences in a way that builds harmony rather than division. So we then move on to attendance, we've done that and apologies, and confirmation of the minutes. Mayor Wilkie: I'll move it Mr Chair. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So Councillor Wilkie has moved the minutes from the General Committee meeting of December I presume there's no debate. All those in favour? Councillor Wilson: Yes.
4.1 GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 17 NOVEMBER 2025 ¶
00:02:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And that's unanimous. We don't have any presentations or deputations, so we move on to section seven, and item one in that section is the Noosa Holiday Park Fees and Charges, and that was referred from the Service and Organisation Committee. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, we have Robyn Mercer, the Commercial Business Advisor. Robyn, if you'd like to give us an overview of this item, please. Speaker 3: Yes, thank you. Good afternoon. I'm pleased to present a report seeking adoption of proposed fees and charges for the Noosa Holiday Parks for the forward booking period from January 2027 to July 2027. Council maintains an advanced fees and charges schedule for forward bookings, which is reviewed twice yearly. In preparing forward pricing, we consider a variety of factors, including benchmarking against other camping and caravanning facilities, analysing industry trends in occupancy and
5 PRESENTATIONS ¶
Nothing was transcribed under this heading — a stretch of the recording with no speech the model could make out.
6 DEPUTATIONS ¶
Nothing was transcribed under this heading — a stretch of the recording with no speech the model could make out.
7 ITEMS REFERRED FROM COMMITTEES ¶
Nothing was transcribed under this heading — a stretch of the recording with no speech the model could make out.
7.1 NOOSA HOLIDAY PARKS - FEES AND CHARGES (Referred from Services & Organisation Committee Dated 9 December 2025) ¶
00:03:00 demand, considering the operational costs required to deliver the holiday park program, and being mindful of full cost pricing and competitive neutrality requirements for Council. The Noosa Holiday Parks program continues to be a strong performer, despite a broader and persistent downturn in occupancy. Our nights sold this financial year to date are only 2% lower than last year, which is a positive outcome in the current market. And from a revenue perspective, we've already secured $3.93 million, or 88% of our financial year revenue target. We have an ongoing pursuit of efficiency within the program. An integrated contracting and operating model allows us to deliver a high quality tourism product with cost efficiency, and this focus on cost and operational efficiency helps keep prices in check and competitive. In developing the proposed fees, we've also been mindful of the need to maintain value for money, and honour the purpose of the lands for caravanning and camping recreation.
00:04:00 Benchmark shows that comparable parks have increased prices more sharply, widening the gap with Noosa. But even with the proposed adjustments, the Noosa Holiday Parks remain competitively priced and accessible, while ensuring we can sustainably meet operational costs. Overall, the proposed fees strike a careful balance, considering competitive neutrality, supporting Council's financial sustainability, and ensuring the holiday parks remain attractive and accessible to visitors and residents. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Councillor Yip. Mayor Wilkie: So, thank you for the report. You're saying that compared with other Council's holiday parks, like Gympie, Frays, and the Noosa, Sunshine Coast, Gold Coast, and Tweed, Noosa Council's holiday parks pricing is slightly below, and we need to catch up a little bit. So, we're still affordable, but we need to increase our prices a bit, also so we're not
00:05:00 undercutting and breaching our obligations to ensure competitive neutrality with commercial opportunities. Speaker 3: Correct. It's a balance. So, we have seen over the areas that we benchmark, which are those regions that you mentioned, we have seen some prices bump up a little quicker than our rise with CPI, more so. So, we do need to catch a little for a competitive neutrality purpose, and to make sure that we're competing fairly with the private and public sector. But we also, for sure, want to make sure that we have an accessible tourism product for residents and visitors. Thank you. Question. Councillor Phillips: Thank you. Thanks, Robert. Just, I was wanting to probably explore a little bit more around the downward trend bookings, and thank you for taking my call last week after the F&O, but more broadly for me, it's now just an education piece of the community, because they probably had similar
00:06:00 questions to me if they were to see the document. I guess, glaringly, when I see downward bookings in the industry, I just want to know a little bit more about that, and how, not too much about what it looks like, but what it looks like in terms of what other councils are doing. I just really want to focus on Noosa and what you do when you're looking at that, and how we gather statistics around the impacts that that could happen if it continues. Speaker 3: Certainly. So, look, setting prices into the future and managing that risk of a downturn in demand or outpricing people is just the nature of pricing. What we can do is, we can't crystal ball, but we can look at the price increases that we have put in place and track what our night sold is doing. So, night sold is our measure of occupancy. It's, you know, how many nights have we sold within a particular period.
00:07:00 What we're seeing is that the industry is having a downward trend. That's happened over the last two years. There's been a year-on-year reduction, and that data comes from the consumer market. There's been a year-on-year reduction from the Caravan Association of Australia. The rhetoric is likely that that is due to macro-economic conditions, cost of living pressures, people changing their discretionary spend on holidays, particularly. We're not attributing our 2% reduction year-on-year to our pricing, because we can see when we benchmark that we are still sitting competitively against others. But we're definitely looking at that. So, just keeping a close eye on things. Speaker 2: Yeah. Councillor Phillips: Okay. And so, to follow up with that, because if the industry sort of noticed that it could potentially cost a living, I always sort of look at camping as the families and the people that, you know, may not afford the soft-to-tell. So, not that it's the soft-to-tell anymore.
00:08:00 Sorry. Are you going to do a question? Yes, I am. So, I'm just wondering, you mentioned operating costs versus the revenue for the commercial operator. I know that you might not be able to go into the details of that, but how do you consider that? Speaker 3: So, with our management agreements that we have, we go out to market every five or seven years for those contracts, and that is the opportunity for Council to access pricing at that point in time. Similarly to our other large contracts where we approach the market through open tenders and a decision is made for those contracts based on value for money and sound procurement principles at the time. What we have done is look at bundling activities together. So, at a very tactical level, it means that if you have one contractor who is managing your preventative scheduled maintenance and also reactive, you've got one tradesman going there. They're going to pick up that they'll do two things instead of going there twice. So, that's one small thing, but when you aggregate that, it allows us to do that.
00:09:00 So, we do pursue efficiency on a cost side across every aspect of the operating model so that our prices can stay at an accessible and competitive level. Councillor Wilson: Okay. Thank you. Just coming back to the downward trend and the sort of market conditions, is that why we only set fees and charges for six months at a time so that we can respond to changes in the market? Is that correct? Yeah. Yes. Speaker 3: It allows us to always have a 13-month forward booking period, which is important. Someone leaves and they want to rebook for the next year. So, commercially, we want to secure that. Every six months in pricing means that we can be dynamic in responding to economic conditions. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Would you like to move the motion? Mayor Wilkie: I'm happy to move it, Mr Chair. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor Wilkie seconded. Councillor Wegener. Can you talk to me? Mayor Wilkie: Yeah.
00:10:00 Well, thank you for the report. I think I said it in the question. We have to set these prices ahead of time. They're responsibly priced with an eye to affordability and competitive price neutrality. You've benchmarked against other comparative councils in South East Queensland, Gympie, Fraser, Coast, Gold Coast, Sunshine Coast and Tweed, and found that we are still very, very affordable compared to their pricing, but also not lagging so far behind as to be costing ratepayers or managing them irresponsibly. So, thank you for the report, and I support the recommendation. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. I'll speak. I historically try and keep the Boring Pond campground lower to, because I know from my long-term association with that campground that it is a place where young families from our community go to camp. Because of competitive neutrality, it's probably not the place to make the most money.
00:11:00 But I do note that the draft destination management plan does have triggers in there where if a council wished to have incentives for families who live locally doing the right Councillor Wegener: thing and could make that holiday more affordable by their participation in some of the programs. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, that's an opportunity that we may see emerge over the coming months. Others wish to close? Thank you, Mr Chair. All those in favour? Speaker 3: Yes. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: That's unanimous. Speaker 3: Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you, Robin. Speaker 3: Thank you. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: We now invite up the Acting Manager of Finance to do the financial performance report. And we also have the Director of Corporate Services to assist. Well done. Councillor Wilson: Good afternoon, Councillors.
8 REPORTS DIRECT TO GENERAL COMMITTEE ¶
Nothing was transcribed under this heading — a stretch of the recording with no speech the model could make out.
8.1 FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE REPORT - NOVEMBER 2025 ¶
00:12:00 Speaker 2: Thank you. Through the Chair. Good afternoon. I'll take the report as read. The November 2025 report provides us with five months of actual data for the financial year. Approximately 42% of the year statistics, if you want that. There has been no significant changes to the previous comments in previous months. So, Council continues to track both from a revenue and operating position in a surplus position. The primary discussion being the continued maintenance or oversight of the capital works program. So, there is no, from the report in front of you today, there are no significant changes or deviations or exceptions from the previous financial report that was provided to you. So, as a result, just be able to take questions if there's anything you'd like to delve into further. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Any questions, Councillors? Councillor Lorentson: Hey, Zach. In terms of staffing and resourcing, and maybe a question to the CEO, are the council
00:13:00 current staffing levels adequate to deliver the, all the planned capital projects on time and within budget? And are there any skill or capacity gaps in staff that could delay the projects or increase reliance on external consultants? Speaker 4: I'm happy to take that. So, thank you, Councillor. The, as you know, the last, for this budget, we increased the capacity of the delivery team. So, we have a capacity for our major projects by an extra five people. I believe those five seats have been filled. And so, we do have a much stronger capacity to deliver the projects and the programs. Also, I think as we have been very transparent in saying is that we have a large program that we've had over a number of years coming out of the back of, on the back of COVID, where there was quite a lot of money that was injected into various councils to deliver
00:14:00 projects. So, we're still, to be honest, catching up with that. So, we've, that's why we've added extra resources to do that. And I think that what I understand that we're, we're on track to, to at least catch up a little bit, whether we catch up completely is, is, is relying on the, on the, the environment and on the, on the, on the availability of contractors to deliver the work. Because I think, as you know, also that, you know, we don't have a team. We don't have a con, we don't have a team that actually delivers the major projects. We contract it out. So, we, we project manage our major, well, most of the projects other than the works that we do with our operational teams, civil operations teams. They do a lot of the work themselves while we still outsource mowing, for example, to that, to that group. And that's the model that we, that we have endorsed and used. From a resourcing point of view, never, there's never enough, I think, is probably the answer in every business. We try to keep as lean as we can and do as much as we can with what we have to keep the,
00:15:00 to keep the costs at a, at a level that we can, that we can, we can cater for. But I think the, the teams are doing really, really well in terms of, of attacking the, the workload that they've got ahead of them and, and are doing a, a great job of, of catching up and getting, getting over that hump. Councillor Lorentson: Okay. Councillor Wilson: Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Kate Dawson. Councillor Wilson: Thank you. On attachment one, the Statement of Income and Expenditure, the bottom line of the capital expenditure table has an amount for 4.649 million of other capital expenses that weren't in the budget. Could you explain what that is based? Speaker 2: Yeah. So through the Chair, so what we do periodically through the year is, as we're going through capital projects, there's an element that possibly look at potential write-offs through the program. So that's currently the placeholder amount for that. That will be reviewed as we go to BR2 and I actually look to bring that onto the books officially. So that's just a placeholder amount for the time being.
00:16:00 Councillor Phillips: Okay. Thank you. Questions? Councillor Phillips. In relation to attachment two, I was looking at contract liabilities and the provisions are materially higher than budget, while property, plant and equipment values are significantly below budget. So just wondering what obligations are accumulating faster than expected? What risks do they pose to future operating budgets and asset valuations or capital deferrals masking longer term renewal and maintenance pressures? Speaker 2: So. So I would be able to take that question on notice just because of the complexity attached to them. There's a few aspects of that, if that's all right. Yeah. Just because there's a couple of points with it we need to address that I wouldn't need further information from it. Councillor Phillips: Sorry, I didn't get to it earlier. I had the DMP stuff and I had the questions to go. That's all right. So thanks, Zach. Happy for it to be taken on notice.
00:17:00 Speaker 2: So through the chair, bear with me, I'm just getting to the right of the page. So on the bottom of, I think it's about the fourth page. Sorry, I don't have the notes on me. Page six. Page six. Thank you. The current arrears percentage of total arrears is 6.5%. So movement from the previous month of $750,000 of rates arrears being paid in the current period. Noting that we're about one month off from the January rates livery period. And commonly you hear from me is rates are cyclical, they tend to go up, spike in July and January down the preceding six months. So the nominal benchmark that we are working towards is a 5% industry average. In terms of the risk around the collection of rates, from a legal baseline of the rates that are charged to the property itself, so it's technically they're reasonably secure in the collection of that, possibly in a future sale or transfer of ownership.
00:18:00 So they aren't seen as high risk effectively, but we will do what we can to more appropriately manage that with the debt collection or the debt rates and charges, debt management policy to hopefully bring that down over time. Does that answer the question? Councillor Lorentson: It does. And it has reduced from, I think, three months ago, so the reduction from three months ago seems quite significant. Zach, from recollection, I think we started three months ago with outstanding rates over $10 million, 10.4, I think, and currently it's still quite significant at 7.2. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'm stopping you there. Yes. Next. There wasn't a question. You were stating what's in the report and what's in, yeah, we're not seeing a question. We've got a very full agenda, so if you can't get to a question very direct, and that's what we're going to do. Councillor Wilson: I think I asked this last month, but can we have a breakdown of what's from the most recent rates levy versus previous years?
00:19:00 And is there a higher risk in collecting ? Speaker 2: So, yes, to that point, I think quarterly we've intended to actually provide more detail analysis. That's right. So we will have that. Thanks, Zach. Mayor Wilkie: The $754,000 movement in arrears, is that in one month only? And was it attributed to a number of properties or one large property? It's significant. Speaker 2: The specifics of that I'd have to investigate, but I believe it's a number of properties. It's not a significant payment in that. But we can get a breakdown of that. Okay. Will I take that at most? Mayor Wilkie: Yes. Okay. I'll see you offline about that. Yep. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: When someone wants to move to. Karen's going to move on. Karen? Excuse me. Mr. Chairman. Councillor Finzel: I have a question. Yes. Sure. Thank you. Just a quick overview again. I believe I took it on notice last month about where we're at with the WIP.
00:20:00 Speaker 2: So, through the Chair, happy to make a comment there. So, that's currently on an action item. There's two aspects that we look to bring back in the new financial year post BR2, the WIP being one of them. So we can provide definitely more detailed information in the report, but we're hoping through BR2 and the budget process to actually bring a more holistic view of the WIP transfer of assets and capitalisation. So happy to take councillors lead if they would like to see more on the report, but we do have a slightly different program to bring that to councillors through workshops. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And if you just could let everyone know what the acronym WIP stands for, please. Work in progress. Mayor Wilkie: In terms of future inclusions for future reports, the capital expenditure goes by the financial expenditure. In the Capital Works Executive, they use a metric about the work actually done. Can that metric be included as a comparison to the financial metric for the Capital Works?
00:21:00 Speaker 2: So through the chair, this is a piece of work we're endeavouring to actually work with infrastructure on. In the next three months, it's actually consolidating the financial report with the CWE reporting to get a bit of consistency between the two. So the simple answer is yes to the question. We are looking to integrate them so there is, again, a more holistic view of that. That's the intent of the new year. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And for those in the gathering, CWE is Capital Works Executive. Councillor Phillips: Last question. Sure. I just would like to know a little bit more around how our Capital Works rollovers. How does that affect our asset conditions? Would that be a way to, I'm just trying to work out how to explain it, but you know how I'm always kind of banging on about our asset management. How, if we have rollovers of Capital Works, does that, how is that matched with our asset management? Because I think if it's rolled over, it then impacts it. I'm happy to think more on that question, but it was just after listening to discussion.
00:22:00 Speaker 2: So we could take that on notice. Yes. Just a couple of things. I suppose the underlying driver we normally talk to is the financial sustainability ratio as it looks at the renewal of assets. But in terms of providing a complete picture, there's a direct tie with the infrastructure that we probably just need to take on notice. So that's a go. Councillor Phillips: Yeah. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Would someone like to move? I think Councillor Wilson. I'll take that. I think Councillor Phillips will do. The end. Councillor Wilson: Thank you, Sir. Stick on the rule. Thanks, Zach, for the report. I really appreciate your efforts into continually improving the reporting and I know that you've got a lot that you're doing in two roles and various other things that's happening in the team at the moment. So, yeah, we'll be keep asking for progress on this.
00:23:00 We know that you're all working on the background. But I think the reporting is really improving and especially the analytics kind of report with the traffic lights, so it's really great to be able to focus in on what's important. But I also appreciate that you're willing to get feedback and continue to improve, so thank you very much and support this report. Councillor Phillips: Can I make a quick comment? I think community tend to only see you two sitting at the chamber desk delivering the reports, but I think it's really important that you get feedback and continue to improve, so thank you very much and support this report. I would like to acknowledge that both of you have given me an extreme amount of confidence in the Corporate Services Department and I know the work that you're doing because we get briefed on it and I appreciate it. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Any others? Councillor Wilson, would you like to close? Councillor Wilson: No. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'll put the motion. Those in favour? That's unanimous. Okay, so we now move on to...
00:24:00 Thanks, Zach. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you, Martin. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. ...the adoption of the destination management plan, and while staff make their way to the... Councillor Lorentson: I'd like to move an alternate motion. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: ...while staff make their way to the desk, I will explain how we're going to run this. The proposal at this stage is that Council have indicated a very large number of amendments, probably more than normal So we'll be quite strict on the standing orders and if we can keep questions so they are meeting the intent of the standing orders, we'll just make them direct and turn the point in short. And we'll ask staff as normal to give us an outline overview of the document. Director Rawlings: Thanks councillors.
00:25:00 Councillors, today we are recommending to you the adoption of the Destination Management Plan. The Destination Management Plan is a culmination of many years of extensive community and stakeholder engagement, technical analysis and collaborative development. The DMP provides a long term, 10 year horizon, evidence based framework to ensure nurses' natural assets, lifestyle and experiences can be enjoyed for generations to come. It responds to the needs and aspirations of our residents, businesses, traditional owners and visitors and reflects the strong message heard throughout consultation. Noosa is a place we love and protecting liveability is essential to our economy, our wellbeing and our shared future. The plan seeks to strengthen the foundations of a thriving and sustainable visitor economy. One that supports local jobs, respects community expectation and safeguards our environment. That underpins Noosa's identity, whilst ensuring that our community is at its heart.
8.2 ADOPTION OF DESTINATION MANAGEMENT PLAN ¶
00:26:00 It positions council and partners to proactively plan for change, manage pressures and plan for and leverage opportunities for our destinations, including in the lead up to the Olympics. The DMP aims to identify actions to help address the challenges brought by Noosa's growing popularity such as population growth, increased visitation, changing travel behaviours and the increasing impacts of climate change. It seeks to redefine the role of tourism in Noosa's future, ensuring it supports and protects the environment, lifestyle and values while contributing to a thriving economy. Whilst these challenges are not unique to Noosa, the way we choose to respond to them can be. Through consultation our community has consistently called for a stronger, more proactive approach to managing these issues. An approach that is bold and forward looking. One that redefines the role of tourism in shaping our future. And places Noosa's lifestyle, environment, community and identity at its heart.
00:27:00 The plan has been shaped through extensive community engagement and is tailor made for Noosa. With overwhelming support, 75% of all respondents supported the draft vision in the DMP. Across all age groups and geographical locations the message was clear. Build on our strong environmental foundations, put our community at its heart and shift towards a regenerative tourism model. One that leaves Noosa better than we found it. With over 3,000 responses across two phases of community engagement. The DMP is structured around four guiding principles. Respecting our community, leading the way, living our values and tourism for good. It seeks to strengthen existing initiatives that are underway and align and introduce new and bold initiatives. Including new areas of focus around day visitation management. Establishing a joint custodian program.
00:28:00 Hinterland regeneration. And establishing a destination stewardship council. The DMP is a long term plan. It has a ten year horizon. Success will take time and is only achievable through collective commitment and effort. Its success depends on a number of factors. Strong leadership and sustained commitment to bold action. Increased investment to accelerate priorities. Effective advocacy with a clear plan to influence policy and decision making. Strategic partnerships with industry and business, government and community to ensure alignment and shared direction. And importantly regular monitoring and evaluation and checking in with our community to stay on track, adapt and improve as needed. The plan includes a high level monitoring and evaluation framework and is supported by a draft initial three year rolling implementation plan. That outlines what we aim to achieve, how we will get there and how we will measure success. The draft implementation plan sits alongside the DMP and is intended to be reviewed regularly and updated.
00:29:00 It is intended to provide transparency and accountability while providing flexibility to monitor, learn and adapt as we go. A key tenet of the DMP is the proposal to establish a destination stewardship council. To bring together people and organisations with the capacity to help deliver on the DMP. It is intended once that this group is established they will play a key role in refining and overseeing the monitoring and evaluation framework and the implementation plan. To help guide the tracking of progress, managing risks and ensuring resources are aligned to the plan's intent. It's important to note that this strategy won't and can't do everything. It sits alongside other equally important documents that Council has endorsed. Council's corporate plan, our smart biosphere economic development strategy, our environment strategy and many other key strategies. Each of these documents align and work together to provide clear strategic direction for our Shire and community.
00:30:00 The DMP is considered a contemporary approach to destination management that seeks to ensure Noosa's values and iconic status are preserved. It puts our community and their values at its heart. This means what's important to our community, including a strong and supported economy. Maintaining our enduring commitment to our incredible and significant environment. And prioritising our community's wellbeing. And ensuring the people we welcome here know and respect these priorities too. As mentioned, this is a long term plan and vision. It will take shared commitment, partnerships and investment. No doubt we will learn and adapt along the way. The supporting monitoring and evaluation framework and draft implementation plan are designed to enable us to do this. The most important thing now is to have a plan that is clear in its intent and vision and strategy, supported by our community. And in this context, I'm very pleased to commend this important report and plan to Council.
00:31:00 Mayor Wilkie: Mr Chair, I just want to signal I'd like to move the staff motion, because that's the only one that's been suggested. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I think Councillor Lorentson did have the floor and I asked for staff to do the process. Thank you, Mr Chair. Councillor Lorentson: I'd like to move an alternate motion. Speaker 3: Is that one news email? Thank you. Councillor Lorentson: That Council note the draft Noosa Destination Management Plan and the submission received. Acknowledges the need for further analysis and refinement. And defers adoption of the current draft to the April, 2026 April round of meetings. And B, engage a suitably qualified independent destination management professional to finalise the 10-year Destination Management Plan. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Do we have a seconder? Second. And so Wilson was the seconder.
00:32:00 We have the floor, Councillor Lorentson. Councillor Lorentson: The draft Destination Management Plan reflects significant work and extensive consultation. And the alternate motion in front of us is not intended as a consultation. It is a criticism of staff or the effort invested to date. Rather, it recognises, in my opinion, that the plan is not yet complete and requires further refinement and analysis to ensure it is genuinely fit for purpose. And capable of delivering on critical outcomes. In its current form, it's my opinion that the plan lacks the rigor and detail and clarity on key elements such as risk assessment, implementation detail, costings, funding pathways and contingency planning. Engaging an independent, suitably qualified professional will help ensure that these gaps are addressed. And it will strengthen the foundations of the plan.
00:33:00 And I'll note, as staff just mentioned, that the draft will be reviewed, monitored and reviewed. I'm going oversight in my opinion is insufficient. We need strong foundations. Strong foundations are essential to ensure that the plan is evidence-based, actionable and again generally fit for purpose. The alternate motion is not about delaying progress or kicking the can down the road. It's basically about setting ourselves up for success. A robust, well-considered plan is critical to maintain public confidence and uphold community trust and demonstrates that council approaches strategic planning with the excellence our community expects.
00:34:00 When I went through the plan I just thought that there was further work that was needed to ensure that the plan appropriately worked. A robust, well-considered plan is critical to maintain public confidence and uphold community trust and demonstrates that the plan appropriately reflects emerging economic conditions. State policy changes, market dynamics and strategic opportunities including Queensland Destination 2045 and the Brisbane 2032 Olympic and Paralympic Games. Strong alignment with existing council strategies and statutory plans is also essential to avoid duplication. Clearer guidance on responsibilities. Measures of success. Success and contingencies for outcomes that are dependent on external agencies must also be analysed and embedded to ensure that the plan is deliverable. Again, deferring the adoption until April and undertaking this further analysis to me will de-risk the plan and again set it up for success.
00:35:00 Again, not a criticism of staff, it's about just getting it totally right. So that we can generally implement a roadmap that protects our residents and supports our local businesses and most importantly safeguards Noosa's unique natural and cultural environment. Thank you. Councillor Wilson: Councilor Stockwell, I mentioned at the beginning of this session that there's a lot of amendments that councils have put forward and I think that really isn't a long kind of fact that the councils would feel that there needs to be so many amendments and therefore I'd consider that the plan is not yet ready for adoption. Overall, I appreciate the amount of work that's gone into this project and the level of consultation, particularly the attempts to bring in people we don't normally hear from.
00:36:00 This is a plan for ten years ahead and another two council terms beyond this one and we have a responsibility to ensure this plan does not lock council into excessive cost or pre-determined outcomes. We can't accept a document on the basis that we can change it in the future as someone suggested. We've done this time and time again this term. While we can't expect perfect, we can't endorse plans that we know need to change before they've been implemented. We've put council at risk because in a couple of years someone will come along and say, we have to do this, it's in the DMP, endorsed by this council. The money spent on consultants and consultation, the endless time spent by council staff are all inputs to the process. But we can't endorse a plan based simply on inputs and effort. We have to look at the output, the plan itself. Not just the video or the consultation process. To me, it falls short of the community expectations and that's the feedback that I'm hearing.
00:37:00 It feels rushed and unfinished and not really a community-led document. The amount of effort should translate to a document that we're proud of, not one that we seek to amend. And also has sufficient time to respond to the feedback given by peer reviews. We were told the DMP would give us a clear direction for our relationship with tourism and OSA. It doesn't. The survey didn't ask specific questions other than for a review of the current model which is supported. Respondents were also in favour of a shift towards a more regenerative approach to tourism. A shift towards. And this has been interpreted as a complete move to regenerative tourism without partnering with the business community to understand what's possible. It's positioned as a shared commitment to putting community first. But does the community agree that this will be achieved?
00:38:00 I've raised concerns about the KPIs throughout this process. And again, yes, they can be developed over time. But I'm concerned that this wouldn't be achieved in all the time today between all the different people involved in the process. And it seems to have presented significant challenges throughout. Um. And so. I agree that the help of those who seem to be qualified professionals would help to reverse this one. Can I speak to it? Um. Thanks. Councillor Phillips: I had a look at our standing orders to see if it suggested anything about amendments or how many amendments were allowed. And it doesn't suggest that. So I was just. Councillor Wilson: I'm talking to motion. Councillor Phillips: Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay. Councillor Phillips: So I'm to support Councillor Wilson's suggestion. There are a lot of amendments. And that gives me an understanding that the document isn't ready to be endorsed today.
00:39:00 Um. There's a few things that became glaringly obvious to me. It is strategies that I would prefer and policies that Council would endorse before the DMP, such as the parking management. Um. Um. And some state decisions around the suggestions of the alternate funding sources. So there's certainly things that I feel, given some extra time, would really cement the confidence in the document. Um. I can see the work that has gone in it to date. But I'm quite happy to see a few more months to make sure that we're sitting around this table maybe without having to put the amendments through. Um. It isn't a live document that we see. This will kick things off. Um. And I think that the community deserves a really strong document that, as suggested
00:40:00 in the opening by the Chair, that harmony and division is one of the things that we should be creating. And up to today, if the amendments, we start off on amendments, I believe that that would be the opposite. That to what happens, it won't be harmony or division. Sorry. There will be no harmony or division. It will be division after today. So I think we owe it to community. So I think all of us sitting here has recognised that the DMP needs to occur. Um. But, you know, the, it's not ready to be endorsed today, in my opinion. So I'm happy to support, um, the motion. In front of me. Mayor Wilkie: I think the community deserves the DMP in its current form to be endorsed today. I think to delay further would be to bring it back to the current form. The community already perceives it to have been delayed unnecessarily long period. There has been no locking in of pre-determined outcomes. Delaying falls well short of community expectations.
00:41:00 I will refer to amendments because the amendments that are proposed I think fail to recognise the recommendation part C. Part C is there as a catch-all to indicate that there will be future due diligence that must be done before any other projects are implemented. Because of the reach of the engagement was so broad and captured a wide range of views it's naive to think there'd be agreement and perfection on all wording and aspects of this collective piece of work among the community and the community as a whole. And even the seven councillors. I think by doing this, you're kicking the can down the road in the hope that you'll come up with something that we can all agree with. This is one other person's opinion that's going to be trying to pull this together. There'll
00:42:00 be disagreement on that as well. That policy is there as a catch-all that says that there's got to be future costings done before anything is implemented, more community consultation done before anything is implemented. And that's what we're trying to do. We're trying to make sure that everything is implemented. It's a very good plan. The community consultation has been extensive. I think the motion that had been circulated previously was the one the community has been expecting. Councillors have had time to get their heads around. We've only just seen this one. This is policy-making on the run. It's a great opportunity for us to come up with a good plan. And look, having an imperfect plan when you've got humans involved is expected. Delaying planning or having no planning is actually quite negligent and not really acceptable. I won't be supporting this. I'll be encouraging councillors to reject
00:43:00 this and go back to the original motion and we'll work through the amendments if we need to. But I draw your attention to section C of the recommendation. I'm going to go back to the recommendation which makes it clear that says the plan will be refined with input from partner support organisations, reviewed and updated on an annual basis and informed by council's annual budget considerations. And that's a catch-all for the amendments. So please councillors, let's trust the process. Let's not delay this any further. There's no guarantee that even after it's been delayed till April that we're all going to agree on it. Because it's an ambitious plan, lots of inputs and I think you're after perfection when a good plan is better than holding out
00:44:00 hope for a perfect plan. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay, can I ask another question? Councillor Wilson: Yeah, based on that question. Yeah, based on that question. Recommendation C and D, how will we call this a final report today if there's still all this work to do? And just how are we going to know that that, if we say yes, there will be further input from partners of all organisations, it will be reviewed and it will be delegated to the CEO to kind of change. So how can we call this a final report, Taylor Wilson? Director Rawlings: Well, councillors, what you're being asked to adopt is the DMP as a final document. Alongside that is a draft implementation plan. It's not unusual. It's actually normal practice for us to have strategic documents endorsed by council and then to have annual implementation
00:45:00 plans. You receive annual updates on our implementation plans, like the environment strategy, for instance. So that's what we're asking you to do, to adopt the final destination management plan and a draft rolling implementation plan that will include and be evolved when any first destination stewardship council is established. So there's independent shared oversight, detailed project scopes, detailed project feasibilities, costings for budget, ongoing monitoring, adapting, all of those things. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So that's just a paraphrase, we aren't adopting the three implementations, there's a draft for noting. That's correct. And follow up question, the D was referred to after standards one, two, three, four of the changes in during application. Director Rawlings: That's right, yeah, before we publish the final, in case there's spelling errors and things like that. And thank you, one councillor's already picked up a couple of spelling errors. So things like that are caught up in the D, in the D resolution.
00:46:00 Councillor Wegener: Others wish to talk to the motion. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor Weidman. Councillor Wegener: What I've heard consistently for the last six years is the community wants action. And that's number one. They want us to actually do something and carry on with our business. Two, responding to economic changing, changing economic conditions. Well, that's not going to change between now and April. The economic conditions are changing constantly. So I don't see that as a reason to delay it. A harmonious council in April, I sincerely doubt that. From what I've seen is when we kick the can down the road, it does not create harmony in the final decision. So I will not be supporting the motion. Councillor Finzel: No, it's a draft for noting. I won't be supporting this. I think shared voice creates shared responsibility. Thank you. And it takes a specific type and style of bold leadership to legitimise voice through
00:47:00 the act of engaging and illuminating our citizens' contribution of their own knowledge, coupled with their lived experience so that we can give legitimacy to their voice. I respect where Councillor Lorentson's coming from to, again, engage a suitably qualified independent professional. I don't know how much that costs. We've spent significant funding at the moment. I'm trying to illuminate the voice of our people who have engaged in this and have called for action. So I think that we need to go to debate, provide opportunity for myself and others to actually bring the full debate to the table. I feel this is too limiting. And I won't be supporting it today. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Councillor's staff asked us. You want to speak to that? We said we wanted this by December.
00:48:00 This council in the early days was starting to be typified as the councillor who didn't make decisions because they kept on deferring. This is another part of that poor behaviour or poor habit to my, I'll take that word behaviour, poor habit of if things aren't your liking, you defer it and hope to make it a little bit better for yourself. Thanks. Thank you. The plan has been peer reviewed by experts. The plan has had input by a range of people who are leading in the field. The staff have given us advice that internationally is seen as a new brand of DMP, one that fetches. And while yes, a minority of councillors have proposed a range of amendments, this motion actually won the vote.
00:49:00 Councillor Wilkie mentioned the, well, we've sort of alluded to the old saying, don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. This is a good plan. This plan sets out the strategic direction and from what my view of the potential amendments was. But people were getting bogged down in the detail for the next level in the IRA. The program logic in Appendix 2 is as good as I've seen produced in this council. And I haven't seen one for a sustainability strategy in the local government or in Australia as good. And I do that with my other hat on. I look for leading sustainability strategies in local government for ones that set out their program logic and their monitoring strategy.
00:50:00 I don't think I've found one that comes close to this level of detail. So we have to be clear that this is a 10-year strategic plan. The details and the refinement happen on the annual operational plan, the implementation. And any good strategy will have the adaptive management side. So, like others, I'm a professional. I think that's all. Thank you. Councillor Lorentson. Councillor Lorentson, do you have a question? Councillor Lorentson: I do. And I thank the councillors around the desk for their commentary. I need to reiterate, the alternate motion is not, delaying it for four months means that it still will come to the table. Mayor Wilkie, you mentioned it earlier. It's a plan for a plan to review, monitor, revise.
00:51:00 What I'm saying is that the plan's at risk of being rushed. And we're prioritising expediency. We're prioritising the commitment to get it done before the end of the year over the level of rigour required for a strategic 10-year document of this importance. Thank you. There is too much at stake. Protections for our residents, their rights, and our local economy, our small businesses. What I've put in front of you, again, focuses on de-risking the plan and setting it up for success. It needs to be genuinely fit for purpose. It doesn't discard the work undertaken to date, but it seeks to complete it properly. I ask, again, in terms of community confidence, community support, and community trust,
00:52:00 deferment and engaging an expert to help finalise the 10-year destination management plan is critical to the plan's long-term success. So, again, I ask those who have suggested they're not voting for it to reconsider and work in the best interests of the community. And make sure that the document that we put in front of them will deliver a plan that is excellence in best practice. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. I put the motion. Those in favour? That's Councillor Wilson, Lorentson, and Phillips. Those against? That's Councillor Wilkie, Finzel, Wegener, and Stockwell. Mayor Wilkie: I'd like to move the original motion, please, Mr Chair. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: That's moved. And do we have a seconder? Councillor Wegener? And that is as appears in the agenda.
00:53:00 Councillor Wilkie, you have the floor. Thank you. You have a seconder, so we need to talk to you first. Mayor Wilkie: After many years of delay, delays for good reason, to make sure that we get this plan right, today is the day we take a collective step on the journey towards a brighter future for Noosa. A future where Noosa not only retains, but improves upon its natural beauty, liveability, and prosperity. It's a 10-year plan that acknowledges we're all part of the solution. And this act of planning has been driven by a powerful, unifying truth that all of us around this community and this table share, and that is a love for Noosa. I really believe everyone's moving things here today because they want the best for Noosa. We may not always agree, but we can disagree respectfully. We're driven by the same love for this place. This plan is an inclusive way forward that recognises everyone, business owners, residents
00:54:00 and visitors are part of the solution, joint custodians. It invites us all to tread lightly on this place and recognise that a healthy environment is the key to liveability, prosperity and success as a community and a visitor destination. Why are we doing it and why now? This is an important question. It's because Noosa's at a crossroads. Whether we're aware of it or not, Noosa is facing unprecedented and relentless population pressures from development in South East Queensland. In Moreton City Council alone, in one subdivision alone, the population that will be housed there will be, when it's completed, will be the size of Mackay. When Aura South of Caloundra is finished, the population there will be zero. This plan also helps position ourselves ahead of the global focus and visitors that are on their way in the lead up to, during and after the Olympics in 2032.
00:55:00 This plan is about responsible preparation, planning ahead because we must preserve what we love about Noosa for residents and visitors and it would be negligent if we did not. This planning builds upon the forward planning that has kept Noosa's relatively relaxed look and feel despite changes everywhere else that have led to Noosa gaining biosphere status. But in the face of these increasing pressures, we need to lift again. Doing what we've always done will see us go backwards. Which is why we're aiming higher through this plan, aspiring to regenerate Noosa. Working towards leaving it in a better place. A better state than how we found it. So it can be enjoyed as we have enjoyed it for generations to come. We're committed to working smarter, harder and in partnership with the proposed Destination Stewardship Council.
00:56:00 Where other agencies and community and industry stakeholders with real capacity to effect change are proposed to monitor and ensure the actions of the DMP. There were two rounds of community consultation, very extensive. Over 3,000 pieces of community. Community feedback, Phases 1 and 2. Over many years, this is why the community is urging us to get on with it. It's core priorities based on community input were clear. Including protecting the environment, managing short term accommodation, addressing traffic and congestion, aligning tourism to community values. And the message, very clear, we've told you before, just get on with it. You know what we want, get on with it. There are four guiding principles. And the DMP three year implementation plan contains key strategies plus actions of what is going to be achieved and measures to determine whether they've been achieved or not. Even at this early stage, each action has been given indicative costing. Whether it can be funded under existing budget, require medium funding up to $150,000 or high funding of an extra $150,000 or above.
00:57:00 Because the reach of the engagement was broad and captured a wide range of views. It would be naïve to think there'd be agreement on all the wording and the structure of this collective piece of work. Which has had input from industry experts and the seven councillors. As I mentioned before, this is why Clause C. Note the draft is a catch all for the future due diligence that must be done before projects are implemented. As I said before. An imperfect plan is expected. A delayed plan or no plan is negligent. I'd like to thank the staff for their excellent work. And I'd like to thank all the councillors who worked very diligently with the staff over many workshops. I'm estimating at least six where their feedback was shared to help refine and finalise the structure, wording and measurables of this draft plan.
00:58:00 We're all intimately engaged in the work. We're in the process of getting to this final draft. And I thank all councillors for that and I do thank the staff for that. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Councillor Finzel, do you have a hand up for questions or is that time passed? Councillor Lorentson: Time is passed. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I was wished to talk to the motion. Councillor Phillips: Can I start with some questions? You may. Just to start. It's Kim. Thank you. Just looking at... I'd like to know which of the following have actually gone through feasibility and economic assessments before coming into a plan. And I know we haven't had a lot of workshops. But just to refresh for people in the gallery and watching.
00:59:00 Visitor contribution models. Paid or dynamic parking. Congestion, charging. And the proposed community and environmental benefit fund. Director Rawlings: There's one that's held this. Visitor contribution. Paid parking. Congestion, charging. Councillor Phillips: And the proposed community and environmental benefit fund. Just wondering which ones out of those have had... Spawn through the feasibility and economic assessment process before it came through to a DMV. Director Rawlings: Feasibility processes have not been done for those documents, those initiatives. Council will be aware that you have endorsed a parking management plan as part of this year's budget. And you are fully aware that that is the process where assessment of parking, dynamic parking, regulated parking is going to occur. And consider all the issues associated with that.
01:00:00 That process has been initiated and it will be progressed as part of this current budget process. The visitor contribution model as you can see in the document is an advocacy piece. It requires state legislative change and it requires collaboration with other destinations. And we have started that process. It's actually been under investigation for many, many years. And many organisations, other local governments and other tourism bodies have done a lot of assessment and feasibility work that they've been willing to share with us. So there's a lot of background information to that. But absolutely, as it currently stands in the document, it's clear it requires advocacy and legislative change before it comes on board. As you know, which we've presented to Council, we've also done significant global research about visitor contributions that occur in more than 400 destinations across the globe.
01:01:00 And that information has been shared with Council. So there's no doubt that all of these initiatives need more work, need more investment, need more commitment. That's what an action plan is about. Identifying these as potential solutions, potential options. Initiatives to investigate, initiatives to test, to try and address some of the challenges that our community have raised with us over and over and over. And that's what the implementation, draft implementation plan seeks to set up. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'm going to move an amendment. I think it's been enough enough. Counties, this amendment is really seeking just to place clarity around item C and reflects what is already stated both in the report and some of which you just heard.
01:02:00 And it's an amendment to read that item C be amended to read, note the draft implementation plan is divided at attachment 2 to support the implementation of the DMP. Noticing this plan will be refined. With input from partner support organisations reviewed, updated on and that should be an rather than an annual basis. That will be with process including one consideration by Council of the advice provided by the destination stewardship Council. Once established in accordance with its terms of reference, form and function should be specifically agreed to by Council. Noting a key function of the proposed Stewardship Council is to provide recommendations on refinements to the monitoring and evaluation framework.
01:03:00 Two, the specific actions relating to parking will be refined and determined by Council through the parking management process currently in progress as approved in 2025-2026 Council budget. And three, project outlines including any proposed community or stakeholder consultation costings and resources will be reviewed. For each priority action be considered and agreed to by Council as part of the budget process. Do I have a seconder? Mayor Wilkie: Tom, you can't. Tom, you can't. I can't because I'll move the original motion. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Council. Cancel that motion. Thank you. Very briefly, as I said, it is a clarifying amendment. It is one that I think, I don't know how many of you have heard of it. It addresses some of what I consider to be the issues raised by a range that was circulated last week.
01:04:00 I think it's, it is a process, a stepwise process and I think the standard budgetary process is where we do make the final decision on all of this. But we need to give staff a clear direction and that is the direction set by the draft E&B before this current round of budget. If we do, as Council has said, the pilots want to be seen as a Council of action in the moment. Others? Mayor Wilkie: Oh, I see what you're trying to do there, Mr Chair. It's a solution to a lot of the actions proposed in the 15 amendments that we've seen circulated, which is that there be further. But all these actions need to be properly costed, subject to the budget process and the relevant community stakeholders engaged before any of these actions are implemented.
01:05:00 You've expanded upon the implementation. You've made the intention of part C of the recommendation, which was a catch all for all of the proposed amendments. You've just made it a bit clearer here. So I think I appreciate what you're trying to do. It's an elegant solution to, I guess, respect where the other councillors may be coming from with their amendments. And that is assuring the community that all actions will be properly costed, subject to budget process, approved by councillors after consultation with the appropriate stakeholders. Councillor Phillips: I'll speak to it. Although the intention is there, one of the reasons why I'm not going to support it is there's conversation with the councillors around respect and circulating amendments prior to the amendment.
01:06:00 Today, this came through at 11.42, so I actually hadn't seen it. I circulated my amendments about 10 o'clock last Friday because I was under the impression that we were trying to be respectful and give each other enough time to really see where we were coming from. So given that I did that last Friday, I'd like to continue with the amendments as they are. Thank you. Councillor Wegener: Thank you. Well, it's largely redundant, I feel, and normally I don't support redundant things that, amendments and things, but it, I think for the community, maybe they want to see this, it might be helpful to some people, but it's all supported, despite the fact that I normally do not support redundant initiatives.
01:07:00 Councillor Lorentson: Councillor Lottie? Well, some of the councillors, in terms of reading the reports, and trying to come up with amendments that address community concerns, I feel that this overrides the efforts of a few of the councillors around the table. I won't be supporting the amendment, again, I don't support the intent.
01:08:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Closed? Oh, closed. I just do acknowledge it was 11 o'clock, and I spent some... I spent some time on the weekend trying to get my head around all that, that was looking for me, in terms of the amendments. I was respectful of staff by not asking for support on Sunday, and that's why I came this morning. It's not meant to be a waste of time, it's meant to clarify what the staff have said in their reports, and it was meant to, I suppose, allow councillors to reflect whether that, having considered the due process, whether their particular amendments actually would have any further impact. I put the motion. Those in favour? The motion... Oh, sorry, they're against. The motion... Sorry, I'd better say the names. Wilkie, Wegner, and Stockwell. And those against will be Wilson, Finzel, Lawrence, and Phillips.
01:09:00 Okay. We're back to the original motion. Councillor Wilson: I'll move an amendment, please, Chair. Sure. Councillor Phillips: An amendment, please, Chair. I'll move an amendment, please. Copy. Any action? Not in drawback. Okay. Any action or measure within the DMP that is dependent on an unendorsed plan, policy, or strategy must be reframed as only as an investigation, feasibility study, or issue analysis
01:10:00 for future council consideration. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Do we have a seconder? I'll take your second. Councillor Moulton. Councillor Phillips. Councillor Phillips: Thanks. I've tried with my amendments to not over-complicate it, but just be really specific in the language. This amendment just tries one simple but critical thing, in my opinion, which stops assumptions from becoming commitments. So, it says that if an action or measure in this DMP depends on a plan, policy, or strategy that council has not endorsed, then it must be framed as an action or measure. So, it's not framed exactly as that, an investigation, a feasibility study, or an issue analysis, not a commitment. Because we are told plans like this are live working documents, but in practice, they are not neutral. They are decisions in pipelines. So, once the plan is endorsed, the internal processes will kick off.
01:11:00 The budget bids start falling, and future councillors will be later told that it's already in the plan that you're thinking of. So, it's a matter of time before it's approved. I have seen this a few times in my first term, and I believe the community sees this too, and they feel like decisions are made well before they fully understand what has occurred. The DMP describes itself as a long-term plan, supported by a three-year implementation plan, a monitoring and evaluation framework, brand regular review. But when you look at the MEF and the future focus tables, what you actually see can be explicit 2035 targets, and a direct line from strategies, actions, outcomes, and impacts, and measures written as if success equals implementation of specific mechanisms and not improved outcomes, not simply improved outcomes. There are multiple areas where action is specified before the evidence base exists.
01:12:00 So, the plan commits to carrying capacities, a real-time tech management across the iconic sites before costs, enforcement implications, equity impacts, or community tolerance has been tested. The MEF assumes paid parking, commission charges, visitor contribution funding, and community and environmental benefit are successfully established, yet there's no cost modelling, no demand sensitivity analysis, and no clear distribution framework. So, this could be policy by assumption, and I am much more around evidence. Under strategy 2.3, the review alternative funding sources, the DMP doesn't just explore ideas, it talks about strong advocacy to state or visitor contribution powers, piloting paid and dynamic parking with congestion charges, collaborating with booking platforms or funding contributions, establishing a community environmental benefit fund by 2035, five destination projects
01:13:00 being primarily funded. In the MEF, there are no longer framed questions, they are framed outcomes, such as alternative funding sources achieved, community benefit fund established, feasibility completed and trialled. That is a directional commitment. If a future council decides these mechanisms are inequitable, unworkable, or damaging to small businesses, perhaps they will be told it's already endorsed in the data. In the MEF, these are not neutral trials. My amendment just intends to strengthen the plan by requiring clear council decisions before
01:14:00 commitments are implied, and removing ambiguity about those commitments. It protects councillors from being boxed in later, and being honest with the community. I just believe this amendment will restore the correct order around evidence, council decision, implementation, and not the other way around. I really am interested in rebuilding trust with our community. And this is how we stop governance by momentum. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Other things you wish to talk about? Councillor Wilson. Councillor Wilson: I'll try and be quick, because I can't hear you. I don't very much agree with Councillor Phillips. I have the same concerns, that there are predetermined outcomes in the measures. And I did point these out in my feedback. Some of these... I've got examples that I'll read out. Some of these are really tasks or actions, yet they're being presented as measures so that they're already completed at some point in the future.
01:15:00 There's a few examples. 1.3. Noosa Council has determined as a clear policy position that all recreation projects and parks will not be used for parking management, though. There should just be a clear position about the use of recreation parks, not that the actual policy is predetermined. That's not yet been recommended or endorsed in the parking management plan. Same area. 2.4. Noosa Council has established at least two additional park and ride facilities as a measure. Now, there's been no decision on this. We're not told why two. We've no data to support whether we need two park and ride facilities or how much it would cost or what we could achieve. Trial, flexible and timed closures of Hastings Street. No decision made on that yet. During peak periods. To improve the amenity and overall experience of the main bridge placement for everyone. Again, that should come out of the parking management plan. And it's set in a predetermined position that we don't know if the plan will arrive at. 2.3. Increased contribution from major booking platforms into local environmental and community projects.
01:16:00 No decision on that. That's something that council offices are having discussions about, but councils haven't been involved in. So, ethically, I don't know if I'm going to be in support of that. Destination marketing organisation has successfully aligned with the DMP and has established new and alternative funding sources. Again, we haven't got a decision yet on the future of our destination marketing organisation. 2.4. Options for a community and environment benefit fund have been determined and shared with the community and new council is progressing the implementation. So, we can't predetermine that we'll progress implementation of something we haven't decided to implement. So, these are all areas where I'm really concerned and that's why I supported the motion that we need more time to work through these. Otherwise, it puts us in a really risky position that we've endorsed something that's... I don't know if this is Part C, Appendix 2 has been noting, but we might not then see the final. Like, I don't know what the future process is for us to endorse that.
01:17:00 So, these may stay there. So, I support this motion. Mayor Wilkie: President Luton? Councillor Lorentson: I won't go over what's already been said, but I just do want to raise that there's quite a few actions in the plan that may materially affect local businesses and already mentioned paid parking, congestion charging, one-way corridor trials, precinct closures. I just think that the inclusion that any measure or action has to be framed only as an investigation. Feasibility study. Or issue analysis for future council consideration reflects the importance of our small business community and the potential some of these actions may have on their livelihoods.
01:18:00 So, I'm happy to support the amendment in front of us. Mayor Wilkie: So, just a question. One of the actions, support and showcase local food and beverage producers through food and agribusiness network. One of the actions. So, this would be investigate supporting and showcasing local food and beverage producers through food and agribusiness network while building expertise and engaging land owners and in general. I guess that's it. So, it's the investigation which is implicit in this, you're wanting to make sure it's Councillor Wegener: Maybe for the staff, is this, the writing, the way it's written, is that normal and is
01:19:00 this a matter of just semantics? Director Rawlings: I'm probably not going to comment on the last question. The last part of that question. It's an implementation plan that sets up a series of actions and measures. Our community absolutely loud and clear call for some clear outcomes and measures so that there's targets and there's outcomes that we're working towards that the community can keep us accountable to and that we can keep ourselves accountable to. So the structure of the implementation plan is normal, but it's an implementation plan. It's a draft implementation plan, rolling plan, which has all of the things around it
01:20:00 needing to be further detailed to occur. It talks about where there's feasibilities need to be done. It talks about existing processes like parking management plan that's in train. It talks about where there needs to be feasibilities. It talks about where it needs to invest. It talks about where it needs to be investigated, but it also does have some stretch outcomes to say these are the things that we've actually heard need to be managed in our community. So we are putting some stretch outcomes there and we will regularly review, there'll be robust governance, there'll be accountability, there'll be monitoring and if we need to adapt these things, because we've trialled things and they haven't worked or, you know, for a raft of reasons. Then the process allows us to do that. Mayor Wilkie: Another question for Councillor. I'm looking at one of the measures now is in terms of an action is about reducing the
01:21:00 impacts of STA. It says one of the measures or the KPIs is the number of local law complaints to the hotline has reduced by 70% from 5-9-2 the end of year one to 178, a reduction of 414 complaints. So how would this change that measure? Councillor Phillips: It'll only be specific for the ones that are around investigations, because I'm asking for policy and strategy to be endorsed before we make decisions. Okay. So we've got an STA policy, so that's. Correct. Mayor Wilkie: It would be exempt. Councillor Phillips: Because my wording is around, without an unendorsed plan, policy or strategy, then it would have, because I couldn't go in individually and look at, I didn't want to complicate it that much. Yes. So it is around just the ones that don't have a policy or a strategy by council. Mayor Wilkie: Okay. So we're already committed to reducing the impacts on STA, so that wouldn't be affected. Thank you. I'm still trying to get my hand around. That's okay. Yeah.
01:22:00 Yeah. Councillor Finzel: So just to clarify then, this is just, won't provide, I guess it's a question to the staff, that won't, it actually underpins what we're trying to achieve, while at the same time ensuring that any gaps in the language used ensures that we're not supporting anything that's currently not being endorsed. Is that correct? Director Rawlings: Well, I think that's the intention of Councillor Phillips's motion. Councillor Finzel: And are you satisfied with that? Yes. That this inclusion won't be detrimental to the overall plan? Mayor Wilkie: I'm sorry. Mr Chair. Director Rawlings: I have to probably do an assessment against everything. Okay. Thank you. Look, the, you know, the intention and spirit and of the implementation plan is that council is the decision maker.
01:23:00 So anything that requires council's investment, budget allocation, resourcing, inclusion in our annual operational plan, has to be done by the council. And that has to be endorsed and decided by council. So that is, that is the process that we work in. That is the process that any strategy endorsed by council and implementation plan needs to follow. So in that context, then, you know, this, it is absolutely the, the intention. Mayor Wilkie: I notice, as an action, this, this seems to be feasibility studies. I'm sorry. I've, as part of, as part of the measures, already some of the actions? Director Rawlings: Yeah. Because many of them still require more work. And feasibility. And consultation. And analysis. And testing. Yeah.
01:24:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Question? Okay. I will remove her from the panel. This talks about any action or measure within the DMP. I'm presuming the measure referred to is in the monitoring evaluation plan, which is an appendix to the DMP. Is that meant to be covered by this amendment? Councillor Phillips: It refers to the DMP, but when I, that's why on Friday when I circulated it, I was trying to get a, my intention is to make sure that we're not, I'll keep it really simple.
01:25:00 My intention is to make sure that we are not unintentionally putting the cart before the horse by not having a policy or a strategy endorsed by Council. I can't see how we can have it as an outcome in our EMP or through the DMP, but so both. I don't know how we can put that in a plan when we haven't debated it and put it in a policy. That's, I'm happy to ask for help with the wording, but my intention is that I don't believe our community will be satisfied without us endorsing a policy and strategy before it's put in a plan. Councillor Finzel: Yeah, question through the plan, through the plan, through the Council. Councillor Lorentson: Chairs, yeah, it's been a long day. Councillor Finzel: If we're looking at higher order strategies just overarching over this, in my opinion, but it's a question to the CEO, would that document be the corporate plan that could give assurance to Council or Phillips?
01:26:00 Speaker 4: My opinion on this one is that this is, you know, I think Kim mentioned it at the start. This is one of many plans that we have. This is a plan. I think it's not the overall be all plan. We have a corporate plan, which is our overarching. This is one plan that fits in there that's related specifically to tourism and promotion and economy, economy of Noosa. But it's a piece. I think what Councillor Phillips is trying to say is that we don't want to take any measures unless there is a policy or a strategy that's been developed to guide that. And I accept that. I think that's a reasonable position to take.
01:27:00 So this document is not saying that. This document is actually saying here's what we think is a measure. And if there needs to be a strategy or a policy brought to bear before we can actually deliver on some of these things, that's okay. Am I right in saying that personally? Councillor Phillips: Yes, except it doesn't suggest that in some of the wording because it suggests that it's before it. So because the administration needs policy and strategy direction to do the work. So I can't see how a plan or the outcomes of a plan can be put in before we've had it come to Council. For endorsement. So I'll use an example. The parking management plan. We have not endorsed that strategy. So I don't know how we can have it in an implementation plan except for it should be as simple as the strategy for parking management comes to Council for endorsement.
01:28:00 Mayor Wilkie: Question. Councillor Phillips. If we endorse the DMP. The DMP will be an endorsed plan that would make all those actions and measures valid. Councillor Phillips: If the community see us then come to here for a strategy and go why did it just get, because it's already put here that that will happen. It's the, to me it's the wrong way around. Mayor Wilkie: So are you talking about the DMP implementation plan or the DMP? Councillor Phillips: Both. But anything that implies that a decision's made today on car park management shouldn't happen today because we're not debating car park management. Mayor Wilkie: I don't think, yeah that's not the intent either I don't think. Councillor Phillips: No but it's in the implementation plan that that would be procedure and this is what happens because we finish here and then the organisation go and do the work.
01:29:00 That's how it should work. Mayor Wilkie: Yeah. Councillor Phillips: But I'm saying how does that happen when there's no endorsed policy or strategy to assist with that. That's the local government act. We, they need a strategy and policy to do the work. Mayor Wilkie: Not a plan. Probably a question of staff. How many plans and strategies feed into the DMP? Director Rawlings: Many. Lots. There's been a lot of work across the organisation ensuring that the DMP is in place. There's been a lot of work across the organisation ensuring, you know, alignment and input with existing strategies. It's also important to note that all of our existing strategies, including our corporate plan, have targets and indicators and measures. You know, and they provide outcome statements. All of them do. Right. Our environment strategy, our corporate plan, they all provide those things that are outcomes, aspirations, indicators and measures.
01:30:00 You know, like 50% protection of our conservation estate. That was endorsed as a strategy. Councillor Wilson: I'm questioning the relevance of the question because Councillor Phillips's amendment is about things that are not yet endorsed, not about the existing policies and plans. Thanks. Mayor Wilkie: I guess my question is what portion... Yeah. I'll just... Yeah. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: It's over there, but I don't understand what you're saying. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'm going to speak. I'm not sure that the amendment has fully achieved what Councillor Phillips was hoping. You'll see in one of the appendices we've listed all the existing strategies and commitments that have led to a range of different strategies. And a lot of them are the higher level commitments to the
01:31:00 The main concerns, as I've heard of, is in the final column of the Monitoring Evaluation Program, where staff have indicated what would be an appropriate measure. Just to be clear, it's not a target. It's how we might measure. The target is if you look at the outcome and the impacts, that's saying what we want. It could be down as a key performance measure and this. It's really important to understand that the actions as written, if we look at the one that we've been talking about, actions on parking, it's really clear what the process is going to be. So the action in the DMP already does highlight if it's something we're going ahead with or something that needs further research. I've just been flipping through so many things I've lost my spot there.
01:32:00 So it's... It's hard to see why we would need to do this when, to me, if the DMP sets out, under the strategy, each action, and which one will go straight to a budget process and which one is going to be drawn through a more detailed process to get to it, I think it's already there. The... The issue for me isn't that... And it's also going to be complicated about what level of support is needed in a planning policy or strategy. You know, it's not clear on when this particular element would click in. So to me, it just complicates things. And while I understand the concern that maybe some of the measures aren't what individual
01:33:00 councils think should be there or are taking a step too far, in essence, the process that's been outlined with the review of the monitoring evaluation framework, the budgetary process, it doesn't create a threat, it creates an indication of what's the way we'd like to measure it. And I think the actions are all couched in appropriate terms. Thank you. Thank you. You may. Councillor Wilson: How can you have a measure in an implementation plan that is the achievement of something that's not being endorsed? That's what this is trying to address. So how can you have a measure that's... Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Cancel it. Cancel it. We're not debating anything about implementation plans. Councillor Wilson: No. Because that's where the measures are. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: No, the measures are in... The only measures that we're debating here are in monitoring evaluation framework. Councillor Wilson: But they relate to the actions that are in the MP. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: That's right. We can't avoid that. You're mentioning the draft. The draft is not subject to submission because it's not part of the PPP. So if you look at Appendix 2, that is being adopted today, so it's the monitoring evaluation
01:34:00 framework. That's where the measures are. That's right. So that's relevant to the amendment? Not the implementation framework. Councillor Wilson: That's where the measure is. Sorry, it's relevant to the amendment. Can you amend it? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah. No, I'm going to go the other way. You asked me a question about the implementation. Councillor Wilson: Well, because the amendment talks about measures. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah. Councillor Wilson: So it's relevant to the Appendix 2. Yeah. And that's what the question was. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: No, your question... You're about the attachment to the item, not attachment to the... Appendix 2, sorry. Appendix 2 is a draft. Thank you. Appendix 1. Appendix 2 is a draft three year implementation plan. It's not part of the DMP. The only part that we're looking at endorsing at today's meeting is the appendices to monitoring
01:35:00 evaluation framework. Mayor Wilkie: Within the DMP itself? Not the monitoring and evaluation. Not the evaluation? It's part of the draft implementation plan. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So if we look at the... Councillor Finzel: Which appendix, please, Mr. Chair? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Which appendix? It's 5.2, page 48, monitoring and evaluation framework. Councillor Wilson: It's 48. It can't talk about measures without... Deputy Mayor Stockwell: No, I think page 48 does have measures as well. Yeah. Attachment 1 and attachment 2. Councillor Phillips: It's appendix 2. No, in the DMP. That's why I did this in the first place, though. It's entwined.
01:36:00 Councillor Wilson: The measures of... On page 48, which is appendix 2. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Appendix 2. It's appendix 2. You were talking about the attachment point. Appendix 2. Do you understand what I'm doing? Yeah. You were relating to the implementation plan. Your question is why I stopped you. Councillor Wilson: Okay. It's the same measures. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So your question relates to the monitoring and evaluation framework? Councillor Wilson: No. I was saying how can you have a measure that is an achievement of a policy that's not yet Things like establishing two additional park or ride facilities.
01:37:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: The current transport strategy poses nothing like the installation of a new park or ride facility. Councillor Wilson: The generations of a community environment benefit fund have been determined and shared with the community and there's a council that's progressing into this section. So having that be a measure of something that the fund hasn't actually been determined if that will go ahead yet. Speaker 4: That would come out of the Act. That would come out of the Actions, right? The Actions then would determine, and the Council would determine whether we go forward and try to hit those measures. But that's just a stretch measure of opportunity. It's not, it's a decision. Mayor Wilkie: Look, I'll speak. I've had a think about this. I think a measure is a sign that an action has been achieved, so saying that there's going to be an investigation into a measure, or a feasibility study into a measure, is post the event. It's the action that's the key.
01:38:00 So I think there just needs to be more thought put into this amendment, because a measure is a sign that something's been achieved. So to say we're going to investigate the implementation of this measure just doesn't compute. Although I think the action, it's implied in here that there's going to be cost analysis done of actions, feasibility studies done on actions, before they're implemented. And once they're implemented, the measure will be how we can tell whether they've been effective or not. So to say there's going to be a feasibility study into a measure doesn't compute. So for that reason, just the wording, I can't support this amendment the way it's worded currently.
01:39:00 Councillor Wegener: I'm getting my head around it. And so parking is something that I'm obviously very sensitive about. And so in this one, which is the implementation monitoring evaluation, which is a part of the DMV, which is what we're voting on, it says in 1.3, ensure fair and efficient access to parking for locals and reduce congestion in high-demand areas. So that's the action. And then the output says smart parking system implemented in high-demand areas, providing real-time availability, et cetera. But I think that it seems to me the crux is that Jess is saying, well, no, this is already assumed.
01:40:00 Like it's been implemented as already, but it's in the outputs. So that language doesn't bother me because we have the action is here. And then the output's down the track. I think that visionary hoping that we get there is not a part of a policy because we're still wandering through that policy. But that language doesn't actually alarm me. And even though I'm probably very critical. I think that's normal. I don't think you would say investigate. That's why I brought up the word semantics. I think that it actually is normal. And I don't think that we're bound to do that. We're not going to. It's not a failure if we don't do that. But we are following through with the actions. So I really get what you're saying, Jess.
01:41:00 But I don't. I don't. It doesn't. That doesn't come up to me supporting it. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Question to staff. It would appear to me a range of the concerns could be addressed by adding the word potential above the word measures in the one-three valuation framework without any significant impact. It's not a simple thing. Mayor Wilkie: We're moving it. Director Rawlings: It's not a simple thing. Look, I think you could put potential. You know, it's clearly said that the monitoring and evaluation framework will be refined with collective input, stewardship council input, and evolved, tested. So, you know, you could put potential there. You'll note in the draft implementation plan we use the word potential because to signal that these are potential measures.
01:42:00 These are partners. These are, you know, potential approaches. But they need refinement. And, you know, collective kind of buy-in and further scoping. So we do already use the word potential in the implementation plan for that reason. Councillor Lorentson: Can I ask a question to Jess? Did you put the wording together for this amendment? Because when you put the wording together for this amendment, you can't just say, you know, you read the plan. The language was unclear. That you were seeking clarity for yourself. Was that... I'm trying to understand how this came about. Councillor Phillips: Every time I look at a document, I think of people like me before I ran for council. And I just look at it with real simple language so then there's no discussion like this. We sit in all the workshops and we have so much more working knowledge. But the community don't sit in all those workshops.
01:43:00 So whenever I look at anything like this, I look at a lens with simplicity language so it doesn't imply that there's certain things that could happen. Okay. Councillor Lorentson: So it's... You were seeking clarity and putting yourself in our residents' shoes and asking the question, what does this mean? And you're just trying to simplify it. Yeah. Great. Thank you. Would you support potential measure? Mayor Wilkie: Yeah. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor? Yes. There was a question. There was a question. Yeah. Thank you. So the question, Councillor Phillips, was would you support potential that would be a separate amendment? Okay. We have some councillors who haven't talked to the motion. Anyone wish to further talk?
01:44:00 No. Councillor Phillips: For council, I always now look at our operating of business and how that continues to increase and sometimes now the way I'm looking at it is more how does this keep continuing and at this point is when I can have some sort of level of control for community around giving them certainty that strategy and policy is what sets direction. That's how I always thought it should be. So my amendments today are all directed at making sure that a plan is considered with the language used, that it should never imply decisions because I think back to the original paper I put up on the wall in the first month of sitting in this room and I said I want to rebuild trust with community and that came down to the decisions in this room to me have to be based on the
01:45:00 lots of evidence, data, feasibility, tell me how much it's going to cost, all of those things before I can just endorse it. So I don't want to imply decisions are made through the plan and that's the intention of my amendment. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay, I've put the amendment. Those in favour? That's Councillor Wilson, Lorentson and Phillips. Against? That's Councillor Wilkie, Finzel, Wegener and Stockwell. The amendment is not accepted.
01:46:00 Councillor Phillips: And I'd like to move another amendment. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Sure. Councillor Phillips: Is it going to be the same thing? Same wording and add potential please. Okay. Alright, well I'm going to try amendment two and then I'll work on it while someone else... Deputy Mayor Stockwell: We will. We're coming up to two hours in 14 minutes. We'll have a break and then we'll work on that one over the break. Mayor Wilkie: No, just not together. Please excuse me while I spend the penny. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: We'll keep going. I'll keep going. Councillor Phillips: Can I move another amendment? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: You have the floor, Councillor. Councillor Phillips: Thank you. Amendment two, Cathy. Thank you. Actions that pre-empt decisions on matters not yet determined by Council including but not limited to parking management approaches. Visitor contributions. Establishments. Actions that preempt measures and new revenue mechanisms must be removed or reclassified
01:47:00 as subject to Council decision following the receipt of evidence and analysis. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Phillips: I'll try not to rehash anything that I've already said. So any of my amendments, this is one that is trying to remove or reword measures that pre-empt decisions that Council has made. That's not yet made. That matters because in several places in this document moves beyond setting direction
01:48:00 and instead implies that specific policy outcomes are already agreed to when they're not. The DMP includes actions and measures that point towards particular parking management approaches, visitor contribution mechanisms, short-term accommodation responses and new revenue tools. In many cases these have not been determined by Council and they have not been supported by the completed feasibility, economic or equity analysis. When those items appear in the plan as actions or measures rather than as options subject to Council decision they can create the impression that approval has already occurred and it is exactly how implied approvals are created. Once language like this is endorsed it is treated potentially as internal direction. It informs work programs, resourcing, shapes future reports that come back to Council and that's not how I like to make decisions. Thank you. By reclassifying these actions as subject to Council decision following receipt of evidence
01:49:00 and analysis we restore the correct governance sequence. This amendment strengthens the DMP by removing ambiguity and by and about what has been approved. It protects Council from being unintentionally locked into future positions and it's honest with the community about what we are still considering. It closes the door on implied approvals and for those reasons I'm going to leave it up to Council to support with the amendment as the commitment to the responsibility we hold up this table. Mayor Wilkie: I'll speak against the amendment. We're talking about a plan so a lot of the actions in there are preemptive. They haven't been done yet. They haven't been decided upon yet because it's a plan. So this is a very, I perceive this to be a very obstructive, delaying and confusing amendment.
01:50:00 It's not a plan. Councillor Wegener: Question. So since we're looking at parking, and it seems 1.3.1, optimized parking and traffic management in action 1.3, this part of the draft plan says accelerate a trial of innovative parking solutions, including dynamic systems, technology-driven tools, etc. So accelerate a trial. So then when we look over here, once again, to the same outputs, I don't need to repeat it, but it says that smart parking systems implemented in high demand areas. So is this, again, what you're looking at? This seems like very particular, the fully focus of your amendment. Councillor Phillips: Not specifically on that, but I will talk on that because we have had workshops in relation to that where we've asked, has the tech been, do we have the tech, do we have the budget, do we have the resources, do we have, all of these things have been asked in workshops and we've been told we don't have that yet.
01:51:00 So I don't understand how we can put it as a predetermined outcome in the DMP when we've been told by the Director of Infrastructure that that is not something that can be achieved anytime soon. Councillor Wegener: So when it comes to, you have the accelerate trials and then over here, you have that, the output, the activity of products achieved during the project. And I see what you're saying, absolutely. But I think that's just normal language. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Can I ask a question? Okay. No, sorry. I'll follow that up. There was a statement that the Director has suggested, so I'm not ready for that yet. Was the relevant directors and managers of... of each area that was, would be involved in the implementation of those actions and consulted in the other way and was there agreement from those relevant managers and directors?
01:52:00 Director Rawlings: Yes, absolutely there was and I'm happy for any of the directors to comment. We're both involved, both drafted and supported the actions and I just might clarify that, that that action is to accelerate the completion of the Parking Management Plan, that's the action, to include consideration of these, these things. Director Walsh wanted to comment. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yes, and so the parking management plan includes a very basic premise of parking management, which are these times, 15 minutes, two hours and so, Director Rawlings: as well as the availability of disabled car park spaces and loading bays. It can include consideration of dynamic parking and we use the dynamic parking word very specifically because pay parking is almost like old hat because the new term is dynamic parking because dynamic parking using technologies means that sometimes a year you can have free parking, other times of the year you can actually have a pay parking.
01:53:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So Director, going into an explanation and then to the question, the question was that you were consulted on the, what's in the monthly evaluation framework that you're having... Thank you. Thank you for the correction and yes, we were, we were consulted and this has been a subject of workshops with the councillors and we've got further workshop sharing with the councillors to take the data we have in the next stages. Thank you. Thank you. I wanted to speak to you and I can't support because basically you're saying we only want things in the plan that we've already decided. It's a really perverse way of looking at planning. Planning is setting out what you want to do and what you want to achieve from doing that. That's what this is all about. And if you look at the words in the actions, this only relates to the actions. All those actions are already framed accordingly.
01:54:00 We've just heard the one about accelerating the parking management plan. Trial the use of dedicated bus lanes. Explore incentivisation of smart travel charges. So the wording in the actions are really clear. There'll be further things done. But what I find is it's not an appropriate way to assess and to count decision progress in government analysis. It's like saying ensure that we follow the normal process. We don't need an amendment. Others wish to talk? Councillor Finzel: Can I just talk to it, just to clarify that we're talking about the draft three year implementation plan under respecting community, which looks at the improvement in infrastructure and transport solutions. It does give us a possible funding range up there and gives us the traffic rights accordingly, which indicates to me that it clearly signifies what's been allocated funding.
01:55:00 I'm just wondering, is that what you're trying to answer? Like, to give clarity around this document? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: What you're reading from is a draft which we're not endorsing. So this adoption, this one, once again, would only relate to the NB. That particular document is a draft for notary, not endorsement. So we're looking at a different document than the NB? It'd be the destination management plan, and I think, and it only relates to the actions. It doesn't relate to the measures in the evaluation framework. So the actions are the ones that are numbered 1.32, 1.33, 1.34, etc.
01:56:00 Sorry. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Would you wish to answer the question? Councillor Phillips: I'm not overly sure with the question. I'm not looking at the draft report. I'm looking at the destination management plan. That's where it's referred to with the different trials and committing us to things that I have not had the workshop on yet. So I'm not prepared to make decisions without being fully across it. While staff may be across it, I am not. Councillor Wilson: Thank you for your clarification. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay. Yeah, I will talk. Councillor Wilson: I'll support it. Although my concern goes broader than the actions, and I've already raised those concerns on things like strategies, the terminology used for strategies, actions, tasks, outputs, outcomes, impacts, measures all being quite modelled in this framework.
01:57:00 And so then, we do get into, as Councillor Wegener said, some language that goes in the framework. Councillor Lorentson: There were a lot of questions asked during the survey and consultation process in terms of the broadness of some of the questions. For example, whether we allow open recreation
01:58:00 space to be used for car parks, whether it's in terms of a visitor charge, congestion tax, you know, when I read the amendment in front of me, I don't look for reasons not to support it. I look for reasons to support it because I understand the intent of the councillor in front of us. And to me, it provides transparency and clarity for the community. It's, you know, it's basically saying we're going to avoid any implied automatic implementation that any implementation will undergo further analysis and due diligence. So to me, go back to the intent, which is with Councillor Phillips, is to ensure that the community that have spoken and are concerned with some of the broadness of the questions that were asked during the survey and consultation process, that we don't automatically implement a decision
01:59:00 without further investigation. The DMP says 75% of people supported a visitor, say for instance, congestion tax. It requires further analysis. So for those reasons, I think this is to ensure that our community and their concerns are addressed. So I'm happy to support and thank Councillor Phillips for the amendment. Thank you. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Does anyone else want to speak? Mayor Wilkie: Just a question. This is actually saying that actions being removed from the. Councillor Phillips: Actions that pre-empt decisions. Mayor Wilkie: So that could be a lot of actions that pre-empt, that are part of the plan be removed from
02:00:00 the plan. Councillor Phillips: Anything that we don't have a decision on. Mayor Wilkie: I. OK. OK. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Anyone else wish to talk? Councillor Phillips, you wish to close. Councillor Phillips: Yes, quickly around, I think whenever there's been consultation with something like this it's hard not to get the results that we got. The video was beautiful, we got so much feedback that was along the way. My issue is always that, back to the community that aren't deep diving and reading through, rigorously through reports, is that they will of course answer a certain way when they don't know what the unintended consequence to their rates or to their future lifestyle here is.
02:01:00 And I can't confidently say that either without knowing, and my whole life has been based on making sure that I'm doing the right thing. Making decisions that have been informed by evidence before. I've never put someone before the court without evidence. It just wouldn't work. So I've always looked for data and feasibility and all of those things that align to give me a really objective decision. And so again, the intention is around making sure that we don't make decisions without strategy and policy to support a plan. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay, I put the amendment. Those in favour? That's Councillor Wilson, Lorentson and Phillips. Those opposed? That's Councillor Wilkie, Finzel, Wegener and Stockwell. It's now 2.32. Councillors will have a 10 minute adjournment.
02:13:00 Okay, welcome back Councillors. We, before we went, we suggested that Councillor Phillips may work on the alternative. So we're working to her motion regarding the motion for the evaluation framework. And we can deal with that in the media future. If you want to read it out and the words can catch up.
02:14:00 Councillor Phillips: So, any action or measure. Councillor Wilson: Just in that without this though. Councillor Phillips: Amended heading in the final column of the monitoring and evaluation framework. To read potential measures. Councillor Lorentson: I'm happy to second that. Happy to second. Oh, thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Just wait for that to come up on the board. So this, your camera's still looking. Oh, there. Camera's still up. Finzel. Councillor Lorentson: So, what is this? Mayor Wilkie: I don't know. I'll speak to you where she is. Okay. Thank you. Thank you.
02:15:00 Councillor Lorentson: Um, is this an agonised EP, or? It would be. Yeah. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And it relates to, appendix two, page four, yeah. Speaker 3: So, you could just tell me. Yes. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: That's it. That's just saying that all those dot points in grey on page 48 are just highlighted as potential measures to avoid concern that others might. Speaker 2: Oh, sorry. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Can't get a hold of that. That's okay. Speaker 2: Right.
02:16:00 Speaker 4: Sort of. Sorry. Sorry. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay. Well, Councillor Finzel, you'll see that Councillor Phillips has moved. That amendment has discussed. Councillor Phillips: Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And is about to talk to. Councillor Phillips: I'll keep it really brief. I think that in the appendix where it just talks about measures, it does seem to lock us in, to certain measure. We've just reframed it to say potential measures rather than committing us to that's how the strategy will be measured. I don't really need to go into it in detail, I don't think.
02:17:00 Councillor Wegener: I'll support it, because now that I see it, I wouldn't want to see that the press say to quote. The outputs that smart parking system implemented, blah, blah, blah, as something that's already happened, and it's set in stone, and being taken well and truly out of context. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you, Mr. Phillips, and Mr. Phillips, do you wish to comment? Speaker 1: I think he's put the motion as in favor. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: That's unanimous. So it becomes part of the motion.
02:18:00 Councillor Lorentson: So, does anyone else wish to talk to us and state their motion? I have some amendments, thank you. Councillor Lorentson, you may have the floor. I might start with this one, that DMP delivery risk register be established and included in the terms of reference for the destination stewardship. Thank you. Council, and reported to council annually as part of the annual review. The register will outline delivery risk, dependencies, resource constraints and mitigation strategies. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: We have a seconder for that. Councillor Finzel: I need a seconder. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor Finzel. Councillor Lorentson. Councillor Lorentson: So just note that the delivery of the DMP is subject to the purpose of the DMP, it is subject And we've discussed this around the table today, fundings of risk, staffing, external dependencies, and stakeholder support.
02:19:00 At the moment, there's a risk section in the report, but it's actually not included as part of the DMP. So my amendment just ensures that the DMP also develops a comprehensive risk management strategy. And to have it reported regularly or annually will help improve transparency and also enable early intervention if there's any implementation challenges. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Does anyone else wish to talk to this? Councillor Finzel. Councillor Finzel: Yeah, happy to talk. Thank you, Councillor Lorentson, for bringing this forward. I always support anything that can identify risks and help close those gaps.
02:20:00 So I think in good governance and looking forward to the future to ensure that everything we do has an extra set of frameworks around it to eliminate this risk, I fully support that. I think it can only benefit where we're heading. I think anything around frameworks. I think anything that works around risk, potential things happening, whether that's economic or social, I think it's really important that as we give people a voice in this document that we put every way possible to ensure that the outcomes keep everyone safe. So I will support this. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Councillor Phillips: I'll speak to it. Thank you, Councillor Lorentson. I think the bit that I like the most is reporting.
02:21:00 I think it's really important that there is a formal review process of anything that we do, so yeah, happy to support, especially in our risks, so thanks. Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: Question. Does this imply that the funding for this is... going to be one of the things we tick off on as we lead into the next budget process? I mean I personally like to see the Destination Stewardship Council established. But is that implied in this amendment is my question. Councillor Lorentson: Question to me. I had sought advice and was told that the intention was that a risk register will be included as part of the Terms of Reference for the Destination Stewardship Council, so that's why it was included, before then I hadn't had that included.
02:22:00 Does it imply that, I would say... It's part of the annual review, is it implied, I might throw that question to the Director of Environment, Kim Rawlings, thank you. Director Rawlings: Yeah, sure, yeah, Councillor Lorentson did seek some comment from me on this, and what I advised is that subject to the adoption of the DMP a first priority is intended to develop the Terms of Reference for the Destination Stewardship Council, who were intended to play an integral role in the DMP's success, the proposed purpose, membership structure and recruitment process for the Destination Stewardship Council will be presented to Council for endorsement prior to its establishment.
02:23:00 Okay, that's a set of time frames. No, it just says that it's an action, intention, proposed, still subject to Terms of Reference and recruitment process, which has to come to Council. Yeah. Councillor Lorentson: And the... Sorry, question to... Director Rawlings: Sorry, there was a second part to that related specifically to risk. Do you want me to comment on that? Thank you. Yeah, yeah, sorry, Councillor Lorentson. Then it also said that, yes, I suggest this be done annually, and I would suggest that it be done as part of the annual review and reporting on the draft implementation plan as stated in the Council report. A DMP risk register informed by risks identified in the risk opportunity section of the Council report is also intended to be part of the reference, Terms of Reference, sorry, for the Destination Stewardship Council. This register could also include additional risks identified by the Stewardship Council as part of their ongoing government's responsibilities.
02:24:00 If... Just a question, where... All of the... Sorry, can't hear you. All if established. Councillor Wegener: Thank you. Again, redundancy. Is this redundant because we will be discussing the Terms of Reference and so forth for the Destination Stewardship Council? So, is this the time to address the risk register, or is it when we're actually doing it? Director Rawlings: The intention is that you will, a Terms of Reference, which would contain all of the risks identified by the Stewardship Council. The purpose of the Destination Stewardship Council is remit. The governance, the risk, all of those things are yet to come to Council. If they are subject to endorsement of the DMP, which has an action in it to explore establishment of the Destination Stewardship Council, part of that process would be to develop Terms of Reference and bring that to Council for consideration.
02:25:00 Councillor Wegener: I'll speak to it. It just doesn't seem the place to vote on this now. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, I'll speak to it. Councillor Wilson reminded me of the peer review on this particular issue just over the break, and I've looked it up since, and it was identified by one of the peer reviewers as a gap, and I think it's quite reasonable to just add it as an item if the Director's already stated that she thinks it is something that would be happening anyway, but if it's a peer reviewer saying, look, I've read it, here you go, this is how we're addressing it. Councillor Wegener: We're addressing it. That's safe. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I think that's nice. Thanks. Good. Others wish to talk? Councillor Lorentson, who's closed. I'll put the motion, all those in favour? That's Councillor Wilson, Wilkie, Finzel, Lorentson, Phillips, and Stockwell, and 6-1 Councillor Williams. Councillor Wegener: Okay.
02:26:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Do we have anything else? Councillor Lorentson. Councillor Lorentson: I have an amendment that I'd like to test that any action likely to materially affect local business activity. Is this the one you just emailed? Just emailed. Yeah. Just tweet the words. So that any action likely to materially affect local business activity or the amenity of nearby residents. Is this the one you just emailed? The measures such as paid parking, congestion charging, one-way corridor trials or precinct closures be subject to meaningful engagement with affected sectors and communities prior to implementation.
02:27:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, the word would be complete. So, move, Councillor Arntzen. Seconded, Councillor Phillips. And, Councillor Arntzen, you have the floor. Councillor Lorentson: No, you've excluded some of the extra wording, Cathy. Can I change that? That any action likely to materially affect local business activity or the amenity of nearby residents? That's the inclusion of nearby residents.
02:28:00 So, I've just used as example. Some of the proposed actions in the plan, such as paid parking, congestion charging, one-way corridor trials, precinct closures. I think it's really important that we articulate that there will be a requirement for further consultation, understanding that some of these actions have the potential to significantly, significantly impact, not just the local businesses, but the residents that live nearby. Also has the, some of the actions also have the potential to impact customer access, trading conditions.
02:29:00 So, I think a requirement that we target some sort of engagement to those that are potentially impacted, that will ensure that unintended economic consequences, that will ensure that unintended economic consequences, and for those residents living nearby, access consequences are identified early and that decisions are again informed by evidence consultation and understanding of local business realities and residential and residents' rights to access. Councillor Phillips: I'll speak to it to support just how much I want local businesses to be included in this. I really am, I really want to make sure that, I just, when you understand how a small business operates and the extra layers of what they have to do currently,
02:30:00 it's trying to find space. And it is not just, you know, the economic pressures that they're going through. And this town that I grew up in is literally based on, on small businesses and family run businesses. And if they are going to be materially affected in any way by a decision we make, whether it, I would think I intended, unintentionally. But they, they're so busy working with their families and their families in the city, I just don't think they would have had the time to read and go through this and maybe there's some provider that we have to change or someone, you know, there's been submissions but at the level that I would like to make sure we're really hearing from, we're going
02:31:00 to have to go to them and really understand the true effects that they are experiencing because anecdotally, which I never like speaking on, but I hear that it's some tough times out there. So if there's any way that we can make sure that we protect someone that's income doesn't hit their fortnightly wage on a Tuesday, like most government workers, these businesses rely on trade and they work hard. I brought in a small business and let me tell you, it was not an easy ride for them. At all. So anything we can do, you know, Tom, you've had your own small business, there's some we've got to make sure they are included in anything that could unintentionally make their life any harder.
02:32:00 Otherwise it will contribute to business fallovers and I just, I can't risk that if we can make sure we protect them, then I would jump up and say let's do whatever we can. Mayor Wilkie: It's standard practice for this council, if they're doing any works that potentially materially affect local businesses, the amenity of residents, that engagement occurs. This is standard practice for the council, I remember, I guess the upgrade to Sunshine Beach Road and Mr Junction was one of the main, some of the biggest bits of work that we've undertaken. And the, I don't know. I think businesses were made well aware of what was going to happen there. Of course we will subject, there'll be engagement with effective sectors before implementation for any of this. I guess we're moving into one of the spaces now with these amendments that are perceived
02:33:00 to be redundant. I don't know whether people that are really busy with their businesses will have the time to read council reports. But if it helps, I don't know. If we can make explicit an understanding of what is standard practice for this council, I'll support it. Councillor Finzel: Yeah, look, I think, you know, overall we do engage the community before we do anything significant, but in terms of supporting this amendment to provide a surety for the people that, you know, are out there swallowing away every day, and at the same time, you know, I'm happy to support that. I think the act of engaging residents' voice is, you know, activism in itself. It's really important that we bring the voice of our community along to our decision making.
02:34:00 I think when we're talking about collaborative vision for a future, for generations to come, I think it's important that every opportunity that we have to give assurity to our residents that we're providing a shared voice around the table is a foundation of equity. So I'm happy to support this. I think it'll give assurance to our business people who are out there, including our families who, you know, travel through the Shire daily, that we're taking into consideration the impacts of measures and decisions we make and that their voice does matter. So I'll support this amendment. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Chas Wilson? Councillor Wilson: I support the intention and definitely looking after our local businesses and economy, but I do have a little bit of a concern about the wording.
02:35:00 It could sound like we're going to engage, but then implement anyway. Like you just said, subject to engagement with affected sectors before implementation. Like, does that engagement actually lead to a decision on whether or not to implement, or could that be right as you're implementing anyway? Councillor Lorentson: Good point. Is that a question? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah, I'm not going to ask a substantive question to start, and it may be mainly in Director Walsh's area. I'm looking at all those items listed. They're all ones that would require a decision council. That's correct. So if that amendment was changed to before a, determined by council, would that be, would that resolve your issue?
02:36:00 And are you happy with that? Councillor Lorentson: Yep, it's obviously, it's across the line. I think the, everyone understands the intent of the amendment. If tweaking of words gets it across the line, I'm happy for the changes. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, all councillors, would you be happy to have an inclination just before? Council decision? Before a council decision? Councillor Finzel: Through the Chair, for continuity, we have to allow council judges to fall before we own potential. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: This is just wording that doesn't change the intent of changing the motion, it's just a grammatical change to make it clear what's intended. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you. Just get rid of the implementation, so before council's decision. Council decision, yes. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And I'll support that, as, I don't know what Tom's going to vote for, but it is basically a restatement.
02:37:00 Of how we operate. And it is, it will be an interesting process because, yes, we have to, those most impacted, you know, we probably, there'll be staff members doing the patient street association every day of the week. We have, you know, there's not going to be a question of whether they're engaged. I'm not going to say that, that everyone's going to be 100% in support of it. Because some of, you know, any change is going to raise concerns and support. We had a briefing many years ago by the chair of the Car Park Association of Australia, and he said, if you want to maximise return to your local businesses, change all the parking in front of your main street to one hour slots, go away for three months. Because after three months, even the capos are coming back and saying, how much extra crap, turn it over and get into a business. But if you go to a Haytham Street site and change it over one hour, I bet you get a lot of feedback saying, don't do it. So it's, it is an issue, but you do have to do this.
02:38:00 And it's both broader consultation like we have now at the strategic level, or when you get down to the place specific actions, you need to make sure that there's special effort taken to include the thoughts and desires of those who are going to be most impacted. Councillor Wegener: For staff, when saying the word engagement, is that consistent, totally consistent with our standard procedure for these types of changes or things that we're going to do? So is the word, by saying engagement, isn't going to confuse people? Director Rawlings: No, I think that's completely consistent. Councillor Wegener: So it's a bit redundant, but I'll support it this time. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Any other people who want to talk? Councillor Lodz and Mr Kynas? Councillor Lorentson: I'll just quickly, yeah, I think it needs to be clearly articulated.
02:39:00 And I also think it's really important that we give respect to our small businesses. They're mum and dads. They're our neighbours. They're people sitting around in this room. The destination management plan is going to have an impact on their livelihoods. So I think, you know, as many ways as we can, we need to ensure, whether it's via amendments or via policy, that any decisions we make is not going to detrimentally impact on their livelihoods. So, again, call it redundant. I think it's totally, it's too critical not to pull out and make clear. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay. I'll put the amendment. Those in favour? That's unanimous.
02:40:00 Now it becomes part of the substantive motion of Councillor Wilson. Councillor Wilson: Can I have an amendment, please? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Far away. Councillor Wilson: Commend item C, to read, not take attachment 2 into consideration until that has been reviewed by an appropriate executive committee. Mayor Wilkie: The question is, is that too similar to the alternative motion? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So Attachment 2 is the draft. Index 2. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: No, no, it says Attachment 2. Now this is about the draft implementation plan.
02:41:00 It will be refined with input from partners for the review and update on an annual basis in the form of a council budget. So I'm just thinking whether it changes, whether it is a move or not. We've got to retain the same thing. The amended part of it is... Yeah, I'll accept the amendment because it talks about a peer review which isn't mentioned in the policy at the moment. Have we got a seconder? Second Council Bill, sorry. Thank you. Councillor Wilson: I mentioned before my concern that this part of the plan seems to have been quite challenging throughout the process. And we have talked about it many times in workshops. And so maybe it's time to bring in someone else that's independent of the whole process to be able to do another review.
02:42:00 So I'm a bit different from just Riff. I think we need to go further than just refine this document. And to... Thank you. And to make sure it's a really, really strong framework that we've been able to report on. In some of the workshops along the way, I've given feedback on KPIs. I don't know how we don't even have KPIs. We just have measures. And I've offered a couple along the way, which has been accepted, but that's in the context of many years of experience in teaching business performance and strategy at postgraduate level, as well as developing KPIs and school cards in large listed companies such as the University of Caltechs. Some of my feedback has been as simple as, that's a great idea, but how would you measure its success? Well, yes, we can measure the number of people on the bus, but that doesn't actually tell us if there are fewer cars on the road, and has that actually used congestion, which is a part of the action. So we've had these many times over, and most of those measures didn't really change, despite
02:43:00 other alternate suggestions. Our feedback at workshops is based on seeing parts of documents on the projected screens, and we didn't see them until the 4th of December, and there were fewer reviews as well over that time. I just think there hasn't been time yet for all of that feedback to be brought together to improve this document to, as I said, refine it, which is really where we're at at the moment. There's a lot of mixed terminology. There's a lot of mixed terminology between tasks, measures, outputs, outcomes, impacts, that I think are quite significant for everything. It's still lacking in clear targets and KPIs, and measures that are directly relevant to the actions. So, I think at this point, we'll just keep going round in circles with the same, I don't know how much the partner and support organisations have been involved so far, but just lots
02:44:00 of different people's reviews and comments that we've received. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you. How many independent experts did we get to peer review this already? Director Rawlings: We had two independent peer reviews, and I'm a bit different, but I can note that it was Councillor Wilson: at least one or two. I don't know how many of those peer reviews said very similar things, in terms of the terminology around measures and things, and some other structural things. Okay. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor Beazley? Councillor Finzel: Just through the Chair, for clarification, I thought three people required a peer review, not two. Councillor Wilson: One, wasn't it?
02:45:00 Three. Director Rawlings: No, two in the peer reviews. And then councillors will also have a peer review. So, we'll be doing a peer review of the document and providing their input and review. Counsellors will be providing the document at the same time. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And as councillor, I think what we're looking at doing is councillor Wilson did have one on one session, did you want to start that review, is that right? Councillor Wilson: No. I didn't read the paper. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Read the paper. Councillor Wilson: Yeah, okay. That's correct. Mayor Wilkie: Just to clarify, what is the process for having all these measures and actions refined as if this motion is ratified today, there is a process for all this to be refined and improved upon? Director Rawlings: Yes, that's why the draft implementation plan is provided as a noting for Council, not an endorsing, because there is a process over the coming months to work with stakeholders, potential organisations that might share responsibility and refine, review, update all of those aspects of the implementation plan.
02:46:00 So that it can inform business cases, projects, scopes, submissions to budget. Mayor Wilkie: And that would involve taking on board the best advice from the two independent expert peer reviews? Director Rawlings: Yes, some of that advice has already been taken on board and what's in front of you reflects that advice. Some of it absolutely will continue to influence the implementation plan. There's also the proposal to establish the Destination Stewardship Council and it clearly says that if that council is established that they should also have oversight and opportunity to review, import, refine, align both the monitoring and evaluation framework and the implementation plan.
02:47:00 Mayor Wilkie: And would there still be room for any councillors who wanted to have input into refining the measures and actions to do so as part of that process? Councillor Wilson: Yes, absolutely. Director Rawlings: It will come back to Councillor Anderson. It can come back to Councillor Anderson if that's what council would like. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So question, I'm just looking specifically at the wording. The... Just not taking the plan into account, into consideration is what's going to happen. That doesn't give any indication of... I'm not supporting what's proposed for year one that's coming to the budget. Would you be happy with that, that you could still suggest what you think, or do you think this one would say, no, we can't take any of that into account? Director Rawlings: I mean, maybe Councillor Wilson should clarify, but that's how I would read it, that we don't, that it's not, attachment to the draft implementation plan is not taken into account at this point until separate process.
02:48:00 So I don't know if Councillor Wilson might be better to answer that. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay, so I'll just take this, if that's unclear, if it's an issue, and the timeline for budget submissions for during the first stage of actions or targets, when do you need to put through, start putting it through, it may go to that, and I'll direct it, it's a question you need to do that diligently, listening to the entertaining debate. Councillor Wilson: Thank you, through the Chair. Our normal budget process... End of January, early February, next year. Mayor Wilkie: Yep. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So others, we should talk... Mayor Wilkie: Just to clarify what we've heard, I really respect Councillor Wilson's desire to get these documents perfect and right.
02:49:00 I didn't say perfect. I'm speaking, please. Refine them to a standard that she's happy with. This... This... Implies another delay, and we can't even take these documents into consideration until the reviews by another independent expert has occurred. We've already had two independent experts peer review the documents. We do have a budget process looming. That would exclude consideration of any of these actions in here for the upcoming budget process and delay the implementation of some of these... key actions. So for those reasons, although respecting the desire to have a document that all councillors can be happy with, there is a process going forward that will see this document refined, reviewed and sharpened, that we can all have input into anyway.
02:50:00 The important thing is we keep moving forward. I'm not prepared to entertain any more delays. We can keep this thing moving forward and still refine and get it to a state where more people are happy with every aspect of it as we move forward. Councillor Phillips: I don't think we can afford not to do it, given that if it comes to budget, I would like this to absolutely be done prior to... That's all I've got to say because it's a no brainer for me, so thank you. Councillor Finzel: Talking about budgets, what, like, the cost of the appropriate expert to be engaged and, you know, does that have to go through a budget process to allocate funding for more co-development actions?
02:51:00 So that would have to go through, what, the budget process? Do we know the cost? Speaker 4: Potentially. I honestly don't know what that would cost, but I think it would be quite reasonable cost. And potentially we'd have to go through a budget process. We don't know how you... We don't know how the budget... I mean, it's this sort of stuff, but, you know, it's something that would take some time. We would have to go out to market for it as well. So from a time perspective, I mean, once we understand what the cost is, whether we're going to do it or whether we need to go through a budget plan for it, it's going to be easy to work out. Councillor Finzel: So it's with the Chair, would that be an action through procurement to engage with the appropriate expert?
02:52:00 Speaker 4: By the Chair. By the... It would be the... We would write the... We would write the proposal and then procurement would be part of that. It's essentially... That's perfect. I think we've done it. I'm not saying that it's... Oh, I can see you. But you can do... Again, we can do it later. Councillor Lorentson: I'll speak to it. Councillor Lorentson? I keep talking, and I spoke about it with the alternate motion that we have to get the foundations right. And I think, you know, we use the word delay, delay, delay. It's not delay. We're just setting the plan up for success and getting it right. So I agree. I don't think the draft lacks sufficient implementation detail. The measures of success, the timeframes, prioritisation, accountability for delivery.
02:53:00 I think we need... I just think we need some expert input. Again, with the... Sorry. It's on purpose of setting it up for success, not delaying it. So I'm happy to support the amendment in front of us. Councillor Wegener: I'll take the musical. And that's right. Set the alarm. Cancel. Wake up. Alarm bell's going. Tom's speaking. No. No. No. No. No. No. So from what I'm understanding, this is a talk, not a question. This is the plan. This is the draft. So going back to the Pirates of the Caribbean analogy, this is the code, and these are guidelines. So this is a need to be said. When it comes to having an expert,
02:54:00 we're all experts, in my opinion. I mean, there's such a wide field that I can't actually, we would never agree upon an expert if you had seven experts in a room and you'd have seven different opinions. So I'm confident that as elected members of society, we each have a certain standing, certain quality, certain experiences that can really help us understand this. I don't, I wouldn't put much faith in an expert's opinion on this. Further than that, because we've already had heaps, and we are actually the experts, in my opinion. So. I won't support the motion. I think we should just get on with the business, waiting for another expert. Is it a delay that I don't think it's worth, if it is worth pursuing? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Whether you support this or not, putting pause down to the decision on one,
02:55:00 whether you're confident that that draft can be refined to a point, where it's a useful document to guide action. And two, whether you're prepared either to have a very rushed process towards the end of the budget, or whether you want actions coming to us as part of the normal process of budget adoption, so that we can look at the project outline, and if you want to go into detail, or checking whether that project outline has got reasonable action, and has got measurements there, at that level, that's really where the rubber hits the road. Because that's really where the rubber hits the road. When we get to the point where staff have said, I'm taking priority X, Y, Z, we said that we want to do it in the first year, this is what we did, this is just going to do it, this is how much it costs, this is what we want to achieve, whatever the budget outline is, and that gives us the,
02:56:00 if you want to get to that level, noting that we as councils tend to have a whole host of staff that have that whole matrix where it makes sense, leading to our decisions. I actually think this would significantly slow down the implementation of the plan, and I think it would be just another one of those nice to dos that would frustrate our community. It's, to me, the other part of it, is it's not adding on to C, it's actually taking away, which may be interpreted as a negative, is taking away the commitment to getting books from our partner supporting organisation, rather than just go to an independent expert. And some independent experts are well connected with the community, understand it, but without that, we wouldn't be able to do it. I think it's a backwards step.
02:57:00 Anyone else who hasn't built? Councillor Finzel? Councillor Finzel: Yeah, I think, you know, it says in the report, we've got over one in support, 75% of all respondents to consultation with the draft DMP. Across all age groups and geographical locations, the message was clear. To build on it, our community has been calling for action. We've got to build on it. I think the cost of, you know, trying to, at this late stage, engage with co-development, I think we've substantially co-developed to the point where we're at. We have engaged our community. We've eliminated our citizens' contribution. They've brought their expertise, their skills, their knowledge, their voice, and their lived experience. I think we do have to come to bold action. I think we need to, to progress this forward.
02:58:00 It may not be, you know, exactly, as perhaps an appropriate expert might drill down to, but again, I think, we've had the experts, our people in the Shire, people around the tables, staff. We've had engagement across the business sector. We've had engagement, you know, from a broad range of people in our community. And, you know, I think the DMP aims to identify actions. I think there's opportunity as we progress this forward for Council to still make decisions if we think that something's not aligning or not ringing true or it needs an amendment or we need to go back to community. I think there's always that option for us to, to make those changes along the way. I think we've, we need to facilitate change and take leadership
02:59:00 and bring our respected voice of our community along with us on the journey. So I'm satisfied that, that collective expertise has been noted and I won't be supporting the adoption of this amendment into item C. I think, I think it is a step backwards. I think, I'm, I think it is a step backwards. I'm sure there's enough opportunity as Council is around the table and our engagement with our well-informed community to give good representation and good governance with the matters raised. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Council, listen to you, please. Play your own song, please. Oh, sorry. Councillor Wilson: Thanks. A few things from the discussion around the room. I don't actually mean to spoil it. I'm not looking for perfection. I actually said that. I don't think there's ever a version that is right.
03:00:00 So I'm not looking for that either. And Council needs to be conscious of making statements with subjective language. So, someone might think it's right. Someone might think it's good. Someone else might not. So, you can't say it's the right plan or a good plan. Four or six weeks ago, we had a discussion as Councillors. And I asked them that this review be taken. Everyone agreed. We asked for it. The peer reviews did not focus on this implementation plan. They basically say that in their feedback. So, what we actually asked for hasn't happened. And I am not seeking to delay the point of delaying. I'm asking that this process that has happened in the last few weeks, that everybody trying to get this finished to meet the deadline, arbitrary deadline really, has meant that this hasn't been properly reviewed. And I don't think we should be making budget decisions
03:01:00 on an implementation plan that isn't really finished. Or isn't at that point. So, just fine-tuning. There's still a fair bit of work to be done on this. And it's really important. I don't know what we're going to say. We've met the deadline. So, let's just take whatever we've got. You know, it's not good enough to say it's not perfect. But, whatever. We've met the deadline now. So, I'm just not accepting that anymore. Yeah, that's it. Thanks. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay, I've put the amendment in favour. That's Councillor Wilson, Lawrence, and then Phillips. Those opposed, that's Councillor Wilkie, Finzel, Wegener, and Stockwell. The motion failed. The amendment fails. So, I have another amendment by Councillor Phillips. Councillor Phillips: And it's going to be an amendment for Cathy. And I'm just going to add some wording at the start, um, to relate to attachment two. Because I realise that I haven't done that specifically.
03:02:00 Yep. So, in attachment two, actions that fall outside local government responsibility must be reframed as advocacy items only with no implied operational commitments. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: The reason being is that that suggests we're endorsing Action 2. There's a process outline in Action 2 about it and you're saying you're treating it as if it's amended. You haven't written specific guidance as to when or where that particular action is to take place.
03:03:00 There could be a form of words that if I was to help you would say in the review of the draft action plan Mayor Wilkie: What's it called? Draft Implementation Plan Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Draft Implementation Plan, yeah. Councillor Phillips: Get an attachment to it in the review of the draft implementation plan. Yeah, that's okay. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: The staff. Councillor Wegener: Yes. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: They requested to, it's all insurance that's the trigger now.
03:04:00 Councillor Phillips: Yeah. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: To rewrite, or to write actions. I'm sorry, there might be. Write actions that fall outside the local government. Maybe it's that big that actions, take out the word write and request actions to fall outside the local government. Councillor Wilson: Is it separate? It's a separate advocacy strategy that comes up rather than bringing more implementation. Councillor Phillips: Yeah. I wish I could just speak to it and then I can re-fix the words. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I think that works. If that's, if you're happy with that. I think, because we're not adopting it, we can't change it. But we can request staff to consider that. I'm just saying. Councillor Phillips: But it's, they've written it, it's more there's some that don't and some that don't. So what I'm hoping is to clarify. Yeah. So it almost sits separately in the implementation about what state and what's our local responsibility.
03:05:00 So. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And instead of words, they get, that's right, they get the message. Are you happy with that, you came with your initial intent? Councillor Lorentson: Can I ask a question? Councillor Phillips: I don't like the words consider because they have considered it. It's the way that it's blurred between the two. So. Identity? Yes. Mayor Wilkie: Can we take this offline, Mr Chair, in the next break and just move on to our amendments that have, we've received 16 amendments well ahead of time that look well formed. Councillor Phillips: I did submit this on Friday as well. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah, so we may have to work with staff because we can't say something in the draft. Mayor Wilkie: And there are operational commitments for advocacy as well. It was staff time.
03:06:00 Councillor Wilson: Is it staff be requested to reframe actions so that all, sorry, does that work? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah, that would work. Councillor Wilson: Yes. Councillor Phillips: Thank you. Councillor Wilson: Staff be requested to reframe actions so that all outside local government responsibility has access to action zones. So just moving reframe to take up as well. Mayor Wilkie: So would that exclude actions where council partners with government agencies? That's what I've just done. Would it exclude actions where council partners with government? No. But is the staff be requested to reframe actions that fall outside local government responsibility as advocacy items only, whereas council is often a partner with government agencies? Councillor Phillips: That will become clearer when there's the civil service.
03:07:00 So there's no agreement and what's our, when we partner, when we advocate, so there's no. Councillor Lorentson: Can I, through the chair, and I'm happy for you to move this, Jess, I've got something similar that may come, may work, that the DMP be amended to include the development of a council advocacy and partnership strategy to support the implementation of the plan. So I don't know if that's the intent of yours. Yes. But, but. Councillor Phillips: That's more around the DMP, isn't it? Not the implementation. Councillor Lorentson: Yes, it's more implementation. Councillor Phillips: But, because of that, that will, in fear that, that'll actually, that will happen then, if yours. Councillor Lorentson: So maybe just move, I'll do mine. Yes. Councillor Phillips: Can I take that off for a second? Hold on for a second. Councillor Lorentson: Hold on. Councillor Wilson: Okay.
03:08:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Can I just. Councillor Lorentson: The DMPB amended to include a clear objective and strategy for the economic management of the visitor economy supported by defined strategies, actions and measurable outcomes.
03:09:00 This is covered now by just some suggestions that were made out of the peer review by experts and it was just a note saying that, how I understood it, that the plan lacked a framework or a clear objective or strategy for actively managing and supporting economic development of the local economy. So this basically, the amendment allows us to have a very clear objective. It could be positioned, I think the peer review said it should be positioned under the tourism for good principle. And I just think again, the plan needs to be made clear, the importance of tourism to
03:10:00 the local economy. Thank you. And it needs to also include a clear, objective strategy for actively managing it. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: We'll go to the amendment. Mayor Wilkie: Just a question of staff. Is economic management of the visitor economy part of the economic development strategy? Is there a reference to that? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Is there more? Councillor Finzel: The only thing that is in the economic development strategy is the development of a DMP. And our mandate goes across all sectors of the economy. And in fact, it's about building resilience of the economy and minimising our reliance on tourism. Director Rawlings: What I would just add.
03:11:00 What I would say is that right throughout the DMP, it talks about the significance of the economy and the thriving economy and how that's fundamental and how we've grown up on tourism and the value of tourism. And, you know, so it's inherent. It's a core tenet of the DMP that the visitor economy is supported. Councillor Lorentson: I think from, again, what I understood from the peer review, that there needs to be, okay, incorrectly, wrong, how I interpreted it, that there needed to be more defiant strategies, more defined actions, and more measurable outcomes, that it wasn't detailed enough as it stood. That was, have I understood that correctly?
03:12:00 Director Rawlings: Yeah. One of the peer reviewers did suggest amongst a range of great valuable insights to be more specific. More specific, yeah. Councillor Wegener: I think that the DMP is the clear economic management because our economy is so largely based on our environment and our pristine environment, our tourism. It's based on how we manage the environment. It's trying to split off and sliver off the visitor economy as a distinct thing is pretty meaningless. When it, the management of the visitor economy is what the whole DMP is all about. There is no micromanagement of that. It doesn't make sense. And it's supported by defined strategies.
03:13:00 Actions and measurable outcomes. With, just with my business, with many businesses, people come from all over the place to visit and buy the products because of the brand and the brand management. For example, the Land and Sea Brewery, when they started the distillery and they made Noosa Gin, and Noosa Gin became on various airlines and just went ballistic because the name Noosa Gin ended up all on it. And so, there, I mean, what, what sort of economists would see that coming? I think that it, it's all so linked up that that's what the DMP is, management of the, the, the visitor economy. I, I, I don't, I don't see it, any, you can't microcosm that. You can't sliver it off. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: 78% of the respondents thought that we did identify a clear objective for economic management
03:14:00 when they looked at the vision for the destination management plan, which is a way of life and travel that respects community, actively protects the environment, and nurtures a thriving global economy. As the director mentioned, the destination management strategy is there to achieve the long-term sustainability and resilience of our visitor economy. It's taking the, the step of, of actively, um, setting out a course of action that is different by nature. It is not about the traditional destination marketing, about we will try and get X, Y, Z. The role of the destination management organisation may get into specifics. But the vast array of actions in here is all about not just getting the right balance between
03:15:00 the visitor economy and the local desire for amenity. It's about how we change what we do to boost the brand. To, you know, we know that the, the research on the Noosa brand, as in the research on the regional locality, has a significant multiplier compared to the national average getting out of place, um, in that particular research, that by following what we're doing here in the destination management plan, we're probably going to increase the multiplier for all businesses. And, you know, while it's quite significant for the logical hospitality and accommodation and the flow through to the retail, that if we get this right, it means people in many business environments will be benefiting from the fact that having new operation enterprise in our biosphere adds value.
03:16:00 That if they locate it down the road in one of the many places, um, if you're very much cities by the sea, um, you wouldn't care. So on that, I don't think the amendment is necessary. Councillor Kinlan. Councillor Kinlan. Councillor Finzel: Councillor Kinlan. Councillor Kinlan. Councillor Kinlan. Councillor Kinlan. All of everything we've read. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: There's an issue with the structure of the amendment. We don't have objectives in the amendment, but as far as this was to pass, do you think there's sufficient in the amendment to guide what people do? Councillor Finzel: Yeah, to guide an objective that can be so simply drawn into a paragraph. Director Rawlings: We have goals. We have principles, goals, strategies, actions. Councillor Lorentson: We do.
03:17:00 Director Rawlings: Well, you could say an objective could be a goal. Councillor Lorentson: And it could be as simple, and I think the peer review referenced it, it could be as simple as just increasing in contribution through visitor spend, increasing in interstate and international visitors, length of stay, et cetera. So just articulating what's the objective. And it's not necessarily growing. Absolutely. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I think we've taken rather the answer. Sure. Anyone else wish to talk? Mayor Wilkie: The success of the Noosa visitor economy and its continued prosperity is an implied outcome of the successful implementation of the destination management plan. We want to make sure that Noosa, its livability
03:18:00 and the prosperity of its visitor economy is ensured for generations to come. I'm concerned that this looks like turning the DMP into an economic visitor economy economic management plan where it's really intended to manage the impacts of visitors so that the livability of our communities can be sustained and the prosperity of the visitor economy can be sustained. Whatever destination marketing body is approved as a result of these deliberations will have its clear measurable outcomes to determine whether the objectives are being achieved or not. Visitor rights, as has already been mentioned. I'm concerned about turning the DMP into something else.
03:19:00 It's not. Okay. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Who else? Councillor Wilson: I'll speak to it. Councillor Phillips: I'll support it because I believe that, well, first of all, let me go back for a second. The DMP was originally a community document. One of the reasons why our supporters pushed to move it was because the reasons why we have amendments now is because we've moved from the original community document. And now we have to include things because if we don't, in two years' time when, you know, maybe we are or we're not sitting here, the next lot of councillors have, you know, things have progressed. So economic management to me is a critical part of inclusion now.
03:20:00 And to quote Councillor Wegener, I'm the actual opposite to an expert at many things except for a police negotiator, police officer. I'm not bad at being a mum. I think I'm finding my feet in council. But I'm absolutely hand on heart. I'm not an expert at many things. I probably could say I'm an expert at... Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor, you could address it in any place. Councillor Phillips: Got a little carried away there at the fact that I feel like I'm constantly humbled by people that I meet in our community with absolute expertise in their fields. And they drive our economy. And so therefore I believe we could... It wouldn't hurt to include this. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Anyone else? Councillor Lange's mute place. Can I just put to them? I'm sorry. You do have one?
03:21:00 Councillor Finzel: Well, I'm happy to support, like, if we were, like, you know, a clear objective and put it in some senses. I do think, though, you know, we looked at our tourism economy today in item 1.3 in our initial phase of community engagement report. I mean, there's clear, like, so much information speaking to this. I'm happy to include it just to give that assurity back to the community that we've listened, we're making sure that we're trying to leave no stones unturned in support of where we're trying to progress to offer assurity to the community that we have heard, we have listened, we want to take action. Yeah, I'm happy to support it so that we can progress this forward today. Mayor Wilkie: Further question, probably of the mover. How would this change the DMP?
03:22:00 Councillor Lorentson: It just, if the DMP is a community document, then it's got to be totally representative of all sectors. And this was raised as, a idea from the peer reviewer, but it's also been raised by our business community and our small businesses. So... Mayor Wilkie: Could I ask, what would the clear objective be? Councillor Lorentson: For economic... Mayor Wilkie: It's just the prosperity of the visitor opponent? Councillor Lorentson: Yeah, in terms of how we are going to be supporting our small businesses. In terms of, again, is it increasing in GDP? Is it increasing in contribution of visitor spend? Increasing interstate and international visitation? Length of stay? These are the things that our business community need assurance about. That they're investing in our future, in their future, in their family's future.
03:23:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, a question to start. I can see how it would be quite simple to include a clearer objective, which would probably be a target or a principle there. But is there enough in the amendment to actually amend the DMP to define strategies, actions and medical outcomes? Director Rawlings: I don't... I'm going to answer this with all due respect to everybody. I don't think there's enough in the amendment to provide a clear objective. I think we've got enough expertise to figure it out, given that the whole plan is actually based on supporting a thriving economy. It's articulated in the principles. One of the principles is thriving economy. Facilitate diverse, thriving and resilient economy by supporting local business, innovation and regeneration.
03:24:00 Circular economy principles. Ensuring that tourism enhances business well-being and environmental integrity. And particularly the raft of things in there about supporting business. So, we could definitely craft up something. What I would say is that that hasn't been tested with the community. All of these actions have been tested with the community and got more than majority support for them. Yes, it was suggested by a peer reviewer. Just to note that. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay. Councillor Wilson has nothing to say? Councillor Wilson: Councillor MacCillard, do you want to go first? No. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: No, we have to hand over to Councillor Kingslaw. Oh yeah, yeah. Councillor Wilson: I'll support it. It was a gap identified and it is important that we consider the economy for our community.
03:25:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Hey, Councillor. Councillor Lorentson: What was your name? No, I said Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay, I've put the amendment those in favour. That's Councillor Wilson, Wilkie, Finzel, Lorentson and Phillips. Those against? Councillor Wegener, Annie Stockwell. The amendment is carried and becomes part of the motion. Let's proceed to whatever comes next. Do we have any more amendments? Mayor Wilkie: I'm going to go out again. Councillor Lorentson: Can I try this one that I spoke to before and see how it goes? That the DMP be amended to include the development of a council advocacy and partnership strategy to support implementation of the plan.
03:26:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Do we have a seconder? Cancel or wait a minute, just a minute. Do we have a thought, Councillor Walton? Councillor Lorentson: Again, this was something that was suggested out of a peer review and I do put a bit of weight on the peer review. As Jess said, she's not an expert, I'm not an expert either. And that's why the value of people that have already been where we want to go is of value. Council at the moment, we don't have authority or direct authority over many of the key leaders that influence destination outcomes. Public land, our waterways, transport infrastructure and potential visitor charging mechanism.
03:27:00 I think the idea of developing a council advocacy. and partnership strategy will allow us to join forces with, like even our neighbouring councils, Sunshine Coast Council, and state and federal governments to achieving the objectives of the DMP. This, as the peer reviewer said, this is, I think Ignace said, it was a critical component and I understand there's going to be some resourcing issues with that. I just think it's really important to understand that there's a lot of stuff that's outside our remit and lots of opportunities for us to partner with, whether it's state, federal or neighbouring councils, again, that will enable us to achieve the objectives that have been set out of the DMP.
03:28:00 Mayor Wilkie: Question, would this set aside the monitoring and evaluation report in the document itself as an action? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I think, if I can answer, I think it could be an action under the same section that has established in the stewardship of the council. Which is, I think, leading the way, if I'm right, I just hit too many buttons. Yeah, I think it could perhaps be, it isn't your intent, Councillor, that to amend the DMP to include an action that proposes to develop a result. So it would have an action level? Yeah, that would be that. And if I can ask staff, would that be in, I suppose in capacity, but that would be in the section of governance, would it not?
03:29:00 Director Rawlings: In the DMP? Yeah. At the back, at the last section in the back, or as an action under one of the principles? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: That's a question, I suppose you don't need to determine that. Director Rawlings: No. Yeah, that's fine. In the front of the DMP, the front section of the DMP talks to the, because we took on board this peer review, and you can see that advocacy in partnerships is critical, and the very front section of the DMP talks about the critical success factors, and point three of critical success factors, as I find it, it says effective advocacy with a clear plan to influence policy and decision making. So it's already mentioned as a critical success factor. And then strategic partnerships to do the same. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So does that do the same, repeating in the action plan? It's repeating in the action plan. And are you happy, or Councillor Duffield? Councillor Lorentson: Can I change the proposers to consider, please? So amend the DMP to include an action that considers, the development of council advocacy,
03:30:00 and partnership strategy to support implementation of the plan. Would you prefer to consider, or proposers can consider this to me? I'm happy with either or, but proposers? Director Rawlings: Well, I think, I think proposers is stronger. Councillor Lorentson: Okay, well then proposers, thank you. No, no, no. Director Rawlings: I just was making a statement. Proposers is a stronger word. Consider is, you know, still requires some consideration. Councillor Lorentson: No, I don't want that. Thank you very much. Thank you. Okay. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Call to this amendment, Councillors. Councillors, wait another second. Councillor Wegener: So, to stop, would this be redundant, then? Isn't it, you just read out what it says in the beginning? Yes. Okay. Director Rawlings: It's a statement of fact that the front of the destination plan says, this is a long-term
03:31:00 plan for Noosa. Success will take time and only achievable through a commitment of effort. Its success is dependent on such factors as effective advocacy with a clear plan to influence policy and decision-making, strategic partnerships with industry and business, government and community to ensure alignment and shared direction. Councillor Lorentson: But I included it as an amendment. Okay. Questions you asked. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'm actually quite happy because it's actually an action that implements such views. Yes, certainly. That's it. Yes, of course. Councillor Wilson: I don't really want to commit this to another strategy, but I agree. Councillor Wegener: Anyone else? Question? Yes. Councillor Lorentson, would you be envisioning an ambassador program, for example?
03:32:00 Councillor Lorentson: I wasn't, but that's a great idea, Tom. No. Advocacy, council advocacy, I'm thinking in terms of like our waterways, buses, more frequent buses. There's a lot that sits outside, out of remit. So, I'm thinking in terms of like our waterways, buses, more frequent buses. So, ambassadors. Or maybe a question to Kin. I hadn't considered it. No is the answer. No, we'll change the amendment. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah. Councillor Lorentson: No. Maybe make it a separate amendment. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: If you would like to comment on that, please. Director Rawlings: There is an action in the DMP about the development of a stewardship, shared custodian program, called the For Love of Musa program at the moment. Critical to that is the development, is building ambassadors in our community. So, I think it's captured already in that action. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay. Anyone else?
03:33:00 Councillor Wilson: Sorry. Can I ask a question? Again, being pedantic. Because this whole document attachment is a destination management plan, but then 2.2 is the destination management plan. So, when we're talking about changing the waterways, we're talking about changing the plan. Is the plan only about 10 pages, but it's 2.2? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: By referring to an action, there is a specific element in the framework of the plan that we're going with. So, it's going to be 3.3.6 or something like that. Councillor Wilson: Having a document before the destination management plan, and then an item within that should be at the destination management plan. Like, this is really an inquiry. So, do you get that? I know it's the same, but... And so then... The question is... That we just talked about is on page 8, not within the plan. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: The question at the start is, do we consider the whole document, that is, with the green
03:34:00 colour as the destination management plan, or only that part of it? Director Rawlings: The whole document. The whole document. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: That is your question? No. Okay. Councillor Finzel: Thank you. Director Rawlings: This amendment, if it would go, change the section 2.2 to include a specific action. And that's how we would take this amendment. Under one of the principles and strategies. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay. Anyone else wish to talk? Councillor Lorentson: Councillor Lundin, you're closed. No, thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'll put the amendment, those in favour? All those against? Yes. Councillor Lorentson: I'll try another amendment, that carrying capacity measures explicitly ensure that resident
03:35:00 access to beaches, parks and natural areas, oh sorry start again, that carrying capacity measures explicitly recognise resident access to beaches, parks and natural areas, ensuring it is not unreasonably restricted. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Do we have a seconder for that? Councillor Wilson: I'll be the second for debate. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Councillor Finzel, Councillor Owens, do you have a floor? Councillor Lorentson: It's just something that came up time and time again. We've had over two years of consultation and discussion in terms of resident access to beaches, parks and natural areas. The amendment just identifies that resident access remains a priority for this council
03:36:00 and is protected as carrying capacity measures are developed and implemented. The amendment also just tries to ensure that managing visitor pressure doesn't result in reduced access for residents to the natural areas that define the local lifestyle and community identity. So just putting at the forefront of our decision making that we don't unreasonably have to restrict access to our residents. Councillor Finzel. Councillor Finzel: I just have a question about recognising the residents. I mean we've talked about you know family that comes and visits that might just say live
03:37:00 at Ingold or live you know at Doonan or Yelundi and they're coming to visit family. How do we recognise you know just do we then they might not be able to come and visit their family and end up being excluded to these places because they don't you know pay rates here or I don't know. I guess I'm just seeking clarity that when we talk about unintended consequences are we being inclusive or are we restricting access to people that don't pay rates or you know where we put residents in there. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Is that a question? Councillor Finzel: Oh yeah that's a question yeah. I think that's a good question. Yeah. How do we be inclusive when also we recognise that you know visitors to the region are not necessarily like day troopers. They could be people that have a second property here. They're coming up on the weekend. Sorry. Yes. Just yeah.
03:38:00 Just wondering how we be inclusive. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah. Probably a retirement pension. I don't know. I don't think it was a good retirement pension. And for that one I'm not looking at the enthusiasm there. Councillor Wood. Councillor Wilson: Would it be improved by saying recognise user access? Oh no. That's good. Councillor Lorentson: Yes it would. Thank you very much. And that captures what Karen's said. I did make it sound very exclusive. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Users are changing the intent. Councillor Lorentson: So I'm happy to make this one four and then change the wording. Okay. So I'll talk to the amendment. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I couldn't support it. I can support the notion that is implicit within the VMP that the intent is to maintain the experience and in some areas where it's overused at the moment, maybe improve the
03:39:00 experience of residents and visitors. And I'm happy with the context of saying, you know, I'm happy with what you've said. If there is problems, that we take our residents and the environment residents' needs into consideration. Why I can't support it is that the carrying capacity elements of the current VMP is about encouraging sustainable visitation by using carrying capacity to guide access and protect sensitive natural places, ensuring a good environment and visitor experience at the moment. And that's what I've observed for all. So once again, it's there for all. And, you know, it's accelerated our work and advocacy with partners, including state government, to introduce carrying capacity to expanding managed access and suggesting that our most upcoming consensus of locations is the action 2.1.1.
03:40:00 Councillor Wegener: The key there is, once again, to come back to what I've just said. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Where we know the current visitation is in excess of carrying capacity is where we know we have this on the North Shore and partying when the 10th National Park is not going to be run. You know, it's about people who say they're getting knocked over by joggers that are going to the National Park through a press. It's about issues about, you know, a lot of the carrying capacity stuff is going to be in partnership, you know, in early days with state government. So, you know, carrying capacity is going to be in partnership with state government. So, you know, carrying capacity is a maximum amount of activity that an area can handle with that quality and unacceptable damage to community values and environment. I just think it's trying to mesh the two different objectives of the DMP into one statement. I don't think there's enough in there to bite staff as to what that might mean.
03:41:00 Councillor Lorentson: Question? I'm happy to make this amendment before I don't really have it really brought this one out too much. I think where I was heading with this is that we don't have a 365-day solution to a 60-day problem. So, I'm wondering, we're going to run out of time today, would user access to beaches not unreasonably restricted achieve that outcome? Like I said, I'm happy to make this call and maybe come back with another amendment. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, I'm going to take that as a closing address. I hope no one was committed to talking. If you haven't, I've put the motion those in favour. That's unanimously lost. And we've got another one coming. Councillor Lorentson: Through, just advice to the Director, would changing the word user achieve the outcome
03:42:00 that I was seeking in the previous amendment? Yes. Director Rawlings: I think what I was suggesting is I could assist with some wording if you would. Councillor Lorentson: Oh, that would be fantastic. Just, yeah. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: That's 30 minutes away from the next general break. Okay. Thank you. So, have we got any other amendments? Councillor Phillips: Not just one. Okay. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Do we have another one? Councillor Phillips: I do. Cathy, I'll send it to you. That actions within the monitoring and evaluation framework and three-year implementation plan that fall wholly or partially or partly outside Noosa Council's legislative or operational
03:43:00 remit and sit with State Government, that it be reframed as advocacy priorities, partnership actions or council actions only, with no implied operational, financial or regulatory commitment, and that this distinction be clearly shown in the monitoring and evaluation framework and implementation plan. Can I have just a second? Mayor Wilkie: Sorry. Councillor Lorentson: Sounds good. Take your time. Thank you. Councillor Wilson: Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Wegener: Thank you. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
03:44:00 Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: I have a question, isn't there operational resources required for advocacy and partnership actions? Councillor Phillips: You can't get out of it. Mayor Wilkie: Staff time, councillor time, is ratepayer funded? And wouldn't we be undertaking advocacy actions to get a regulatory outcome?
03:45:00 I ask that because it's often we advocate to have regulation change at the state government level because we can't do it ourselves. Councillor Phillips: Yeah. This is only to do with the monitoring. I'm sorry. I understand what we do as part of our business. It's more around committees to things in the implementation plan that I'm not comfortable with because it doesn't clearly tell us what is our role and what's state ... It's blurred in that implementation plan and it's more around just saying what's our ... What's in our lanes and we're not ... Do you want me to speak to it? No. That's not it. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: We're not ... I'm just pursuing the inventory. Councillor Lorentson: Can I have a question through the chair? Sure. Oh, absolutely. Councillor Finzel: You did raise in workshops about clarifying our role and others' role. Is this like something requesting perhaps a table that identifies who's responsible for what level?
03:46:00 Councillor Phillips: No, well what happens in that monitoring report, and it came back in the review as well, but there's not clarity around what is our responsibility and what isn't. So I'm trying to put some wording together, and again, I put them Friday, so I don't have, I don't know how to clearly articulate what... Well could that be, you know, a graphic diagram that shows... No, well I think it could just be separate. This is, and I think it says in the review, I don't have the wording in front of me, he's saying, the review says, what's state, what's council. So I'm trying to find... Councillor Finzel: Could a table give us that... Councillor Phillips: I don't know, because I'm not the expert anyhow to... Councillor Finzel: Or rather than writing that, could we say, can the staff please include a table that clearly identifies each level and what their responsibility is for it?
03:47:00 Councillor Phillips: In the implementation plan. Mayor Wilkie: Councillor Phil, sorry, after you. Councillor Phillips: Or can we put that question to the staff? Through the chair, please, Mr Chair. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Sure. Any questions? Director Rawlings: Yeah, yeah, yeah. A table could be provided to outline roles and responsibilities. I would say in each of the actions, because we took on board the peer review feedback and actually refined the wording in the action in all aspects from that peer review, so that advice was taken on board and it has been incorporated, so I'm not sure that that confusion still exists. For instance, we say very clearly in each of the actions that are around advocacy, what we're doing, so continue to advocate and who we've, to our partners, the state government. In the responsibility section, we then also say who's the lead and who are the partners, so we took on board that. If you still think there's confusion, it'd be great to get some specifics, I guess, because that advice was taken on board and there was restructuring that happened.
03:48:00 Councillor Phillips: So, question, did they review it again after? No. Okay, so that's probably where I'm sitting uncomfortable. If they've given that, I'd like to know, does that cover any of your amendment then? So, okay, so. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Question, sorry, I'll just get some clarification because you mentioned responsibilities. So, you were then saying that's in the three year implementation plan and we're not endorsing the three year implementation and same with draft. Like, what are you saying? My technical problem with the amendment, it seemed to make changes to the draft. It's not being sought to have guidance on it at this stage and then when I look at the monitoring evaluation framework, you're talking about actions and in the monitoring evaluation framework, actions are just listed by number. There's not words, so partnership action cancellations wouldn't make sense in that regard.
03:49:00 Councillor Finzel: That's why I'm suggesting a table perhaps, not in the framework. Councillor Phillips: No, because it goes back to Councillor Wilson's. Councillor Wilson's amendment that when the review, the peer review, I now don't know that peer review then went back to, I'd be comfortable if they said, they saw this and they've implied it, then I wouldn't need to, yeah. So, I will wait, I'll let it fall and I'm going to, when we have our break, I'm going to speak. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: No, no, I haven't accepted the statement. No. Okay. No. Because I was reviewing his technical credence and I don't think I could accept it, so. Okay. So, is this just not happening? It's just recorded as not accepted by the Chair. Doesn't work. So, those are technical.
03:50:00 Any other amendments? Anyone wishing to talk, just raise your hand if you'd like. Councillor Lorentson: No. All right. Thank you. Councillor Finzel: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Lorentson: I'm going to just play with the one that I let fall before, and Kim, if you can let me know if this captures what I'm trying to achieve, and I'll just try it. Carrying capacity and visitor management measures apply proportionate targeted solutions to specific problems, not blanket restrictions.
03:51:00 I'll send that through to you now, Cathy. Is it a totally new one? It's a totally new one. Director Rawlings: Do you want to just read it out? Councillor Lorentson: Let's see if this makes sense. I'll just send it to you, Cathy. That carrying capacity and visitor management measures... ...apply proportionate targeted solutions to specific problems, not blanket restrictions.
03:52:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Very good. We have a seconder. Second, Council Wilson. Fox Two. Councillor Wilson: Second, Council Wilson. Oh, hold on. It was Council Phillips. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: It was Council Nicole Phillips. Councillor Wilson: You know, someone says Wilson, someone says Phillips, we sing. We sing. I go. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: You have the floor. Councillor Lorentson: Without repeating what I just said before, I think what I'm trying to achieve with this is that we use data.
03:53:00 We use data to provide solutions to specific problems and that we understand that, you know, congestion and traffic and issues even along the North Shore are not 365-day problems. They're, you know, whatever the data says, 40 days. You know, we have congestion in Hastings, trying to think about 60 days a year. So I think it's just really important, access is really important to our beaches and natural places. So this... I mean, just ensures that we allow the data to inform any decision-making. Councillor Phillips: I'll speak to this. Sure. Yeah, I fully agree because I think sometimes we try to, like, solve a huge problem that may only exist for certain times
03:54:00 and then it diverts, like, a lot of time and resources and things like that into something. What are we actually trying to solve? Um... If this just keeps it more to what we're trying to manage, then yes, I would much more consider that that's what our community would want rather than that they don't want to be stopped from, um, why they live here in the first place. And I don't think that's the intention anyway, because we're looking at, um, making sure that it is enjoyable for everyone and that might just need some time to be tested through and understood a little bit more. But I think this would help reassure community that it isn't about stopping, um, yeah, there are times through the year where it's completely fine to go to these places and it's, it's not overcrowded, but we don't need, the DMP was meant to manage it and, um, so this hopefully achieves that, thank you.
03:55:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Questions, um, to me, that's just a statement of what we're intending to do. Do you see any problems with the space? How are we going to apply to that? Is that your understanding or is it raising red flags that you should consider? Director Rawlings: There's two aspects to that, I think, for me. One is that it infers that we would do blanket restrictions. And no, it doesn't really say that at all. It's about managing the experience sustainably. And, yeah, so... Councillor Lorentson: Can we get rid of the word scheme, not blanket restrictions? Mayor Wilkie: That's a great idea. Councillor Lorentson: And just targeted solutions to specific problems and accept what you just said. That's never been our intention. Yeah. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Through the chair. Is everyone happy with that change? Yes, sir.
03:56:00 Councillor Bizzle? Councillor Finzel: I'm just thinking if you just read that without listening to this conversation, I think it's... It's quite general. Do you want to make it... I think it doesn't really address your intent in your original motion. You know, I think your intent is about making sure that that capacity is... Councillor Wilson: Sorry, yes. OK. Councillor Finzel: So, yeah, I think it's very broad. I think without the narrative alongside it, I don't think it counts. It doesn't reach intent. Councillor Lorentson: OK. So, ensure that carrying capacity measures and visitor... Sorry. No, sorry. That carrying capacity and visitor management measures recognise user access to beaches, parks and natural areas. So, Councillor, that would be a different amendment? It is, yeah.
03:57:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: OK. Other people wish to talk to the amendment? Councillor Wilson? Councillor Wilson: I'm a bit unsure on this one, because from what I understand of what's in the plan at the moment, the first step is that we have to calculate what that carrying capacity is. And until we've got that data, we don't have any specific measures. And the intention is really about finding out whether at the moment we're under or over that ideal carrying capacity. So, there would only be measures if we're looking to go above that carrying... Or we find that we are above that carrying capacity. And where we have things like the potential development of an app. I did challenge the words better decisions, but... It's not subjective, but... Informed decisions is what I wanted to say. So, people can go, oh, it's busy there today, I won't be able to park. Or it's busy there today, I will think of the turtles. Or, you know, whichever way their behaviour is going to change. Without us actually introducing specific measures in the initial stages.
03:58:00 So, I think I would want to see where we get to first with establishing our carrying capacity and where we're actually at versus that before making any promises and the like. Director Rawlings: Can I just confirm that we took on board that and it doesn't say better? It does somewhat. It says locate... Use it to inform their choices about when and where to visit. It still says period. Councillor Wilson: It still says that. It does somewhat. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Other than Mr Cook, I'm a little bit with Councillor Finzel. I actually support that in the state of the fact that it's what's intended. I don't know whether it's included in the motions going to make any impact, but I don't think it does, which was I think the initial attempt was to signal to residents that we're not going to say wait a minute, we'll search 10 for 5, we're going to allow our own service out there.
03:59:00 Councillor Lorentson: I take on board all the commentary around the table. I agree, just reading that you need the context to really understand where it's going. I think there is an understanding, clear understanding that that is what we're actually going to do. Targets. Resolutions to specific problems, so I'm happy for this amendment to lapse. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'll take that to close the address. All those in favour of the amendment? Councillor Lorentson: I'm sorry, but I'm going to. Actually, I am, as a statement, beautiful. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So there's two. Who is for it again, please? So that's Councillor Wilkie, Lorentson and Phillips.
04:00:00 Those against? Wilson, Kinney, Little, Wegener and Stockwell are the amendments lost. Are we ready for this one? We're debating the motion. Mayor Wilkie: I think there's been a suggestion for a break, Mr Chair. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: We'll have a break and if we're lucky, when we've started the debate, we can stand and vote. 10 minutes, we can make it 4.40.
04:10:00 Welcome back. So, Councillors, we may have one more amendment. Councillor Finzel: Yes, I'd like to just please test this. I did circulate it but it was probably not intended due to circumstances. That item JB added to read endorsed the establishment of a Destination Stewardship Council as a priority action to support implementation of the Destination Management Plan with its purpose to provide oversight, monitoring and evaluation, guidance and transparency. A terms of reference be prepared outlining the process for establishing the Destination Stewardship Council and report back to Council for consideration is provided as the first priority following adoption of the Destination Management Plan.
04:11:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I second that. Councillor Finzel: Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Councillor Finzel: I think a pivotal, really important part of this conversation is the Destination Stewardship Council, especially in support of another level of governance to give a surety also to the community that there is really strict and strong frameworks around transparency, providing opportunity for another level of governance. Thank you.
04:12:00 Thank you. Tewantin plays a critical stewardship role, ensuring that tourism in Noosa is managed in a way that aligns with community values, protects environmental and cultural assets, and supports long-term wellbeing. It is understood that DSC's purpose is to assist guiding Noosa's transition towards regenerative tourism, consistent with their identity as a UNESCO Biosphere Reserve and a destination that is different by nature. The Council provides a forum where key organisations and stakeholders come together to support shared learning, transparency and adaptive decision making. Through its oversight of the Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Framework and the Rolling Implementation Plan,
04:13:00 the DSC will help ensure that the DMP remains relevant, evidence-based and responsive to emerging challenges and opportunities. As outlined in the Council Report and DMP, one of the first roles of the DSC will be to refine and oversee the Monitoring and Evaluation Framework and the Rolling Three Year Implementation Plan, ensuring that strategic goals are being achieved, risks are actively managed and resourcing requirements are identified early. Progress will be reported to Council supporting an adaptive approach that allows Noosa to test ideas, learn from experience and continuously improve how tourism contributes to the community, environment and economy.
04:14:00 Given this important role, in my opinion, prioritising the establishment of this Stewardship Council is, if not the most important action before us today. Do you need an overview of what you think that might look like? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I think you've got it. Thank you. Councillor Finzel: Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'll just switch to Councillor Wilson. Councillor Wilson: Just asking a time question. Is this redundant? Because it's already in the plan. Sorry. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, who are you asking that of? Councillor Wilson: Councillor Pinson. Councillor Finzel: Well, quite clearly. If I thought it was, I would have raised it. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, I'll answer it for you. Certainly, the establishment is foreshadowed. I think what this amendment does is say it's the first cab off the rank.
04:15:00 That's what makes it different. And I agree with that. I can't point out why I'm saying that. So, that stands to your question. I'll talk to it. Yes, I think we've heard today and previously about all the expectations in our community. And we know that plan implementation will be better if we have a collaborative model of governance. And I think this is a key step forward. If we get the Destination Stewardship Council in terms of reference right, and we have a key step forward, then I think it's going to be a key step forward. We'll have a blend of local knowledge, expertise, and enthusiasm, and probably people with a long track record, as well as expertise, perhaps from inside, outside, perhaps from out, and perhaps from other levels of government as well. So, there's people who will have the expertise, and also, maybe key partners involved in the process.
04:16:00 And also, the key thing about putting this up front is saying that this is not a set and forget. And then we're going to go away and do business as usual. It's about establishing the new governance as a first, and then, you know, prioritising the one-three evaluation review and the three-year action plan. So, obviously, if we've got that happening as a matter of priority, it should help speed the implementation process. So, I support the sentence within the amendment. I wish to stop. Speaker 2: I will, Mr Chair. Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: I think Councillor Finzel, with this amendment, has targeted the Rosetta Stone of this whole DMP. It will unlock a lot of the key actions for this plan. Importantly, the Destination Stewardship Council has a role of refining and overseeing the monitoring and evaluation framework and the draft rolling implementation plan, which we've all been discussing
04:17:00 this afternoon. Their job is to make sure it is right. Get it in really good shape, functional shape. It's a very inclusive body that will take on board key stakeholders, other partner agencies that have real power to ensure that the key actions of the DMP are being implemented. I think it's a critical piece of work. I think this shows a commitment to driving this plan along and getting real change for the future of our community. So, I will be supporting it. Councillor Wegener: Is it the key change that this is bringing, is it moving forward to put that, as they say, the first tab off the rank? Councillor Finzel: Well, I guess for me, I always put governance as like number one. And I just feel like that's why I'm bringing it as a priority action.
04:18:00 Firstly, it's about governance and extra layer of transparency, providing assurance to our community. But also, I guess, if that action itself progresses it forward. But I think it gives it that actual extra layer to our community that, you know, we're bringing our community along the journey, we're bringing the expertise, we're honouring the voice of our community, and we're promoting a collaborative approach. I just, and I love governance, I think it's just, you know, we can't miss out or have gaps if we have strong governance. And I think this provides that, just another layer. We have, you know, things that we can look at, measure, and have a surety that we can move forward with confidence. Okay. Councillor Phillips: I have a question that I'd like you to put forward. Can you, it might be because it's late in the day, can you remind me when the Stewardship Council came into the DMP?
04:19:00 Was it the first round, second round? Just remind me. Director Rawlings: It was in the second round in the draft document that went out to consultation. Councillor Phillips: Okay. And can you remind me what the question was in the survey that, I know, I'm putting that up. I just want to know where our... I think I can actually. Thanks. Director Rawlings: Give me one minute. Councillor Finzel: Nothing's happening here. Director Rawlings: It was to establish a destination stewardship council with the ability and influence to help drive the successful delivery of the key BMP actions, helping to implement, monitor and measure DMP progress, whether you support that or not.
04:20:00 Councillor Phillips: Um, no. And when did we explain what that, who would be on it and, like, for them to, in order to get the answers, how was, how did they understand what this was? Director Rawlings: So the DMP itself that went out, the draft DMP, had a section on what the destination stewardship council is. And remind me, team, did we also have a fact sheet? Oh no, we had it in the GMT, the, um... Speaker 1: The GMT. No, we didn't have a fact sheet deliberately on the DSC, but in all our community engagement sessions and everything we did, when we had face-to-face sessions, we explained in more detail what we meant by that, because some people weren't 100% sure about it, they thought it was a locally based program or panels, which I've explained, it's state government decision makers.
04:21:00 Councillor Phillips: So did community, was it glaringly obvious in the second round that this was a priority that we would foresee? Or was there any other things for us to decide today that it becomes a priority? Director Rawlings: Um, it, it was supported through the survey and the feedback, um, and it was, it stated pretty clearly in the document and the survey that part of the process of a, a new approach to destination management and regenerative tourism and success to that is shared responsibility. Um, and, you know, collective oversight, so that the stewardship council was a key aspect to, as a mechanism to do it. So I, you know, I, I think it was, it was, I think it was clear for those who engaged and asked the question.
04:22:00 Councillor Lorentson: Okay, I'll speak to it. Um, I'm not going to, uh, I'm not going to support the amendment. Uh, I think that it jumps a step. Um, what I would like to see as a first priority is the development of the terms of reference. And my understanding is that the proposed purpose, membership structure, recruitment process for the destination stewardship council is going to be presented firstly to council for endorsement prior to its establishment. I think the, the amendment in front of us skips that very, very critical step. Um, so. No, I'm going to accept that because we're not, we don't, I need more understanding about, you know, the legalities, what, you know, what, what's the purpose, what's the structure, what's, what does the membership look like? Um, what's the relationship of the DSC with Tourism Noosa?
04:23:00 Um, what's the relationship with existing advisory groups and council commitments? We need to understand that prior to its establishment. Um, again, um, commend Council Finzel, um, for putting it forward, but I don't support it because it's, um, you, you can't support something that you have no understanding of what you're supporting. Mayor Wilkie: Just a follow-up question. Um, Council Finzel, was it your intention, if I'm reading your amendment correctly, you are saying the terms of reference be prepared, outlining the process for establishing the destination. Is that what you're saying? Yeah, that's correct. Yeah, that's what I thought. Councillor Lorentson: Yeah. But that has to be supported first before we endorse the establishment. Director Rawlings: Mm-hmm. Councillor Lorentson: And that's got to, the report has to come back to Council, is my understanding.
04:24:00 Mayor Wilkie: Mr Chair. There's continuing arguments here. Sorry. Councillor Lorentson: Um, question, question, Shaquem. Have I understood that correctly? That the, the process, as I understood, was the terms of reference, references, um, will be coming, will be prepared, um, the report comes back to Council for consideration and approval, um, before the establishment of the Destination Stewardship Council. Have I understood correctly? Director Rawlings: Um, so the, the, the DMP itself has an action that says establish the Destination Stewardship Council. Exactly. So this implementation, first step, is to develop the terms of reference and have Council and a process to recruit and have that endorsed by Council. Mayor Wilkie: So is this amendment consistent with that? Director Rawlings: I think if this amendment is consistent. It is. Mayor Wilkie: Mm-hmm. Councillor Phillips: One more question. If it's, we're asking for it to be priority action, just so I can understand, what would
04:25:00 then become not the priority if we're lumping it up now? What, what's getting knocked off? What would you? Director Rawlings: Yeah, look. This process was probably always going to be a priority. You know, we've, we've said one of the, the language in this says one of the first priorities of the Destination Stewardship Council, so assuming establishment, subject to process and Council decision making, is to have oversight and review of the monitoring evaluation framework and in, in, put into the implementation plan. So. Um. So, given that, it's establishment is, is a priority to be able to help, you know, and advise on those things. So, I don't think, um, being clear about it being a first priority bumps anything. Um, it was an, it was always going to be an important element. Councillor Lorentson: So, is this redundant?
04:26:00 You, you're saying it's already articulated clearly in the plan. Do we need this amendment? Director Rawlings: I think there's been lots of things today that are up there. Um, that provide clarity. So, in the spirit of. Yeah. Providing clarity. Um, is it already in the plan? It's in the plan to establish. What is different here is that it says A is a first priority following adoption. Councillor Wilson: I'll speak to, um, struggling with this one a bit. I think I agree with the second sentence in particular. But also, it's a bit of a chicken and egg thing that we're trying to prioritise items within a plan that's not complete yet. And the Destination Stewardship Council are supposed to have oversight of that implementation plan. So, um, without them being established, do we actually get the final implementation
04:27:00 plan? Or is the establishment of the Stewardship Council a priority in the plan? Director Rawlings: Can I just be clear? The establishment of the Destination Stewardship Council is in the DMP itself as a key action. It's also outlined as a key governance component in a separate section of the DMP. So, it's both an action and it says it's a key tenet to monitoring and evaluation. That's in the DMP plan itself. Not the, not the implementation plan that is not being endorsed. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, it's actually all part of the DMP? Who else? Councillor Finzel: Um, thank you for the invitation. But I think, um, I'll just keep it brief. I think, um, just bringing it up and illuminating it is just, um, you know, I'm passionate about
04:28:00 good governance. I think this just, it's already in the plan. As we've seen today, everything has been a little bit about chicken and the egg. I guess, for me, it's just, you know, raising it to our awareness to, um, you know, the best way to, I guess, put my intent forward and my heart of the matter is to, to ensure that it is this collaborative approach and that our community, um, sits at the centre of that. And, um, I just wanted to bring that to everyone's attention today. Hopefully, everyone will support this. And, um, thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'll put the motion that the amendment goes in favour. That's Councillor Wilkie, Finzel, Lorentson, Wegener and Stockwell. Those against? Uh, Councillor Wilson and Councillor Phillips. The amendment is carried and therefore becomes part of the motion. Have we come to the end of the full amendments? Councillor Lorentson: I'm going to try one more.
04:29:00 See how this goes. Um, that during implementation, monitoring and review of the destination management plan, Council officers and staff are required to make a decision. Council members engaged with key stakeholders to further refine the plan's strategic settings, assumptions and delivery approach, ensuring it remains responsive to changing economic conditions, state policy and regulatory settings, market dynamics, delivery risk and emerging strategic opportunities. The operating environment for destination management is changes all the time, um, including economic
04:30:00 conditions, the visitor markets, regulations. Regulatory settings, state strategic directions, and particularly in the context of the Queensland destination 2045. And the opportunities and pressures associated with the Brisbane 2032 Olympic and Paralympic Games. Ongoing engagement with whether it's experts or just key stakeholders will support evidence-based decision making, um, and help us identify emerging risk and opportunities. And refine and review our implementation priorities as conditions evolved. Um, I think it's, I think the key reason I've thrown that in is to avoid a set and forget approach. Um, just allowing the plan to be just flexible, um, and able to be adopted and, and changed.
04:31:00 Um, again, with community backing and key stakeholder and independent advice. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Oh, yeah. Councillor Finzel: Happy to speak to that. Thank you, Councillor Lorentson. Um, I appreciate the time you've taken to put this up. The first thought in my mind was when we got into council in 2020 and we had COVID. And, um, you know, we had to pivot and move in the space. So I really think this is good. I think it's good to, um, ensure that we can remain responsive to changing economic conditions and whatever else befalls us. So I'm happy to, um, support this. Hopefully also that the, um, destination strategy group will also be around to engage with the, um, delivery approach and remain responsive to changing conditions. So I think it's, um, it's good to add this as an extra layer.
04:32:00 To ensure that we can pivot in times of changing, ever changing environments. So thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Question to start. Am I reading a partial role description in terms of reference to the Destination Stewardship Council? Me? Director Rawlings: I think, um, I think yes. The Destination Stewardship Council, um, would have key responsibilities. I think, um, I think, um, I think, um, I think, um, I think, um, I think, um, I think, um, hold annual data data in terms of monitoring and evaluation. We already say doing that annually and we're reporting annually. Um, you know, but I think it also states kind of the fact that, um, we do regularly review. We do a state of economy report every year. We're constantly looking at context and trends and all changing conditions. Um, the plan itself says very clearly that, um,
04:33:00 Um. We recognise that not everything will work, we'll address complex challenges and leverage opportunities and remain flexible and responsive. The plan and the framework provides a mechanism to do exactly that, helping us to test and pilot, measure what matters, adjust our approach and continuously improve. It's based on an adaptive cycle. So, yeah, I think it, again, says what's kind of already there and what we do as a matter of course when we are in an adaptive cycle and have committed to monitoring and evaluation and regular reviewing and reporting. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Anyone else wish to talk to this? Councillor Lorentson: Just, I think we've all, we all know there's some serious local know-how in our community and expertise in our community.
04:34:00 Not all those people are going to be sitting on the destination stewardship committee. This amendment just broadens that scope to key stakeholders and I'm referencing also just, you know, state. And I think it's important that people from state who can partake in a review or refinement of our delivery approaches and our strategic settings in the plan. Again, maybe a little bit redundant but I think it's really important that we get it right and that we actively seek, you know, our key stakeholders, the chambers, the business chambers, execute, you know, the plan. I mean it's a large number of experts, people who have already been to where we want to go. I keep using that phrase. But this is one of the gentlemen, two of the guys that sat on the control group.
04:35:00 They have experience in successful, delivering successful destination management plans. And it would be regretful for council, whether it's with them or other people that live in our community, to seek some assistance. Some type of engagement or advice from some great people that live amongst us. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I put the amendment. Those in favour? That's Councillor Wilson, Finzel, Lorentson and Phillips. Those against? There's Councillor Wilkie, Wegener and Stockwell. The amendment is carried and becomes part of the substantive motion. So, councillors, there being no more amendments, we now debate with the substantive motion to which only Councillor Wilkie has fought.
04:36:00 Does someone else want to do that? Councillor Wilson. Councillor Wilson: My focus today is not on meeting a deadline, although they are important, or striving for perfection, but endorsing a plan that the community supports. The feedback I've heard from the community is it's a plan from all plans. Lots of nice ideas and great intentions, but lacking tangible outcomes that our community can really grab hold of and see what will improve in the coming years. We're really looking for bold actions to solve the problems of partnership. We're also looking at protecting our biosphere. I'm uncomfortable with things like a rewards program or a community benefits fund that hasn't yet been designed or costed as being the answer to those problems.
04:37:00 The surveys contain leading questions, and that's not just my opinion, but shared in feedback from the community too. Some chose to make a written submission instead. Councillors did not see the survey questions before they were released. And some have raised multiple concerns about how much we can rely on the responses, despite being a statistically valid sample. The written submissions, which were lengthy, are barely mentioned in this final version. Although some of the feedback might be incorporated. In a plan, I expect to see an executive summary that explains our current state and what the DMP sets out to achieve. The bold key actions, priorities and solutions that will get us there, and what will change for our community in the coming years. It should also acknowledge the threats and challenges ahead, alongside an economic framework and risk management framework supporting the plan. We get to the actual plan on page 29 after a lengthy introduction, and that sort of ends on page 38.
04:38:00 The plan itself is based on four principles and various strategies and tasks. As I mentioned before, the monitoring and evaluation framework and implementation plan are focused on completing tasks, not on reporting on progress towards completion or their success once implemented. And this was echoed in the peer reviews. On page 55 we have what does success look like, which I would like to have seen as the guiding principle for the document, rather than really focusing on regenerative tourism. Because I don't really see where we have tangible inroads into the top priorities, being community wellbeing, lifestyle and local prioritisation, environmental protection and sustainability, transport and mobility improvements, balanced tourism management, preserving identity and lifestyle, and importantly, transparency, trust and accountability. Although I do acknowledge the destination strategic council will help with that. Some of the KPIs don't align to actions and tasks,
04:39:00 and again I accept that we're not endorsing that framework today, but I'm still concerned in how that will proceed. Strengthening the tools available to council for STAs. We can't just measure that by a decrease in hotline calls. It suggests we don't want people calling the hotline, and there are plenty of other measures aligned to the recent local law review that we could implement here. Improving infrastructure to ease congestion. We need to actually measure that congestion, not just the availability of other options. Caring capacities. Measures need to be focused on the success of the actions, not just the completion of them, and there's lots of repetition in the various columns of those tables. For the Love of Noosa programme, 3.1, the measure is that the programme has been launched with at least 500 participants joining the programme, and increases in the participation in regenerative activities.
04:40:00 This is a task. The measure should be whether it's having an impact, and I can't see that 500 people being involved in that programme is going to have a significant impact on a population of 60,000 and a million visitors. Again, lots of the other measures at the moment are just tasks like Kabi Kabi education programmes. It's not about their success. Destination marketing and local promotions and for the Love of Noosa programme have inspired positive behaviour change, for example an increase in waste being diverted from landfills, and being recycled, and increase in public transport use. How do we measure whether those promotions are correlated to the waste diversion to the landfill? How is this measuring whether our stories reflect our bones? So there's lots of examples there. And also we've just been put in a position again, I've been asking all year for our meeting schedules to be reviewed
04:41:00 so that we're not making decisions after having just one business day and a weekend, at the busiest time of year, to review lengthy documents that shape Noosa's future. Most of us were in meetings all day Friday and again we're having all these amendments on the fly to try and improve the report and its outcomes. It's not good governance and it's not acting in the public's best interests. It doesn't set us up for good decisions or meaningful debate when we're scrambling around all weekend trying to write amendments. It was one of my priorities to get the DMP implemented last year and I just don't really, I don't know, if I feel like we've really got there yet in terms of what we've promised to the community and how much it's going to be a guiding document over the next 10 years. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Others wish to talk? Councillor Wegener: Yes, William.
04:42:00 I've come to really like the plan. Partially because it's courageous. In the past, Noosa has taken many very courageous actions and this is one in the long line of very courageous things to do. Not only have you been courageous in facing these meetings and sitting with us for the last six hours, but I'd like to applaud the courageousness of Kim, Lynn, Andrew, Juanita, and the rest of the staff. Thank you for following through. I believe this plan reflects Noosa's identity. It reflects the findings from the surveys and the massive consultation process. And on that ground, I support the DMP. Thank you very much. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Councillor Finzel: Anyone else? I'm happy to speak. I think I want to just say thank you to everybody who's contributed.
04:43:00 It's been a big journey. And today has been really finished that off with another big journey. I love this idea that we can be proactive in the best of our ability and our capacity to action something that can at least move us forward. Noosa is not just a place people visit. It's a place we love. It lives in our daily rituals. Our morning swims, our school drop-offs, quiet walks along our hinterland trails and stunning coastline. Conversations with neighbours and the deep sense that Noosa Shire holds something precious. Noosa has always been more than an economy. It is a community shaped by care, connection, and respect for the land and each other. And yet here we are today at a turning point.
04:44:00 At an intersection that demands magnification and readjustment to safely inform and facilitate unprecedented change socially, economically, and environmentally, both locally and globally. The pressures of over-visitation are being felt not just in traffic or crowded beaches, but in our hearts. In the quiet erosion of amenity. In the strain on infrastructure. In the rising cost carried by residents. And also in the growing fear that what we cherish may slip beyond our reach. This is not about closing the door to visitors. Visitors are a part of our collective story. But the current model asks too much of residents and too little of those who benefit from Noosa without carrying its long-term responsibilities.
04:45:00 Health and wellbeing. Shared access to affordable housing. Meaningful employment and equity matters here. When the costs of visitation are absorbed by ratepayers alone. When young people inherit congestion instead of connection. When community wellbeing is treated as a secondary to growth. Something fundamental. Becomes unbalanced. That is why collective voice matters. As I said before, it takes a specific style of bold leadership to legitimise voice. Through the act of engaging and illuminating citizens' contribution of their own knowledge. Coupled with their lived experience. To act together through voice. To deliver a collaborative vision. For a sustainable future for the next generations.
04:46:00 Because when decisions are made by only a few. The burdens fall on many. But when residents, traditional owners, young people, local businesses and visitors are all heard. Fairness becomes possible. Shared voice is a shared responsibility. It is the foundation of equity. Our young people remind us of what truly matters. They tell us they value a healthy environment. Ease of getting around the Shire. And a future where Noosa remains liveable. Not overwhelmed. They are asking us to think beyond the next season. The next budget. The next election. And to act for generations to come. And this is where we must lead with heart. A Destination Stewardship Modelling Program. In conjunction with the Destination Management Stewardship Council. Demonstrates how tourism can be responsibly managed.
04:47:00 It's not just a governance change. It's a value statement. It says that Noosa chooses care over short-term gain. Balance over burnout. And shared guardianship over fragmented decision-making. It gives equal voice to residents and visitors. It ensures those who need it the most. And those who benefit also contribute. It places community wellbeing, environmental protection and social values at the centre of every decision. This is our opportunity to create a shared vision for Noosa. One grounded in fairness, respect and love for the place. So let us stand together. Let us raise a collective voice that speaks not against visitation. But for stewardship. For equity. For our young people. For future generations who deserve to inherit a Noosa that still feels like home.
04:48:00 Because when we lead with heart. And when we choose to care together. Noosa doesn't just endure. It flourishes. And that is why I support the adoption of the destination management plan today. Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Phillips: Okay so at the very heart of this role we are public servants. We are not advocates for a particular world view and not champions of one sector or one group. Public servants are entrusted to make decisions on behalf of the whole community. That responsibility demands more than good intent. It demands humility, balance and a willingness to challenge our own assumptions.
04:49:00 When this DMV began it was presented as a community document. A way to bring people together around how we manage tourism, protect what makes us special and plan responsibility for the future. Somewhere along the way I believe it has changed and I really did want to have a crack. Today what sits before us no longer feels like a document that's shaped equally by the full breadth of our community because it feels like it's been morphed into something that serves a different purpose and one that sits uncomfortable with me. And my moral compass seems to be extremely wrong. The document now contains solutions and measures and targets that imply future decisions that have already been settled on and matters such as visitor funding mechanisms, parking management approaches, behaviour change programs, governance structures despite those decisions that have not been formally adopted by Council.
04:50:00 And that is a minor issue for me because it goes directly to how trust is eroded. Plans like this are often described to communities as live documents but in practice we know they're neutral. Once endorsed they activate the internal processes. The work programs commence, resources are allocated, budget bids are starting to be developed and future Councils are told the direction is already embedded. And so that's why to me the language matters. When measures are written as outcomes rather than options and feasibility appears assumed rather than testable. Councils discretion is narrowed before the evidence is on the table. And I also want to address the community survey work that underpinned this document. Engagement is so important but how questions are framed matters just as much as how people respond.
04:51:00 Survey language must be crafted to have open questions that lead participants to open answers. When complex policy ideas are presented in values based or aspirational language they can attract broad support without respondents fully understanding the governance, the financial or regulatory implications. When we talk about our passionate community we need to be careful not to confuse passion with capacity. Before I sat in this room I had no time to read a Council document. I was a full time police officer working night shifts, raising two kids. My husband at the time was FIFO. I was studying at uni and I was volunteering at a local sporting club. So in my down time I was actually at the river or the beach and I am sorry to say that I never had time to read the Council reports. And that's in the reality for most people in our community.
04:52:00 They care deeply about Noosav but they are not experts in local government. They are not sitting through the workshops or reading, monitoring frameworks and not everyone in those workshops in my opinion gets an equal voice. But all people deserve representation and I owe it to them today to stand up when something doesn't feel right. I represent many views at this table. When I was voted in, maybe from my policing background because I'm a mum, because I'm a local, because I'm direct, grounded. Maybe I'm not interested in the fluff, the titles. Maybe I'm not interested in all the photos. Maybe all of us around the table we all know why you ran. As in you know your why. When I was in policing I had a simple test for my decisions. If I was wearing my body on camera and it was being live streamed to my children and the people that I love would I be proud of what I was doing? That test applies to me every single day.
04:53:00 There may be only a handful of people watching this meeting live, probably not by now. But the real moment of accountability is not in our speeches, it's in our vote. So that's when the robot will hit the road. For me the actions embedded in the document haven't aligned now to what I believe is a true reflection of our entire community. They carry assumptions, downstream consequences that are not comfortable standing behind. And while I deeply respect the staff and people as our professionals in the room, it isn't personal for me. I respect the effort. That doesn't mean I automatically support the outcomes if I believe that they have fallen short of what I owe the community. I'm not interested in supporting reports and frameworks simply because they've taken time to repair. Because my responsibility is to the people that I represent. And those people including those who don't have the time, energy or access to be sitting in these rooms. So yes, I guess standing up and sitting down and voting against these reports
04:54:00 puts me in the firing line and I understand that. But I've never been afraid to speak up for those who cannot. So thankfully I know I'm not alone in this room to be brave enough to go against the pressure of a meeting like this. Because at the end of the day I'm going to go home, I'm going to look at my kids, my husband and this community and say, look them in the eye and say I acted every single day with integrity. That's the standard that I'm going to hold myself to forever. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So councillors. Councillor Lorentson: Can I speak? I was going to speak. Oh excuse me. Can I go ahead? I thought you opened. No, you moved to the motion. Excuse me. No, the councillor will be here. Okay. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: 3,000 or so people involved and 20 years in local government. I don't think I've seen a clearer indication from the community what they want.
04:55:00 We can talk about the... Can I speak? Could look at the results and say what our community want and see if it's in this plan and for me it's really clear it is. Other councils would die to have the level of community involvement that we've got in this process. I know we have come with high standards and expectations but it's very clear that in the vast majority of the actions that three quarters of the people who took the time to have feedback were in support. Now there's going to be limitations on the level of support in some of the disclaims. But you can't look at the results of consultation and come out with any other conclusion than the vast majority of Noosa people support what's in this plan.
04:56:00 So when you say you're going to vote with integrity, you have to end, vote with integrity to vote for the issues of the minority of the people in the community. That's what I'm trying to say. Because that's what the consultation tells us. Now this journey has been a long one and there's been suggestions that the process has been squashed at the end. Can I say, we have been involved in every step of the process. We've had opportunities to provide commentary across numerous workshops and we were given a full draft to comment on ten days ago. So I think that's what I'm trying to say. I spent probably a day and a half reviewing that document and providing feedback. We've all had that opportunity. And yes, there will come a time when we need to make a decision. And that is local government. You get an agenda and you take time and you read it and you adopt a position.
04:57:00 I don't feel pressure. I feel that we've done as good a job as I've seen done in this council, in engaging the community. And getting expert advice. I can see a plan that is one that is evolving where we've come from. Now there's some debate about transformation involved. But the interesting one was when we got expert advice on what other destinations that are seen to be at the top of the world in terms of sustainability and going down this regentive path. All the successful ones are the ones that are in the top of the world. And that's what this plan does. But there is some bold things in here. And I think it's really clear that the four key areas that we're saying are new. Day visitor management. We've clearly identified what we're going to do that's different to try and address
04:58:00 the issues associated with day groups. And everyone knows that's going to be probably the hardest one to make meaningful changes. And that's what we're going to do. We did over the final stages of the plan come up with the For Love and Noosa concept which really to me was a really good one saying whether you go down the end of your street to surf or whether you come 10,000 miles, the experience is shared and therefore the responsibility to care for the place is shared. So the For Love and Noosa program is picking up on elements not just for the visitors but for residents, some of the concepts that I put many many years ago in this place and then we look at some of the fears that this plan was going to actually just redirect tourism to the hinterland and start having over tourism in the hinterland so the new focus on hinterland regeneration, what we see the hinterland doing is providing the large areas where we can have visitor led tree planting.
04:59:00 Or visitor funded tree planting where we can have a whole value chain that goes from the artisan producers or the artisan wine makers and gin makers into the visitor economy so we start to have the Noosa experience that is embedded with local produce and local arts and crafts and then the destination stewardship that will be something that I believe will help the community understand that this is a shared issue. It's one. It's not just council working with a destination management organisation. Marketing, sorry, destination marketing organisation. Marketing is one element of what could help lead to a new culture within the visitor economy and a new opportunity for businesses within this Shire to enhance their offering. To look at the type of visitor we're trying to attract in our marketing.
05:00:00 But the destination stewardship is about having expertise and key stakeholders around the table to look at shared responsibility and move it forward. So I understand the individual issues that have been raised today where improvements could be made. But on the whole this plan has a program logic that has really strong roots that does set a direction that we as councillors can be able to take into account. I think that's it. And Councillor Longison. Councillor Lorentson: Can I just start with, this afternoon we've seen a number. We started with C, I think there was about 15 amendments that we were going to play with. And one, two, three, four, five, six, seven got up.
05:01:00 I think there was a number of amendments that we were going to play with. That alone highlights the issues for me raised around the robustness of this plan. Keep going back to our obligations. Our obligations to our residents is to ensure that we manage and protect their interests, support our small businesses and safeguard the lifestyle that defines our community. A 10 year strategic plan deserves rigorous and strong foundations. Yes. Yet today what we've been asked to do is endorse a plan that in my opinion lacks the level of detail and robustness it deserves. In doing so what I feel we're doing is prioritising expediency and a deadline over the rigour required for a 10 year strategic document of this importance. That's not acceptable when what's at stake is our residents, our community's future.
05:02:00 I don't believe that we should be rushing this process. And again endorsing a plan without the necessary rigour, risk undermining confidence, creates unintended consequences and potentially fails to deliver on the very outcomes that we claim to protect. I've done an analysis. I've spent a lot of time reading the document and there were some red flags and gaps. Again I reference the rigour that's needed. There's been a great deal that's changed since the draft was prepared. Economic conditions, state policy settings, some of us attended just recently the 2032 Olympic and Paralympic forums that was hosted by the Noosa Chamber of Commerce.
05:03:00 There's new opportunities that have emerged through the Queensland Destination 2045 and challenges. I believe that these changes need to be examined in further depth. I also go back to some of the elements in the plan. The draft doesn't clearly articulate an economic strategy. Including, for our visiting economy, including how growth will be managed. In addition, and I know that I've thrown this as way of amendments but it hasn't been done yet. The plan doesn't embed a destination specific risk framework that identifies the delivery risk, external dependencies and how they will be managed. Implementation details are also insufficient. Measures of success, timeframes, prioritisations, accountability for delivery. And again I note that, you know, it's been said around this table over the last five hours that the draft will be reviewed, it will be reported on and continuously monitored.
05:04:00 But I keep saying that's not a substitute for getting the foundations right. And I just simply don't believe we've got the foundations right. Several of the proposed outcomes depend on state government reform or cooperation from other agencies including short stay accommodation, visitor contributions, transport initiatives and managing visitor numbers. The draft, in my opinion, doesn't adequately address contingencies. What happens if these changes don't occur? What risk do they pose to council? And are we risking, are we about to endorse outcomes that are beyond our control? Some other of the measures identified in the plan also can significantly impact the outcomes. They can significantly affect the residents, local businesses and access to public spaces, particularly around parking, congestion and visitation management.
05:05:00 And we note a lot of the amendments were around this. Again, I keep coming back to this is a really important document. It's a 10-year strategic plan. And we have an obligation to our residents. To endorse the plan without rushing it. I keep coming back to one sentence that I wrote during our meeting. Our community deserves better than a plan built on compromise for the sake of meeting a timeline. And that's what I feel that we're going to be delivering today. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Councillor Wookiee, your opportunity to close. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you. Look after. Very extensive series of workshops where all councillors were taught through the structure of the plan.
05:06:00 Had ample opportunity to have input, get their head around and understand it. The final draft for 10 days to pour over, make suggestions and improvements with staff. I'm really sorry that after all that, that some only see confusion, risk, uncertainty. Fear of offending supporters and wording they don't like. What I see is a fantastic. Point of order. Councillor Lorentson: Point of order, Chair. Yes, what's your point of order? Risk of offending. What were the words, Mayor Wilkie? Risk of offending. Supporters. Supporters. I take offence to that. Speaker 2: I think that's personal and out of line. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I didn't. No, I heard. I heard that's. It's not, it's not directed at a councillor, sir. Mayor Wilkie: This is what I heard about wanting to wreck our. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: A councillor's up to me. Acknowledge what you're saying, but I don't believe it. It's benchmark in terms of that point of order.
05:07:00 Councillor Wilson, have you got another point of order? Councillor Wilson: Yeah, it's actually incorrect that we got the final draft 10 years, 2 days ago. No, no point of order. We got it on the Thursday. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor. You cannot use a point of order to correct what you perceive as a factual error. Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: So, we had. Did you? Had the final draft for many days prior to the release of the report. And the, the interesting thing about this destination management plan is it's not about us. It is about the best long term interest of the broader Noosa community now and into the future. Thank you. I don't know how anyone could argue that it's reflecting a minority view or ideology when the feedback from the community was so overwhelming. And to say that the people that they represent could not be happy with a plan that seeks to preserve out the natural beauty that makes Noosa what it is, makes it the livable place
05:08:00 that it is. The connections. The, the prosperity. This is what this plan does. That's its intent. By ratifying this today, you're giving Noosa a future. We are well aware and ought to be responsibly preparing for the challenges that we face. To vote against this plan and to do business as usual, knowing the population needs to The amendments have been used as explained as a symptom of something being wrong with the plan. But as we've seen, the amendments largely reflect what's already in the plan and have been acknowledged as largely redundant. So there can't be a problem with the plan, because the plan already inherently contains these, what the amendments involve.
05:09:00 Councillors, I also commend you for the way you advocated for the amendments. The passion with which you applied yourself for those amendments. Means that you would really like to see those things implemented. That's the way I'm interpreting it. But they don't mean the genuineness of the enthusiasm with which you advocated for these things. Amount to nothing if you don't vote to ratify this destination plan in its entirety. But what we heard it said, it's not what we say, it's what we do. And how we vote that shows what we really stand for.
05:10:00 And I think that's really true. But this is a plan that's, even though you may not agree with it, I think you must know in your heart of hearts that it gives Noosa the best chance of facing a future where population pressures and visitation is only going to become more and more intense. And to do nothing is to go backwards. Of course, with a plan as ambitious as this, and as wide ranging and cast as wide a net, there's bound to be the high chance that we're not going to agree on everything in it. The wording. But the framework with the establishment of the Destination Stewardship Council will be refined. The measures improved. It will be refined as it moves along. The list, we're on the path now. The journey can commence. And I know in your heart of hearts, you're here for the betterment of the community.
05:11:00 You want to be a council that does things, not delays things. So this destination management plan is a good step forward. And I would like to especially thank the staff who have been saintly in their patience, in their response to information requests, in the integrity with which they've handled the work, with which they've handled the submissions and interpreted the submissions. I've been giving the wind up. So councillors, all of you around the table, I commend you for your input into this plan. And I urge all of you to support this plan. Support it. Not for us. But for our future Noosa. The future of Noosa.
05:12:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'll put the motion. Those in favour? That's Councillor Wilkie, Finzel, Wegener and Stockwell. Those opposed? It's Wilson, Lorentson and Phillips. The motion is carried. Thank you. And well done. Councils. Thank you. Our next item is in confidence, so we are dealing with the not-for-public-release environmental levy proposed lease purchase, referred from the Planning Environment Committee. If we have a stand for a motion to move, we'll stand for a motion. Moved by Councillor Phillips. Have you got the stand? Seconded by Councillor Finzel, was it? Yes. Thank you, Mr Chair. Moved by Councillor Cook. Yes.
9 CONFIDENTIAL SESSION ¶
Nothing was transcribed under this heading — a stretch of the recording with no speech the model could make out.
9.1 CONFIDENTIAL: NOT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE – ENVIRONMENT LEVY PROPOSED LAND PURCHASE (Referred from Planning and Environment Committee Meeting dated 9 December 2025) ¶
05:13:00 Councillor Phillips: Is that the meaning of the proposed lease? Yes. Is that the meaning of the proposed lease? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Any discussion? No? I'll put the motion in their favour. That's unanimous.
05:27:00 Mayor Wilkie: Are you ready for me to turn it on? Councillor Finzel: Yes. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay, so we're now back in open session and we're dealing with item 9.1 and I will move. Councillor Lorentson: Aperture second. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And I'll read that because there is a slight change from that which was in the plan. And it is at the change, so it's not a report by the coordinator of conservation environment to the planning environment committee dated 9th of December 2025 and B, authorised the CEO to commence negotiations with the owners of their or their agent regarding purchase of the subject property as detailed in this report. If purchased by council, utilise funds from council's environment levy.
05:28:00 If purchased by council, undertake the necessary establishment actions for security. If purchased by council, undertake the necessary investigation actions to pursue biodiversity and carbon offsets over the property. And five, where relevant and to the satisfaction of CEO, enter into agreements and arrangements for the property to receive biodiversity and carbon offsets. Councillor Lorentson: Happy to second that, Mr. Hatton. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Seconded, Councillor Laurinton. Not much we can say, but I think the staff recommendation is worthy of support. Anything else we should say? So anything? No? I'll put the motion. Those in favour? That's carried unanimously. And I would close the meeting. That's great. .