2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY ¶
00:00:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: All those in the community of Noosa and pass on our respects for their culture, heritage and ongoing custodianship and for their elders past, present and emerging. We then move on to attendance and I note that all councillors are in attendance. We have the confirmation of minutes. Would someone like to move the minutes of the last general committee meeting? Mr Chairman, the general committee meeting date is 16th of February. Yes, Councillor Wilkie, seconded Councillor Lorentson. Presuming there's no discussion, I'll put the vote and that's carried unanimously. We have no presentations nor do we have any deputations. Moves on to item 7, which is the update to council's representation on various groups, boards and external groups 2026 midterm review. And that's been referred to in the services and organisation committee meeting. So. Mr CEO, are you or is one of the directors doing the overview on that one?
3 ATTENDANCE & APOLOGIES ¶
Nothing was transcribed under this heading — a stretch of the recording with no speech the model could make out.
4 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES ¶
Nothing was transcribed under this heading — a stretch of the recording with no speech the model could make out.
7.1 UPDATE TO COUNCILLOR REPRESENTATION ON VARIOUS GROUPS, BOARDS AND EXTERNAL GROUPS 2026 (MID TERM REVIEW) (referred from Services & Organisation Committee meeting 10 March 2026 - Item 7.3 ) ¶
00:01:00 Speaker 2: I'm happy to do the overview. So this is, thank you, Mr Chair. At the middle of each cycle, we, we, we, oh, sorry, let me take it back. The councillors are appointed to various committees, external and internal committees across the, across the period of the four year cycle. At the mid-term of that cycle, we have, on previous occasions, looked to review that and look to provide opportunities for councillors to move across into different committees, if they so wish, to get either further experience or to provide further opportunities for other councillors. We've gone through that process. It was brought to the committee, subcommittee last week, but there was a request for some more information, which we've provided. That information really is to, to give a sense of the amount of work, because each committee is different.
00:02:00 Some committees meet regularly, some committees don't, some committees require quite a lot of reading and preparation, some committees require simply to be part of and observe. So what we've done is, is provided a, an attachment or a further report, which essentially outlines, to the best of our knowledge, some of the committees are a little bit scant. So to the best of our knowledge, we've provided that information. So just to give everybody a sense of the, so we can try to get some equity, but also give a sense of the, the workload that each of those committees requires from councillors being either part of it, or chairing it, or as I say, as an observer. So that information is there for, and I'll take that as read, but that's, that's the information that was requested and we've provided. OK. Mayor Wilkie: Council Wilkie. Can I move an updated motion please, Mr Chair? As on the screen currently, it's, it's diffe-, I'll, I'll move it.
00:03:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Move Council Wilkie seconded, I think Council Wilson got him second. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you. Thank you, Mr Chair. This updated motion shows changes to the one that was presented to the Cervical Council. I refer to item H, which is appoint Councillor Stockwell as Chair, Councillor Finzel, and I had Councillor Wegener, that's been crossed out, because Councillor Wegener has graciously stepped aside to allow Councillor Lorentson to take his place on the Noosaville Biosphere Trails Reference Group. I refer also to item K, the change there is appoint Councillor Wilson to the Management Committee, and Councillor Finzel, it was incorrectly listed as Councillor Phillips in the Services and Organisation Committee meeting agenda, as an observer to the MOU Regional Partnership Agreement with the Sunshine Coast University, and Councillor Finzel has graciously stepped aside to let Councillor Lorentson take the observer position on that.
00:04:00 So, and also, another change down the bottom queue, Councillor Phillips, that was not an error, Councillor Phillips has decided to step aside to allow Councillor Lorentson to sit on the Environmental Levy Working Group. So, the purpose of bringing that here and showing those in an open session is to ratify them in an open session, and that is the final appointment list as it stands.
00:05:00 And there's also an addition of C, that the Tourism Noosa observer role be reviewed at the time of the establishment of the Destination Stewardship Council, because we may want to review who sits on the Tourism Noosa board at the same time as the establishment of the Destination Stewardship Council. So, for consideration of the meeting. Councillor Wilson: Can I ask a question, please? Mayor Wilkie: You may. Councillor Wilson: For item K, have we established yet whether the university will allow an observer role? Because we didn't previously have that. Speaker 2: Through the Chair, no, we haven't had a chance to do that. I don't see it being a problem, but I just haven't had the opportunity, or I haven't got a response back from the university at this point. All right. Councillor Lorentson: Question to the Chair. How many times has the university, that group, actually convened in the last, say, 12, two years? Speaker 2: Through the Chair, it's not been a regular thing.
00:06:00 It's something that, there's been a lot of changes within the university, and it's had a bit of a stop start. I've met, I think, twice, probably. We've had representations from the university, I think, maybe twice in my time that I've been here. Councillor Lorentson: So, that's over a period of three, four years. Speaker 2: Three, four years, yeah. Two times, okay, thank you. So, we are looking to reactivate that, and speak with the university to see if it's still where it lies. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, would anyone else? Councillor Wilson: So, a question on that, with the further information that we've requested, at the moment, that says that the university meets four times per year, and it hasn't met at all in the two years that I've been here. Speaker 2: Sorry, that's the response that I got back from my staff, and I'll be looking to work through that, but I think it is an important piece. It was the VMOU that was set up, I think, is very important for us to activate. It's just that it hasn't been, it's been, sort of, hasn't really been activated, I guess, is the best, best way to say it, but I think we just need to, we need to put some attention to that, because there is opportunities in terms of, we do already have students that come here from university, and various relationships that happen, but they don't happen necessarily as formally as they potentially could.
00:07:00 So, I think this, this needs to be activated further. Councillor Wegener: Tom? Okay, any other questions? I'll, I'd like to make an amendment. Sure. Okay, I'd like to move, make an amendment that D, request the CEO to begin a review of the status of existing working groups, and the potential need for the establishment of any new groups, including consideration of an external Hastings Street Precinct working group. Thank you very much. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, I'm happy to second that one.
00:08:00 Thank you. Councillor Wegener: We, our jobs is really to be visionaries, to vision the future of Noosa, and then to work to create that vision. But, in order to do that, I believe we're, we need to talk to experts in the field, experts around, all the people in the different groups, people on the ground, and, and that's in order to get the best information that we could possibly have in order to find this vision, find the strategic vision for Noosa into the future. And these groups are a really, a great way to do that, the best way to do that. And the best way is to actually have an organized group with minutes being taken, so that we can know what, what this group has found, who it's spoken to, have a bit of a, a trail of where we've been, so that when it comes to debating amongst the councilors, the vision, the strategic intent, where we're going with Noosa, we have that information. And so I believe that it's really important to do this.
00:09:00 I think our, our, our groups that we have, some of them are, have become stagnant. Some of them are, are very useful. But I think we can actually do better. I think we can be better strategic thinkers by talking more intently with the different areas, whether it be that the, the hinterland or the Hastings Street Precinct. And I bring the Hastings Street Precinct. Up because I think that there's just so much going on down there. There's the lighting in the woods and cameras on Hastings Street. There's the new sub, transit substation, the surf club redevelopment, Lions Club parking, the rock wall renewal, which is a colossal project. There's paid parking, the surf management plan, and many other things that are just all happening around the, the precinct. And I would love to see a group, and if we, I could be on the group or just be a, an observer. But to, to, to get the, the experts in to talk, round table it, and, and, and create this vision so that we're in charge of this, of moving forward with that precinct, with the hinterland, whatever.
00:10:00 But I think that we, we really should, we'd do our jobs better if we were better informed through talking to experts. And again, these groups are a wonderful way to do that. Councillor Wilson: I'll speak partly in, in support and partly against. I'm in support of the first half of the sentence. I request the CEO to begin a review of the status of existing working groups and the potential need for the establishment of any new groups. I believe we do need a review of the purpose of some of these groups and definitely need to identify new groups that we might need to deliver strategies in the future. And I believe at that point we should all be encouraged to make suggestions. And so I don't think there's a reason to single out any one particular project or precinct at the moment. It should be part of, of the process.
00:11:00 So I think already identifying the need for the establishment of any new groups would include considering Hastings Street. Therefore, the rest of the sentence is redundant. I do believe we, we really need to have a clear purpose for councillors to be involved in these groups and staff as well. Not to be just duplicating effort and making sure that if councillors are appointed to particular groups that they, they have a role. Whether they're influencing or advocating or observing. We need to be clear what that role is and what councillors can actually achieve by being on these groups. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor Lorentson? Councillor Lorentson: I'm aligned with Councillor Wilson. I support the need for a review of the status of the existing working groups. And we heard that in the previous conversations in terms of the university. There are a lot of groups that meet rarely, if at all. And it'd be really interesting to understand which ones should remain fit the purpose.
00:12:00 Which ones are aligned with our current priorities. And where there may be gaps in terms of, you know, whether it's, whether it is a Hastings Street association group. Whether it is an integrated Burgess Creek management group. Whatever the case may be. But again, in terms of the amendment in front of us, I can't support the second part including consideration of external Hastings Street precinct working group. I think that should be considered and is considered and captured. Under a review of the status of the existing working groups. Because there'll be opportunities there to again identify any gaps and make suggestions. But I think what we need to first do is better understand what's already been managed operationally. There's a lot of the groups that Councillor Wegener mentioned are being managed operationally. Councillors are involved in processes in some of those groups.
00:13:00 So I'd just really like to unpack that before we single out any potential group. But I do think it can be captured just as part of the first part of that amendment. So the amendment as it sits I won't support. But I will support a broken down version of that. Councillor Finzel: Councillor Finzel. Yeah, thank you. Thank you Councillor Tom for bringing this to this table. I think it's great as Councillors if we're always thinking forward, forward visioning. How can we do better for our communities if we sit in this role to serve them. We currently sit in a time where we have changes pretty much a constant. It's how as leaders we facilitate change. I love the idea that we're going to outreach into our community. You know, raise awareness and start new narratives around what the future could look like.
00:14:00 And who are those key people that would like to engage in that conversation now and into the future. So yeah, I'm always open to change, new ideas. Let's be creative in that space and be strong leaders. And be continually checking out the landscape. What's happening out there? What's new? Where are the new ideas in the community? What new groups are coming up with, you know, ideas or potential growth within our hinterland? Every voice matters. So I will support this addition. But I'm with the other conversation around the table. Limiting it to the Hastings Streets precinct I think is very not broad enough. I think I'm happy to support it so that we can look at the establishing new groups without limiting it. Especially for the hinterland. You know, all our strategies and everything like diversification of the hinterland. I really want to see that. I want to see like what's happening out there and can we attract new voices to the table.
00:15:00 So I think it needs to be broader for equity across the Shire and reaching out to potentially new voices at the table. So thank you Councillor Tom for bringing it forward. I think it's a great debate around the table. And a positive step forward at this point of reviewing the groups. So thank you. Councillor Phillips: Thank you. I guess how I looked at it. I liked the first part. When I think of including consideration of the external Hastings Street precinct working group. I start getting worried about the lanes being blurred. Like if I think of street lighting and safety then that would be TMR, QPS. If rock wall design would be other stakeholders. Surf life savings, surf management. Like they're all very unique in their lanes. And so I'm just not sure of how it would work having them all together in one. If they're all, all their needs and their, you know, their lanes are so separate.
00:16:00 So I'm just not sure at this point if I could support it because it's too broad. But I really like the first part. So unfortunately I can't support the entirety. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Now that. Wait till you close. Yeah. Sorry. Councillor Wilson: Can I ask a question please? You may. How soon could this review take place? Speaker 2: Personally I think it's a very good idea. I think it's well, well required. Each of those groups we could, we need to bring, we need to review the existing ones. But the new ones is where I'm really looking at, at the option, opportunity. But that would have to come back to council to decide whether we do that in workshops and then bring it forward. So everything takes a bit of time. It's not, not something that we can do in a, in a week or two weeks or a month.
00:17:00 But it is something that, and, and understanding who would be on those because even, even with Councillor Wegener's idea of a hosting street precinct working group, everybody immediately goes to who's on it as opposed to what is it, what are we really trying to get from it? And then how do we, how do we, you know, get the membership right? So there's a lot of consideration. It's really, you know, it's a really good opportunity for us. I think we should take the time to actually get it, do it properly and look at where the real needs are immediately and then moving it out from there. But at the times of a timeline, it's something, again, I wouldn't want to rush at it. I think we need to, we can review the existing ones, but the new ones I think we should, we should consider well. Because once you start these, they require, in terms of reference, they require a whole lot of work that goes behind the scenes. That takes time. And if you, you know, you do all that work and then it doesn't, doesn't work, you know, we're wasting time. So let's, let's not rush it. That's my, that would be my advice. Councillor Lorentson: So question to the CEO, as part of a review, will we have the opportunity to identify these
00:18:00 gaps and opportunity to establish potentially new groups? Speaker 2: That's exactly it. So that's what I mean. The council is, I'm sure all of you sitting around here have got your own ideas of where the gaps are. Speaker 3: Yep. Speaker 2: So we need to, we need to provide the opportunity to bring that back and then work out how we best deliver it. Because the risk again is we've got, if there's a number of gaps, we create a number of bodies and then it requires a number of resources, a number of, whereas if we can look to consolidate maybe in different areas, then it, then it helps us, but it also creates the right, the right model going forward. So I think it just takes a bit of time. We should take, take the time to consider it properly. Mayor Wilkie: Question for Councillor Wegener. Councillor Wegener, taking on board the feedback from around the table, would you be prepared to change the amendment to strike out the last clause or if it fails, move another amendment, just including the first clause?
00:19:00 Councillor Wegener: Um, no, I, I, I, I'll, I'll, I'll, I'll close on this. We could vote on this and if it disappears, then it disappears, it's no biggie. Um, no, so I don't want to change it. Okay. And I'm not prepared for it to fall, but I do want to close. Mayor Wilkie: Yeah. Okay. Uh, we've taken on board the feedback from around the table. Um, uh, I, I respect the intent, Councillor Wegener, which is by saying that, um, reviewing the, the, the groups includes consideration of an external Hastings Street policing group, working group. That's perfectly legitimate. As we've just heard, we've all got ideas about what other groups ought to be formed. Um, but, uh, I'll vote against this one and I hope that, um, Councillor Wegener will consider, uh, if it fails, moving the first part of this, this amendment because it's, um, we certainly do need to review the existing working groups and the potential need for the establishment of any new groups.
00:20:00 Okay. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, um, I actually like it as it is worded, and that's because of the rationale that Councillor Wegener, uh, explained in his opening address. The, the rationale for giving an example, and it's just really an example, saying including consideration of, it doesn't exclude anything not being considered, um, is that we have multiple projects in a, a local area and we haven't, other than the business association, got a combined group of stakeholders who can review that. Now, my, in my, um, working history, I always came back to one thing, the place is the best integrator. If we're going to get a combined understood view, uh, you do it around place, so implicit within that is an indication that part of that review is, is there actually places like hinterland, um, that we do a similar thing.
00:21:00 We've got a range of projects where it'd be good for, um, councillors and staff to hear, um, from a range of different perspectives. So, to me, it just gives an indication of a new element of these working groups that may be in the, um, in that review. So, I'm happy to support it as is. Councillor Lorentson: A question to the Chair. Sure. Um, or to the CEO, actually. Um, just a question. There's, Councillor Wegener mentioned a couple of the groups, um, including the surf management plan, the redevelopment. Um, my understanding, and can you confirm, question to you, um, is each of these groups, um, have stakeholder groups, which involved Noosa Council, Seawall Noosa Council staff, key stakeholders, Hastings Street Association, um, local residents, surf club, et cetera. There are, within each project, um, proper reference groups and stakeholder groups.
00:22:00 Is that correct? Speaker 2: Um, I think it's a bit of a mix and match. There's some that, that are internal. There's some that are external and exclusively external, but we didn't have so many observers on them, but they're really observers. I think this is just looking and, and, as an example for Hastings Street, and again, we could do it for other places. So, don't sort of hold me to that, but I think it's just a, it's just a way of bringing all of them around the table. It's almost like a round table so everybody understands exactly what's happening. Um, but do it on a regular basis and, and provide that, that opportunity for feedback and, and direction. So, I think, um, but led by council is the, is probably the, would be my, would be my, um, in terms of the meeting or the, you know, being, being managed by that. So, I think that's, that's where my head would be at. But again, it's up to us to then sit down and work out in terms of reference. It's not, not, um, it's a bit of a horse of course as well. You create something that, that's suitable for the particular project or this particular area.
00:23:00 Um, so I, you know, I just think it's a, it's, the idea is bringing everybody together so that they understand what's going on in a particular precinct because they all interact and they all have influence on each other in terms of the outcomes. Councillor Phillips: Good question then. Because I haven't been part of the establishment of a group. I think when we were elected the groups were established. So, maybe just to help. What, um, just coming to how will it work behind the scenes establishing it? Do we get the same issues or what? Speaker 2: Absolutely. That's, that's the idea is to say, well, we, we think we need a group for this particular reason. Then it's a matter of, this is just sort of off the top of my head I guess, but, but we need a group for a particular reason who should be on that group, who needs to be part of that group. Again, the risk is you go so broad that you don't get anything, anything. It's like who are the, who are the key stakeholders potentially for that particular group to make sure that we do get the right feedback but we also provide that, that cross flow
00:24:00 of information so they understand why something's happening and that's, that's a big part of it. People understand why. They, they're more, more willing to accept it. So, it's really just getting that, that cross flow. It's the way I see it right now. Councillor Tom might have a different, slightly different view, but that's the way I see it as a, as we would set the terms of reference. We would set who's on it and then, and then what the, what the outcomes or expected outcomes are of that group. Councillor Phillips: Okay. So, so we would set it, but we, in relation to the staff that would be responsible or the department, if all of them are slightly different in departments, how will that work? Speaker 2: Well, they're already doing that work. Okay. So, it's a matter of then how we, how do we integrate that and make sure that it's not an overburden on, on them, you know, another layer if you like. But I think in some respects that other layer might be more important and more, more, more useful anyway to make sure that we are totally integrated. We're already doing it for, for a number of, they're internal and they're staff driven for various projects that we know are happening.
00:25:00 So, this is just broadening it out. Councillor Finzel: Question through the Chair to the CEO. I note you've said the terms of reference would be council led. In terms of our recent expenditure that led to fast community engagement around town planning, you know, there was a recommendation that, you know, teams could come together through town teams and then it was going to be community led in terms of reference back to council. Do you see there will be opportunity for, you know, community groups to actually reach into council and have, you know, recommend their group somehow gets reviewed? Speaker 2: Potentially. Absolutely. That's, and that's, you know, that's for you as a councilor with your connections to those groups to bring that to the table and then decide whether they, they should be or should not be on that group. Councillor Finzel: Thank you. Just seeking clarification.
00:26:00 Speaker 2: Sure. That's what, that's how I, that's how I see it, councilor. But again, when we get around the table, it could all change, not change, but you have your influence and you have your, and we set the direction in. And again, that's what terms of reference is all about, is to understand what we're trying to achieve rather than just have a meeting for a meeting's sake. It's what we're trying to achieve from that group. Councillor Lorentson: So part of the review through the CEO would be to actually just gain some clarity as to the purpose of establishing groups. Absolutely. And we need to do that part first before proceeding to establishing new groups. Yep. Speaker 2: Thank you. Yep. So just, I guess one example we did was that the, even though sort of it's, it's waned a bit, but we got the funding we needed to, to, to progress it. But the, the Noosa Drive, the, the, the walkway over the hill was really led by council. It was our funding. We got the, what we thought were the appropriate stakeholders together so that we can help to drive the, the planning and the design of that, of that project. That's a small example of it. But really just saying, here's the project. Who do we need to have involved? How do we drive that from a council point of view and led by council also that we get
00:27:00 the outcome that we're, we're looking for. That was one that was, that was already put in place. Further question? Councillor Finzel: Yes. Thank you. Can I just ask you, just to take you through the chair to Mr. CEO, before my time, like these groups were already in place, this was normally just an internal review of like who's in what group. How did these groups arise? Was that like, did council staff invite this or, I mean, what was the process? I mean, to me it should be like an internal review with a bit of rigor around where we're at. So just trying to understand the background to inform the future. Speaker 2: I agree, Councillor. And that's really, it's just now's the time to review them. That's what this is all about. What we did is, this is a rollover. Remember, these are already in place before my time as well. They've evolved from different, whether we've put them in place or somebody else has put them in place, but they have evolved. And we've said we need to be part of that, or that's something we're driving, as you can see by the mix and matching there.
00:28:00 So now's the time to review and look at them. But this is what we did do. I know that our administrators here, they looked at it and said, which ones are still happening? And that's what this list is. To the best of our knowledge, these are the ones that are still operating. There's been some that we took off that list, if you remember. So that's really where we're at. So now's the time to say, well, what we're doing is just changing the membership of it. Now's the time to actually look at it and say, are these actually relevant? So that will become feedback from yourselves as well. Because you go to those meetings, tell us whether we need to be there or not. Councillor Lorentson: In terms of the Hastings Street Association, how often does council meet with the association? And what information is fed to the group in terms of what's happening around the precinct? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So I won't allow that question that's going off into a specific that's not part of a council appointment or working group or review in terms of the amendment before us.
00:29:00 So, Councillor Wegener, would you like to close on your amendment? Councillor Wegener: Yeah, I see this as, well, I see the first half as being, you know, a whole lot important, but a whole lot of nothing. It actually doesn't say anything and nothing's going to change, probably. So that's why I wanted to include the Hastings Street as a consideration, as an actual, we need to get this done. Maybe Hastings Street will be off the table. Maybe we'll be talking about the arts and the hinterland. Maybe organic farming, these different groups, but I know that we are, I believe, lacking strategy. I think some of us around the table have noted that us councillors are lacking strategy, and this is a way of bringing good information. I think that Hastings Street, by putting there, it actually gives some meaning to the first sentence. So, what I've found, going around Hastings Street, talking to different people, is that there's still silos. That our groups don't talk to each other nearly as much as they should be.
00:30:00 Lighting, you know, all of a sudden, when I talk to the Hastings Street Association, they have a plan for lighting that is spectacular, I feel, very different from big lights going down, but rather lights, the small lights on the red ground going up, so it kind of mirrors the pathway, the national park. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: You're getting off your... Councillor Wegener: Okay. I want to tell the story. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: You're closing, so you can only address the matters that have been raised by other councillors. Councillor Wegener: Okay. During COVID, whether these things work, the roundtable was amazing. That group was very good. The business roundtable during COVID, that was fantastic. The housing group did its job. It's gone now. We need to be, have that same sort of forward thinking as the housing. In my opinion, the DMP would have been better served with a work, a DMP working group,
00:31:00 looking at a lot of different groups and looking at it from a much more strategic level, shared by the councillors. Councillor Lorentson: Through the chair, all these matters have not been raised before. Right. Councillor Wegener: So, I think that there'd be a smoother transition from our thinking, through making the plans, through a strategy arising from us, plans, public consultation, to voting on it. I think there'd be a smoother transition if we had a better strategic mindset around the table. And that's what the goal of adding the Hastings Street, whether that becomes one or not, it doesn't matter. But I think it actually defines more what the first sentence is about. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. I put the amendment. Those in favour? That's Councillor Wegener and Councillor Stockwell. Those opposed? That's Wilson. Councillor Wilson. Councillor Wilkie. Councillor Phillips. Councillor Lorentson. And Councillor Finzel. Do we have another amendment?
00:32:00 Councillor Wilson. Councillor Wilson: I'd like to put the same amendment, but without the second part of it. Councillor Lorentson: I'm happy to second. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: It's coming. And just turn the final comma into a full stop and we'll be fine. And that was moved by Councillor Wilson and seconded by Councillor Lorentson. Councillor Wilson. Councillor Wilson: I don't think we need to say too much more on this one. I think we were all in consensus that we need to have a review and we want to identify the potential need for the establishment of any new groups, but we need to do that through the proper process of identifying groups and having equity around all of the different groups and discussing terms of reference before singling out any particular area. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Others wish to discuss the matter?
00:33:00 Councillor Phillips. Councillor Phillips: I'll speak really quickly in support of it and hope that it happens fairly soon, just even a workshop to start the conversation, because I agree with the fact that it's where we're all sitting and I agree with you that we have to be sitting strategically and this is a good start. So. Mayor Wilkie: I'd like to commend Councillor Wegener for bringing the amendment in the first place. It's a good idea and I look forward to discussing the need for any sort of Hastings Street wording group as well. Councillor was quite right, there was a lot happening down there. Councillor Wegener: Councillor Wegener. Yes. Councillor Wilson, thank you for this amendment. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And I support this. I think what Councillor Wegener has said is absolutely right. I think what Councillor Wegener has done, and I know he's talking to Councillor Finzel as part of the conversation leading to this amendment, is it's made us think about how do we organise ourselves to get the best information we can to make decisions. And what's been triggered rather than just an appointment of a carryover is a bit of thinking around an engagement framework.
00:34:00 And I think there have been different models over time. Before amalgamation we had the sector boards. Before we had sector boards it was actually recommended by staff to have place based boards. And I know when I first came in I did a lot of thinking about whether we'd do a similar sort of thing. And one of the key things we have to think about is what the CEO has been saying over and over. Is there a purpose for the group in the first place? And being really clear on we don't just do it just to have a group. We do it because there's a specific purpose that we need that sort of engagement. So hopefully the amendment, if agreed to, will lead to that sort of a thinking and process. Anyone else? Councillor Wilson. Councillor Lorentson: Councillor Wilson Just to support Tom, but support you with this amendment, Tom, in terms of strategic thinking.
00:35:00 Everything we do should be aligned with what's happening in the community. I think the review will allow us to work out, you know, do these groups align with current and future strategic priorities. Very important base what's happening now and with that future lens I think we need to be forward thinking. So thank you for bringing the amendment and again Hastings Street precinct group, whether it's Peregian Beach precinct, Cooroy, Kin Kin, I think you've opened a really great conversation. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor Wilson would you like to pose? Councillor Wilson: Yeah, again Councillor Wegener, thank you for bringing this forward and thanks for the discussion around the table. I think we can all go away and think about this now and really have some good ideas about new groups that we'd like to see established and really think about the groups that we're on and the influence that we're having along the way.
00:36:00 I think we can all go away and think about all those groups or the need for them in the future. Okay. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I put the amendment. That's unanimous so it becomes part of the original motion. I believe only Councillor Wilkie has talked to you. Councillor Wilson: Can I ask you a question quickly? Even though I've made comments about we need to review these groups, I do want to acknowledge that we have all these groups and I'm really pleased to be appointed to them. I've had a few changes in my sort of portfolio and also just to say thank you to the councillors for the respectful conversations we've had in recent weeks to sort of negotiate between us all of who should be in which group so that's been a really positive process. Thank you. Speaker 2: Thank you.
00:37:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'll speak, I'd just like to put on the record, it's going to be a historic moment, quick calculation, 13 years as a councillor, it'll be the first time I've been on any committee with the word works in it. Mayor Wilkie: Capital works. You'll love it. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Don't take offence engineers, I'm a planner. Councillor Lorentson: One of my favourite committees boys. Love it. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Looking forward to it. Anyone else? Councillor Wilkie, would you like to close? No thank you Mr Chair. I put the motion, those in favour? That's unanimous. Okay, we move then on to reports direct to General Committee and the first one is Bridgend Beach Active Streets Stage 1 Progress Update and Next Steps. Mayor Wilkie: Mr Chair. Yes. I need to declare a conflict of interest.
8.1 PEREGIAN BEACH ACTIVE STREET - STAGE 1 PROGRESS UPDATE AND NEXT STEPS ¶
00:38:00 In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009, I, Councillor Frank Wilkie, declare a prescribed conflict of interest for item 8.1, Bridgend Beach Active Streets Stage 1 Progress and Next Steps, which is not ordinary council business, as it proposes to bring benefit in the form of improved safety and amenity to a specific geographical area. Following public consultation, the project now also includes consideration of traffic calming in my street. I live near the project site and stand to benefit if the project proceeds and my mother, who also lives nearby, attended the public information sessions, made comment and donated above the prescribed threshold amount of $2,000 to my election campaign. As a result of my conflict of interest, I will now leave the meeting room while the matter is considered and voted on. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Can we just get started? Councillor Lorentson: Sorry. I'm just reading this for the first time. Can you just give me a couple of seconds?
00:39:00 I'm just wondering whether we should be moving a procedural motion. I just want to ask whether a material conflict of interest, why this has been raised now and not previously given the number of workshops, community pop-ups, public engagements. I think I want to move a procedural motion. To just get some more information from governance before we proceed with this. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: There's no valid procedural motion there, Councillor. Councillor Lorentson: Can I adjourn the meeting to get some more information in terms of governance? At what stage does the material conflict of interest need to be raised? And given that we've done so much workshops and community engagements and it's been declared now, is there a risk that the integrity of the process might be undermined by this late declaration?
00:40:00 Like I said, I'm just reading this for the first time and it's... Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, Councillor, you're either going to move a procedural motion or you're not? Councillor Lorentson: I am moving a procedural motion. I will be moving it. So what's the motion? Move a procedural motion to request information or advice from governance. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: That's not a procedural motion. That's too late on the table. So... Councillor Lorentson: I would like to move a procedural motion to get some more information. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: No, not a procedural motion, Councillor. So we'll move on. So, staff, if we can have you to the... Councillor Lorentson: It's through the Chair. Through the Chair. Can I please ask the CEO for some advice in terms of what process is available to me given that this is potentially a material conflict of interest and the Local Government Act actually stipulates that you have to declare it at the time that you become aware of the conflict. Living next to the street... Like I said, this has just taken me a little bit by surprise. So, advice...
00:41:00 Question to the Chair. What processes are available to me to adjourn the meeting to allow us to get some advice from governments in terms of whether we should be progressing this report at all? Speaker 2: You can take a break. Councillor Phillips: I'm also not comfortable proceeding because that's the first time I was aware of that. So I'd like some advice. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I think we could say that the procedural motion would be that the meeting be adjourned. Councillor Lorentson: That's what I actually said. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I have to wait for the motion to be moved. Councillor Lorentson: I actually... That was the first words that I used through the Chair to adjourn the meeting so that we can seek advice from governments in terms of the... ..whether the integrity of the process is going to be compromised given that this is a material conflict of interest that's been just declared for the first time. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, Councillor, a procedural motion has to be short and succinct
00:42:00 and as outlined in the Standing Orders. Councillor Phillips: I make a procedural motion to adjourn the meeting. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: You may. Do we have a seconder? Councillor Phillips: Yes. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Councillor Wilson. All those in favour? That's Councillor Wilson, Phillips, Wegener... Excuse me. Councillor Lorentson: I moved the procedural motion. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: No. No. Councillor... Councillor Phillips moved to motion. Councillor Phillips: And a second. Can you speak? I did. It's for the length. Can I explain it or...? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'll explain it. You talked about you wanting to adjourn. You didn't move the specific... A procedural motion on the Standing Orders is a set format. Very precise. You can't... Councillor Lorentson: Sorry. I sought advice from the CEO to help me with the wording. I don't understand why it's not being moved by me. I've moved a procedural motion. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor Phillips just said, I move. Councillor Lorentson: Through the CEO, can you please provide advice?
00:43:00 Thank you. Councillor Phillips: So, Councillor... Sorry, after it fell and the Chair didn't move it, I've just made it simple to adjourn the meeting. Procedural motion, because the Chair has explained that the Standing Orders have to be succinct around just simple wording. Councillor Lorentson: But I sought advice from the CEO in terms of how to move the process. That hadn't been sorted out. I would like to move the procedural motion. Thank you. Through the Chair. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, Councillor, under the Standing Orders, there's a process. Councillor Lorentson: Yes. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: The 31-1, the procedural motion that you would have need to move had these words, that the meeting stand adjourned. Councillor Phillips said that we adjourned the meeting. Councillor Lorentson: Yes. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Same thing. When a Councillor moves a motion, they have to use the specific wording. You asked... Councillor Lorentson: So, why wasn't this advice given to me when I asked through the Chair and through the
00:44:00 CEO? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I explained it. Twice, I thought. Councillor Lorentson: I asked... Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And I can't take back a motion that's been moved by another Councillor. So, the first Councillor to move a motion in the format required by the Standing Orders was Councillor Phillips. Councillor Lorentson: When I moved a procedural motion... When I moved a procedural motion and asked for advice from the CEO and the Chair in terms of wording and what process I need to put forward, no one responded. No one responded. And, Chair, you just explained to me what had to be done. I just... I'm disappointed, to say the least. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, my understanding was the CEO did explain the situation. Councillor Phillips, considering the strength of Councillor Lorentzon's views, are you happy
00:45:00 to let yours lapse? Councillor Phillips: I'm hoping for just the wording to be succinct, so then it meets the Standing Order requirements. It doesn't matter to me who moves or seconds it. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, the second, are you happy? So, Councillor Lorentzon, the wording would be that the meeting stand adjourned. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you. The question that I asked some time ago. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And do we have a seconder? Councillor Finzel: Oh, no. I just needed a question to clarify. Sure. Under the Standing Orders, I thought for it to fall, you have to ask for a show of hands of all Councillors. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Oh, you're true. Correct. Yes. Councillor Finzel: Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, is everyone else happy that we let that one fall to allow Councillor Lorentzon to move the motion? Councillor Finzel: And don't we have to be in group? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yes, we have to be in group. Does anyone? Councillor Phillips: Is everyone clear what we're down to vote for? Yes. We're letting that lapse so Councillor Lorentzon can move a simple wording with the word adjourned
00:46:00 for the Standing Order requirements. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: We can do it by show of hands. It's not a vote. Is everyone happy with it? Yes. Okay. Thank you, Councillor Finzel. Thank you. And now we're looking for a seconder. So, the mover of the meeting stand adjourned is Councillor Lorentzon. We're looking for a seconder. Councillor Finzel: Can we have a seconder? So, the word is the meeting stand adjourned. Councillor Lorentson: To adjourn the meeting. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: The meeting stand adjourned. Okay. Councillor Finzel: I'm just bringing that up. Sorry. I'm sorry. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And I'll put the motion. That's unanimous. So, the meeting's adjourned. Councillor Finzel: I just think it might be a good time to put the windows and stuff.
01:04:00 Councillor Lorentson: Okay welcome back. Councillors would someone like to move a procedural motion? I'd like to move a procedural motion that now before the meeting item 8.1 Corrigion Beach Active Street Stage 1 progress update and next steps be deferred to the ordinary meeting at 10 a.m. dated 19th of March 2026. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Do we have a seconder? I second. Seconded Councillor Wilson. I put the motion. Those in favour? That's unanimous. We move on to the review of Noosa Council meeting structure and invite Councillor Wilkie back into the meeting please.
8.2 REVIEW OF NOOSA COUNCIL MEETING STRUCTURE ¶
01:05:00 So we've just got Jonty Wolfe who is the author of the report going to do an executive summary of this matter.
01:06:00 Speaker 3: This report presents the findings of the council meeting structure review that has occurred over the past four months. The review was encouraged because the current meeting structure can place significant meeting demands on councillors and staff, provide limited time for report reading and create duplication between small and general committee meetings and it can also contribute to community uncertainty when decisions are made. The review considered four meeting structures as outlined in the report in an attempt to address ideally all these issues just listed and after the workshop it was identified that option two reducing meetings to one general meeting or committee meeting and one ordinary meeting per month has been identified to provide the best balance because it significantly reduces the number of formal meetings. I think that's the first one. So we've got to be around 50 per year to pretty much 25, 26 maybe.
01:07:00 It also eliminates overlap and duplication between the small and general committee meetings. It provides longer report reading time for councillors and the provided draft would be seven full days. And I tried to table in the report they are full days regardless whether they are weekdays or weekend days, but they are full days. They are not the day of a general release. Or the day of when the meeting occurs, they are full days between those dates. It also, I think, improves clarity for the community about when decisions are being made and it still provides a good format for robust debate and good decision making. It is therefore recommended that council A note the report, B adopt option two as detailed in the report as the new report. Council meeting structure with implementation to commence 1 July 26, C appoint all councillors as committee members and appoint the deputy mayor as the chair of the general committee meeting from 1 July 26, and D approve the council meeting schedule for July to December 26 as provided in attachment one to this report.
01:08:00 Mayor Wilkie: Question. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor O'Hee. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you for the report and the work that's gone into this, you won't see. I note in the recommendation that this new meeting structure is to take place from 1 July 2026, and unless I missed it in the report, could you explain the reasons why for the selection of that date for the commencement of that new structure? Speaker 3: It was considered to provide appropriate time for us to, in the background, to amend quite a few documents, the governing documents that govern the meeting. There's obviously public participation. There's obviously public participation. There's the standing orders.
01:09:00 And I think the change should also be communicated appropriately to the community. That would require also some time. Any change to the standing orders, for example, would then also, because it's obviously council adopted procedure or document, it will obviously, you know, it will provide opportunity for further review. There would be a council workshop and then it needs to be adopted. So there's quite a few items that are required to be actioned and done prior to the implementation. Mayor Wilkie: And what's the... What are the implications for the resolved system? I'm not a specialist in the... Is there scheduling and programming that has to be taken? Speaker 3: So look, there is quite a few things to be organised and I think with, in collaboration with Vicky and Cathy, obviously, we have discussed timeframes and what... Because there is quite a few things that need to be organised in the background. It was considered an appropriate timeframe without knowing all the technicalities that are required because I don't work that intensely with... In detail with resolve.
01:10:00 Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Any other questions? Councillor Lomson. Councillor Lorentson: The report highlights improved reading time as a benefit of option two. Yeah. Should the motion also amend the standing orders to require the minimum seven hours of the seven day agenda release period? At the moment, I think it says reasonable time. Should we, in alignment with the report in front of us, look at amending our standing orders just to ensure that that time, the seven days, is actually guaranteed for councillors and the public? Speaker 3: Yeah. I don't think that is necessary considering that this report provides a draft schedule for 2026 and it is defined as necessary. It defines the agenda release dates as well, and the meeting dates, and that would be, if adopted, this schedule would be adopted as well, and it clearly defines seven days reading time between a general release and the meeting, so that's already covered through
01:11:00 that. Councillor Lorentson: Okay. So your answer is no. That's correct. Okay. Speaker 2: Thank you. Through this... Can I add to that as well? So in the option, it says seven days before, and that's the intention, and that's the reason why we need to go back and do the standing orders to make sure that that's reflected in the standing orders so we can... And that's for us to then agree the standing orders, and we know that when we changed some of the things in the standing orders a year ago, it took quite a bit of debate to get things through. So that's why we're looking to have enough time to be able to do that, and that's why July 1 was the date that we put forward to do some of those things, because we know that there is quite a bit of work that has to happen, but in terms of the seven days, it's already in the option, and that would be then reflected into the process and the ongoing process in standing orders. Councillor Wilson: Question, clarification, please. So councillors will get seven days reading time, and that's also...
01:12:00 Those reports will be available to the public at the same time? That will continue? Speaker 2: That's the thing. If we... That's the rules and regulations we run with the state government, is that when the report goes to you, it has to go to the... There's a final report, and that's an important point. As the final report goes to the councillors, it needs to go to the public at the same time, so they would have seven days as well. Councillor Wilson: I'd like to try an amendment, please. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Certainly. Councillor Finzel: We have an amendment, please. Oh, good. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Oh, yeah, well... Councillor Finzel: Sorry. Speaker 4: Okay, move. Councillor Finzel: I've got a second. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay, so it's moved, Councillor Finzel. Seconded, Councillor Phillips. You might not be able to move from your amendment. Councillor Finzel: Oh, yeah. Can I withdraw it? Do you? Councillor Wegener: Yeah, I'll move it. Councillor Finzel: I'll second. Okay. Okay, and... Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Because the council pulled me up just before. Councillor Finzel: Oh, sorry. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Is everyone in agreement to Councillor Finzel withdrawing her moving of the motions?
01:13:00 Yes. Sure. Yes. Show of hands. Very good. And Councillor Wegener, you've indicated... I'm excited. Councillor Wilson: I need to move things up. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor Wegener, you would like to move the motion? Yes. Councillor Phillips is seconding. Councillor Wegener, you have the floor. Councillor Wegener: Oh, we've gone round and round on this. I don't think I need to say anything. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay. Councillor Wilson, would you like to move an amendment? Yes, please. Councillor Finzel: Do you remember what column... There's one or two? Councillor Wilson: The first part, please, about the timing. One second. Okay.
01:14:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, the wording in D there should, rather than having those red lines, shouldn't it just say May 2026? Councillor Wilson: No, because it's not in the attached record currently. Ah, okay. I did think about that. Speaker 2: That's what I agreed to do from July 1st. Councillor Wilson: I'm going to read a second. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Seconded by Councillor Phillips. Councillor Wilson, you have the floor. Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: Councillor Phillips seconded by a original motion. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Oh, yes, you can't do that, Councillor. Councillor Phillips: That's right, I was just going to say. No, you can't do it. You can't. Oh, I can't. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yes, you can. Yes, I can. I'm happy. There. Councillor Finzel, come on. Councillor Finzel seconded. Councillor Wilson: Thank you, Mr Chair. Thank you. I just want to test this motion. We've been talking about potential change for a long time now. I think I've been requesting it for a year already,
01:15:00 and I wasn't happy with approving the current timetable for the year 2026 to just keep rolling on as we have been. At the time, I questioned, well, at the time, I was told that even if we approve a calendar for the rest of the year, we can change it at any time, and we weren't given an indication of how long that needed to be. I can see that it's completely impossible for April, because people are already working to existing deadlines, but I don't believe that's as much of an issue for May. Basically, we're pretty much in agreement that the current structure isn't working. Therefore, I don't want to continue doing it for another three months if there's an opportunity to change soon. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else wish to talk to the amendment? Councilor Wilkie. Mayor Wilkie: Look, I, there were, there was some discussion at the workshops about the reason why July 1st was chosen as the date.
01:16:00 There was a lot of back of house rearranging that has to be done to make sure that we can bed down this new meeting structure very smoothly. I understand reprogramming of the results, So it is a big change to the way the council has done it. It's not just since 2014 that this meeting structure has been in place. It goes back about at least another 30 years. I remember being a journalist reporting on Noosa Council back in 1996-97 and they had the committee general and the ordinary then if I remember correctly. It has served us well to date. The only shortcoming of the current structure in my view, if I heard the councillors correct, is the short lead time to the general committee meeting with reports going direct to the general.
01:17:00 So I'm in support of the change but I'm also in support of and respect the staff advice that they need the time to July 1st to get the bed in the changes. So that they can be done correctly and with as few glitches as possible. Councillor Lorentson: Can I ask a question through the Chair to the CEO? In terms of resourcing, what Mayor Wilkie just said, is the date 1st of July, was that because of resourcing implications? Speaker 2: That was one of the considerations, absolutely. Absolutely. We have people on leave over this next couple of months as well so trying to match all of that up, that's not the absolute but it's certainly a consideration that we needed to put into this.
01:18:00 Also, I think just with the standing orders, there are changes that need to be made. If we went with May 1, I couldn't guarantee that we have agreed standing orders. We can certainly make the changes but you need to go through a process to get them agreed at a meeting as well. So all of those things I haven't really considered, to be honest, Councillor, in terms of stepping it through in a timeline because I just assumed that July 1 was the correct time to give everybody a time to do it properly and get it up and running. But also, I certainly understand the frustration in wanting to flip the switch as quickly as we possibly can. So it's amazing how quickly the months roll around. May is, you know, in terms of meeting, you know, we're in the March one now. The April meetings are already planned. Reports are being written. So it just, you know, we're on this rolling schedule that makes it difficult for us and that's one of the reasons why we wanted to change the structure, to be honest.
01:19:00 But I worry, the first of May is a very tight timeline for us. We may miss something, we may not have the proper procedures in place. We also have, you know, we have other considerations as well with the new bill coming through and what that means in terms of our standing orders with conflicts of interest and particularly conflicts of interest that needs to be fit into the standing orders as well. So, again, that July period just gave us that time to work that through. Councillor Wilson: Can I ask a question, please? Which, how will this change? How will this change? Change the standing orders, like which parts need to be addressed? Speaker 2: Yeah, I was just looking through it then. There's not a huge amount, but it still requires us to, if we want to make, this is a good time to actually look at the standing orders and change if we wanted to do anything different outside of that as well.
01:20:00 While we're reflecting on the standing orders, are there other things that we've, that we'd like to change now going forward? I know we've still had the debate about the timing of questions and deputations and things like that, so whether we want to look at those things or not, but that was going to give us, that was my thinking as well, gives us a chance to really review the standing orders in more detail, but most of it is about the timing of the meetings, when we'd like to have them, that all needs to then come to a council meeting, so that would need to come to April before we could, you know, come to a council meeting and sort of, well, everything comes forward, that's an extra step. Mayor Wilkie: Mr Chair? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah, sorry, I'm just looking at the certificate thing. Do we have, I was just trying to work it out myself.
01:21:00 Councillor Finzel? Councillor Finzel: Oh, just a question. You mentioned this bill to the Chair and Mr CEO. Can you just clarify when we expect that, and is that about governance looking through that? To have time to, I don't know, absorb that and then apply that, or give advice as to how we make adjustments? Speaker 2: Yeah, there's, in terms of the bill, the empowering council bill, it's been ratified by the State Government, but there are some things that are now immediate, but then there's the conflict of interest, we're going back to a different process with conflict of interest. That is, from their perspective, not being rolled out or not being implemented until July 1. There's a number of education processes that are coming to talk to us about what it means. So they're not, that's not, the expectation is that we don't actually utilise that new process until July 1. So there's a few things in there that we just will then have to be fed back into the terms of reference. So again, just in our thinking, this is the process we thought it all sort of matches up
01:22:00 in terms of timing for July 1, but I also understand that the frustration or the desire to mostly make the decision to actually implement this as quickly as possible. Councillor Phillips: Can I just speak to it, please, with consideration to the conversation around the table. I think for me, I see them separate, even though they feed into our reports and our meetings. To me, it's like what we're adopting now is, I don't know, I don't know, I don't know, I But regardless of if it never changed, we'd still hold out general and ordinary with the standing orders anyway till they change. Like, I don't know if I'm explaining it properly. I don't... Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Can I answer your question? Because that's what I was just looking for. The standing orders only require the dates to be published and for enough time for councils, as much time as is practical.
01:23:00 So, on the standing order issue, while, you know, we've mentioned the potential desirability to have seven days' notice, et cetera, there would be no, just my quick review, there'd be no specific requirement to amend them before it started. Speaker 2: Yeah. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: In terms of a meeting, be able to, because all it says is you have to set the dates. Councillor Phillips: So, that's why I'm supporting this, because if that will come regardless of whether this would happen. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, can I ask the move of something? Sure. May is tight and if we have staff away, is there any, any, if we move to middle ground of June, start moving one month, you're moving one month.
01:24:00 Is that likely to be all? Councillor Finzel: It was a bit better than May, I'm thinking. Speaker 2: So, May, June is better than May. I thought it was then. Councillor Wilson: Yeah. Yeah, at home. Yeah, well said. Councillor Lorentson: So, question to the CEO. Yeah. Will that give staff enough time? Speaker 2: Well, that's the, it's still going to put everybody under pressure. There's no question about that, but we operate under pressure on, on a daily basis. So, if that's the request of the Council to do that, then we'll make every effort to, to meet the June deadline. Mayor Wilkie: Question, if there's new conflict of interest rules that need to be recognised in the standing orders by July 1. Yeah. Will we need to amend the standing orders to accommodate them if we go with an earlier
01:25:00 date? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: No. Okay. Yeah. So, I think they can be dealt separately. There may be some benefits of amending standing orders, but there's no requirement of amending standing orders. Yeah. Mayor Wilkie: So, was it a matter of alignment that conflict of interest standing orders changes to accommodate, the standing orders to be done by July 1? Yeah. As per the, when the laws become enacted, and you wanted to align that with any changes that come with that? Speaker 2: It was really just an opportunity to do it all in one, all in one go. Yeah. That's right. So, that was all our thinking is, is in how we do it, based on, on resourcing as well in time and everything else that we've got going on. Mayor Wilkie: Yeah. So, it's not just standing orders, it's resourcing and restructuring of the resolved system. Yes. That you want the time for. Speaker 2: Yeah. Okay. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, does anyone else wish to talk to this amendment?
01:26:00 Councillor Lorentson: I'll talk to the amendment. I'm hoping Council Wilson will change the date to June, and I think that's a really good middle ground and respects the resourcing implications. But I totally support the intent and the amendment in front of us. Speaker 2: Anyone else? Can we travel to June? It's the 30th of June, so it seems. Councillor Wilson: Can I talk to it before making my mind up? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah. So, I accept the staff advice that May's probably pushing too hard, and, and, and, and, for the benefit of one, one or two months, I don't think I could support this. I do, probably could support the middle ground of June, and then just treat the standing orders, amendments as a separate process.
01:27:00 Councillor Wilson: So, you've got May? Councillor Phillips: Is that May? That's good. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Speaker 2: Thank you. Councillor Finzel: Yeah, look, I think in terms of the CEO's response to questions around the table, you know, I do have concerns around, we always talk about, you know, productivity, we talk about, you know, psychosocial hazards in the workplace, you know, we want to protect a workforce that, you know, is already, we're extended. You know, we've got new things that have come up, even this week, around, you know, extra training, around different things that's been mandatory for councillors as well. I'm just very mindful to make sure that we're not putting extra pressure on staff. And given, you know, I think it's really important that we get these meetings right.
01:28:00 Yeah, so perhaps maybe I could support a middle ground, but I think... Taking it to May and putting it, you know, I don't know, I don't deal with the staff, but given the response from the CEO, you know, I think it's worth consideration to make sure that if there's, you know, pressures on the workforce, that this is a very, should be prioritised. So I can't support this in full for May. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Hey, anyone else wish to talk? You wish to close, councillors? Councillor Wilson: Yes. I'm going to continue to talk about May, but we'll still consider. There's no need to change standing orders for this to be implemented. We already have a schedule made up for July to December that can be replicated for May and June. I don't believe that to be a significant workload. We haven't been given really a clear view on result, but I can't see that a system might resolve.
01:29:00 It's a period of six weeks, and we could certainly get assistance from them to do that. Councils are put under time pressure all the time with reports coming two days before a meeting, and that's what I'm actually trying to address here, is that we stop that, that we stop having things skip the S&O and the P&E, and we do what we've agreed to do and have everything come with a week's notice to the general committee meetings. So just taking a couple of... Meetings out of a schedule, moving the general that's already there, I really don't see why it's that big in any cost, when we're already planning ahead to do it for July anyway. I just don't see this as something that's such a huge, pretty much too big a task. I've been working in corporate environments all my life, but these things happen, I guess. Councillor Lorentson: A question through the chair, if I can.
01:30:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: We can't have questions between the close and the vote. Councillor Lorentson: Oh, excuse me, sorry. Councillor Wilson: So, I don't want the current situation to keep continuing, and just pushing things forward all the time. We agree things need to change, and I think we need to get on with it as soon as possible, and not have this whole process in things coming two days' notice. But there's absolutely no reason standing orders to change. I would like to review some things in the standing orders, such as special meetings, because that doesn't help with not having special meetings for two days' notice. I'd like to look at some other things, but that can be done later, and if we have to adopt more changes because of the bill that's coming, we would do it, but we have to anyway. But this doesn't actually trigger any changes to standing orders. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay, I'll put the motion. Sorry, through the chair. It's an amendment. No, I can't take it until the amendment's been voted on. So, I put the amendment.
01:31:00 Those in favour? That's Councillor Wilson, Phillips, Wegener, and Lorentson. The amendment is carried. It becomes part of the motion. Against? And against? Oh, yes, that's important to ask for that. Councillor Wilkie, Finzel, and Stockwell. Okay. Thank you. Okay. So, we only have had Councillor Wigners speak to his motion, which has now been amended. Does anyone else wish to speak to the motion? Councillor Lorentson: I have a question through the chair. Sure, yes. Thanks. My question, in terms of a general meeting, the agenda's going to become significantly larger. So, my question is, how are we going to ensure that the complex planning or environmental
01:32:00 matters, that we actually deal with that properly? Is there a view to streamline or make the agendas more efficient in terms of noting reports, strategic, complex matters, et cetera? Because I think long days may compromise, but we need to be all over the reports that come to us. Speaker 2: Sure. Certainly, sorry, through the chair, that's certainly the intention, is to streamline and get the reports so that there's reports that we know will require discussion or debate further, as opposed to those that were earlier for, as a status update report, for noting. We need to more... We need to... It's just need to be more disciplined. Correct. Almost. In terms of our reporting, in terms of what they are requesting. Okay.
01:33:00 Councillor Finzel? Councillor Finzel: Can I test a change to item C? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: You can move to amendment. Yeah. Councillor Finzel: Thank you, Mr Chair. Sorry, I think I've had this sorted now. So, basically... Should we move to amendment? I just want to... Speaker 2: So, Councillor... Councillor Finzel: Here we are. Yeah. I'd like to test some different wording for item C. Okay. Give me a moment. Okay. All right. So, that... Councillor Finzel: Okay. So, are you ready? I am. So, ready? Ready. One minute. Two. Three. Yes.
01:34:00 Councillor Finzel: Today, after this... Deputy Mayor Stockwell: We'll take it for a while to come up. Okay. Speaker 2: Yeah. Okay. Yeah. Councillor Finzel: Well, can you just happen to pass item C and I'll edit the changes, because there's only a few changes. A couple of words. Okay. Just while we're waiting. One of the reasons I'd like to test this around debate is I saw real value in the committee meetings, and the value that I saw in that was in the role of chair, because it provides us lots more opportunities as councillors to be a chair. I think... Thank you. Thank you. The gap in the current meeting process was the fact that... And I've raised it. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, councillor, you can't really do your debate until... Councillor Finzel: Oh, yes, I can't do the debate. Right. Okay. All right. Sorry.
01:35:00 Councillor Phillips: We're just going to get the chairs. The chairs come in. Speaker 3: Okay. So, I'm just checking... Councillor Phillips: Thank you. Councillor Finzel: Okay. Okay, appoint all councillors as committee members and appoint the Deputy Chair, oh no, and appoint councillors via a schedule. No, no. It's regarding the Chair. Yeah, what I'm trying to achieve is I would like to debate that we provide opportunity for all councillors via a schedule that has equity and fairness to allow a rotation of the Chair.
01:36:00 So appoint the Chair on a process out here, appoint the Deputy Mayor. So after appoint councillors and appoint councillors, no, sorry, after appoint, yeah, that's right, we can work out a word because I'm just trying to get, Deputy Mayor Stockwell: on a rotation, on a rotating schedule, on a rotating schedule to be Chair of. Councillor Lorentson: Yes, thank you, to the, sorry, yes, to Chair, yeah, to Chair, to Chair, the General Committee from 1st of May, 2026.
01:37:00 Councillor Finzel: Yeah, thank you, thank you, second one, second one. Well, it could even be faces, rotating faces. No, I don't have a schedule. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: You don't have to be a schedule. Councillor Finzel: Schedule. Yeah. Mayor Wilkie: I'll second it for the purpose of debate. Councillor Finzel: Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah, we don't know why you're doing this because you haven't talked to the motion yet. Councillor Finzel: The reason why I would really like to bring this to debate, and hopefully we get some robust debate around the table, is I see the value in opportunity to chair meetings at all levels, like in the chamber and in the community.
01:38:00 I think it provides also diversity and develops skills and education for councillors. The reason I personally think that we've had challenges around the committee meeting, and deferring, is because the gap, in my opinion, existed, because it wasn't mandatory for all councillors to be at both the committee meetings, B and E, S and O. I, I'm trying to address that, that gap of opportunities also for chair through this amendment. So, I'm putting it to the table to see what people think, and I'm going to put it to the table to see what people think about it. I think that it's a great opportunity and shared opportunity to chair the meetings, aside from just the deputy mayor. Via a rotating schedule.
01:39:00 Councillor Wegener: Yeah, I'll speak to it. Is that okay? Yeah. Oh, sorry, I'm off the channel. I think it's a good idea. Like, being the chair of the meetings absolutely puts an extra responsibility on the person that takes the chair. And you've got to read the notes, you've got to be so much more astute as a chair. It kind of brings an extra level of engagement as the chair in appreciating. Speaker 4: So, I think this is a great idea. Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: I would like to put a different perspective. I applaud the principle behind this, Councillor Finzel. I would recommend that we, at least, see how the all-day new general committee meetings flow and go for a period of time before we move to a rotating schedule.
01:40:00 Because, one, that general committee meeting will be all items coming with the capacity to make decisions on all those items in that forum. It's an extra workload on all councils. It will involve more reading for all councillors as a start and more preparation for all councillors. And more pressure on all councillors as a starting point. My feeling is, as you've probably seen over the last two years, the chair of the general or the ordinary, wherever any robust debate takes place, you need experienced councillor a lot. And you really need to be across the standing orders and have had experience in managing robust debate. There is an opportunity for councillors, while we bed down this general committee, to get experience as chairs of the external and internal working groups.
01:41:00 Part of the changes we can make there is councillors to chair them more frequently, rather than being committee members. I applaud the idea. The principle behind it. But there is a big, as you've probably noticed, there's a big difference between the informality of a portfolio committee meeting, where only half the councillors sit, and also the general committee, like today. And also the formality of the ordinary meeting. So I'd recommend we hold off. My suggestion, and I'm happy to be guided by the group, would be to hold off, see how we all go when we move to an all-day general committee meeting with all councillors having to be prepared and make almost final decisions on every item
01:42:00 that comes across their desk at the general committee meeting, which is likely to run, if not half the day, possibly full days. I'll speak to it. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And to Bill? Councillor Phillips: To support the amendment. Okay. I think that opportunity to learn comes through doing, not necessarily through watching for some. I actually didn't really mind whether or not I do or don't chair general meetings, so this isn't about me. It's about giving opportunity to those that would want to sit and learn the skills, I think another way to make sure that we are across standing orders, is to put us in a position where we have to step up and lead. And some may or may not want to do that again, but it certainly gives the opportunity for those that want to a great place.
01:43:00 And I think it also encourages respectful conversation and debate at this very table when there is someone that is in the chair. If they haven't got any experience, then I would hope that we can all assist in developing those skills for their hand up to it. Or through a rotating schedule. Whichever way. I think they're done. It's great. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor Wilson. Thank you. Councillor Wilson: I'm a bit in two minds on this one, so I'll listen to the rest of the debate. But I have enjoyed having the odd experience to chair the S&O meeting. And I think it's great. And I agree that we need experienced people in these roles, but you don't gain experience without having to go. At the same time, I think continuity is important.
01:44:00 Knowing who the chair is and all the different things that have to be resolved, potentially with the chair before the meeting, that's going to get quite confusing if it changes everyone potentially. And I also learned a lot from Brian, sorry, Councillor Stockwell, as the chair. So yeah, I'm still not quite sure. I can see the reason for doing it. And in fact, I considered putting this amendment forward myself. But then when I really thought about it, I think I was keener on having continuity, everyone knowing who the chair is. So I'm still not quite decided, but that's where I'm at at the moment. Councillor Lorentson: Can I ask a question to the chair, to Councillor Finzel. So the wording, as it's stated, implies mandatory, that we're all on a rotating schedule. Would you consider maybe optional, allow councillors to, what's the intent behind your wording? Is it to mandate that we all chair,
01:45:00 or does it give us opportunity to say yes or no? Councillor Finzel: Well, I've only thought about it, at this meeting. So I take your point. Yeah, I see where you're heading. So that people could choose to opt on or off if they don't want to chair. Perhaps we could appoint the councillors with an opportunity to opt off. Councillor Lorentson: So, all councillors as committee members. Good work. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So can I, I'll, I'll speak to it, because I was going to wait for everyone. Councillor Lorentson: I haven't spoken yet. Yeah, Deputy Mayor Stockwell: the, it's going to be difficult, it was 3-3, and then I'll be mating on myself. I'll start with, by saying that when, my key thing I want out of this particular item,
01:46:00 is for council, and councillors, to be far more efficient and effective, and to stop what has been, a significant loss of productivity in this organisation. So then looking at the amendment, I actually went to the, the Mayor and said, I think you should, could do both. I, that's an alternative, is that, we're having two meetings, is it really appropriate for the Mayor? I accept the, the notion that, yeah, learning how to chair the meeting is important, and to, because it is silent on the terms of the schedule, I would, when I saw this, saw this, I would think that, you know, that we, the, the schedule wasn't every, rotating every month, it might be a six monthly, so, in this term, there might only be, three more, four more people to do it. And I also, agree, that, when you do get with controversial matters,
01:47:00 can be a, an interesting task, but I'm, yeah, personally, I'm not going to say, I should be the Chair, because I think I can see the arguments around the table. Councillor Lorentson. Councillor Lorentson: I'll, I'll speak to it. I'm, I like the, idea of it, and, I like the idea, you know, gosh, use these phrases quite a lot, that, leaders should allow others to lead. So, I'm, I love the idea of allowing, councillors, on a rotating schedule, to chair, the, general meeting, and I think that, you know, if, if we wait till we're ready, and again, I think I spoke to Councillor Tom Wegener, I spoke to a school just recently about this, if we wait, till we're ready, we never, we miss opportunities. So, the best way for us to learn,
01:48:00 is, maybe get thrown in at the deep end. And I think also, never underestimate, one, two, three, four women around a table, and, and Tom, the councillors, because we actually thrive under pressure. And, it allows us to hone our skills. It allows us to, really get all over the standing orders, rather than being, you know, quiet participants. So, I am going to support this. I would like, if we all agree to, maybe, considering the wording, just those councillors who, agree to be on the rotating schedule. Some councillors may not. I don't know how we're going to do that. But I am totally, totally supportive. I, I just think, on a personal level, I, I would love the opportunity. That's, this is how I best learn. Councillor Wilson: If this was to,
01:49:00 um, be carried, um, would we be able to have, some training for councillors? Speaker 2: Well, I think if, if, if that's required, if that's something that the councillors, request, then absolutely. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor Phillips? Councillor Phillips: That's right. I was just going to say, is there, possible to make one wording change? On an opt-in, rotating schedule? Yes. If it's up to the, council, themselves. Um, Councillor Finzel: yeah, I'm happy to consider it. I, from where I've worked before, it's the opt-off, works better. Oh. In terms of administration. Okay. Because, it's just the process moves forward. And then you can just send an email and say, I opt-off that. Okay. I'm open to, to what we think. Also, a question, um, through the chair to the CEO. Yes. Um, you know, we talk about not being too prescriptive in these amendments.
01:50:00 Do you think that's sufficient for us to, with the intent to proceed forward? It's not. We need more detail. Oh, Speaker 2: I think the, the, the point that the chair made, is, is this six monthly? Is it monthly? Okay. Is it three monthly? That debate, and that will come into the standing orders as well, um, is, you know, whether, whether, I think that needs to be discussed or, or agreed now. Otherwise, we'll get to a point of, of, Councillor Wilson: further, further debate, and, Pardon? Because it would be effective from May. Yes. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yes. And we'd have to have a schedule coming to April. So, you might want to think that Council Stockwell stays until the schedule has been adopted, might be a good addition to this. Mayor Wilkie: Or even the first few months. Councillor Phillips: So, Deputy Mayor Stockwell: it is 2.20, so we're, we're nearly at the two hour mark,
01:51:00 when we normally have a break. I will, ah, adjourn the meeting, ah, for all the things we normally adjourn for, and we can have private conversations during that break. We'll make it a 15 minute adjournment. Councillor Lorentson: Good idea. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Um, which is 2.36. Councillor Finzel: Okay. Thank you, Mr Chair. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you. Thank you. I'd like opt in, opt out. And appoint councillors on a...
02:06:00 Councillor Finzel: Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Welcome back, Councillor Finzel. You have the floor. Councillor Finzel: Yes, thank you, Mr Chair. I'm prepared to let this drop if there's a blame around the table for the standing orders and then I've got some wording prepared to bring another version to the table for debate.
02:07:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Is everyone happy for this one to be withdrawn? Yes. Okay, so the amendment was withdrawn, if you can just note that, with the agreement of councillors. Yes. And then... Mayor Wilkie: I'll second this one. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, it might be because it's new, Councillor Finzel, would you like to read it out? Councillor Finzel: Certainly. Thank you, Mr Chair. Item C, amended to read, appoint all councillors as committee members and appoint councillors on a four-monthly rotating schedule on agreement with Councillor Stockwell retaining the chair for the first period on the schedule. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And seconded by Councillor Wilkie. Councillor Lorentson: Would you like to talk further? Sorry. Just through the chair, does that make sense? On agreement with Councillor Stockwell? Are we missing a couple of commas? No, that's right. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: It should be a comma or a colon, yeah. Councillor Wilson: Yeah. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: After agreement?
02:08:00 Councillor Wilson: Oh, yeah. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah. I'm just thinking... Thank you for that. On agreement with me. Everything should be. Councillor Finzel: Good pick up. Good pick up. Councillor Lorentson: Yeah. Councillor Finzel: Picked it up straight away. Councillor Lorentson: That's right. Councillor Finzel: I think the retaining of Councillor Stockwell, it comes back to the Mayor's comment that we are, you know, changing. So, I think, you know, to be prudent and give us that opportunity to test out the new meeting schedules, what's that going to look like. I think that gives us the confidence with an experienced chairperson there as we make that transition. The four-monthly rotating schedule is in response to the CEO's request for further detailed information as opposed to as it's set, so hopefully that meets that requirement and I think for equity around the table, we counted out the number of months until the next election
02:09:00 and four months gives that equity around the table, but also the assurance to other councillors that if they don't wish to do that, they can do it. If they don't wish to participate in that role, that then they can opt off. So, I think the new wording meets all the concerns that were raised at the table. Councillor Wilson: Thank you, Mr Chair. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Councillor Wilson: Can I have a question please, Chair? I'm just wondering if our standing orders actually allow for this to happen. So, 36.1, council will choose the chairperson for a standing committee meeting. This chairperson will preside over meetings of the standing committee. So, that suggests one person presides over all meetings. Would we have to keep having a new motion every four months to change the chairperson? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: My view was that if you adopted a schedule that would meet that requirement.
02:10:00 Speaker 2: That was my take on it as well. I'm reading it at the same time. The more I read it, the more it says, council will choose, and that's my take on it as well. So, that would be the, if you adopt the schedule, then council would be choosing. So, and that person would then preside over meetings of the standing committee. That's sort of just a standard statement. Thank you. Councillor Finzel: Can I just get a clarification which number that was on the standing orders? Speaker 2: 36.1. Thank you. Or 36 presiding officer for standing committee. Councillor Finzel: Yep. Speaker 2: Not for ordinary committee. So, 36.1 and 36.2. Councillor Finzel: Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Does anyone else wish to talk to the amendment? Excuse me, Chair. Councillor Finzel: Just as per Councillor Wilson's original amendment, which we're changing it to, do you want the 1st of May to be put in count? As of the 1st of May? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yes. So, that... Councillor Finzel: At the end?
02:11:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yes. Yes. So, that sounds... So, that's just to align it. That's what was there before? Councillor Finzel: Oh. As of or as? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Commencing. Councillor Finzel: Commencing? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah. What's wrong? Yeah. So, that's just... Councillor Finzel: Oh, I don't know if we should put a date in, because we debated that. Yeah. Yeah. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, that's now part of the motion. Oh, right. Okay. Yep. Councillor Finzel: Sorry. I lost track of that. Okay. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Thank you for bringing that up. Anyone else wish to... Councillor Lorentson? Councillor Lorentson: Can I please seek clarity? Section 36.1. My understanding, as I read it, is that there's one chair and it doesn't mention anything about taking turns or rotation. I would like clarity before we resolve this. My gut, and I have a legal background, is that it's maybe a breach of standing orders.
02:12:00 So, can we seek clarity? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Is there something we can clarify by the ordinary meeting? Councillor Lorentson: Yes. Can we just move a procedural motion just to get some governance or legal advice with our in-house lawyers in terms of whether we're breaching Section 36.1 by introducing rotating councillors? As it reads, it's one. One chair per committee. One chair per general meeting. Speaker 2: Can I also say that as part of our other discussions, because we're looking to start this on May 1, we need to actually review the standing orders prior to May 1. So, this could be incorporated into the new standing orders prior to our starting anyway. Councillor Lorentson: But... So, we shouldn't be ratifying something until that process is done. Okay. Thank you. Can we just seek advice before the ordinary meeting, please?
02:13:00 Question. Councillor Phillips: In the interim, would it just be a motion to put the chair in until the standing orders? Is that how that would work? Councillor Lorentson: Yeah. Yeah. Councillor Phillips: So, we just have to... Councillor Lorentson: Change the wording. Councillor Phillips: Change the wording. Yeah. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: You could add to this one, and their standing orders being amended accordingly, but... Councillor Lorentson: I just think, can we seek advice and then play with the wording at the ordinary meeting? Councillor Wegener: Sure. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, there's no impediment for adopting it as yet, but if it's something we need to change, that can occur at the ordinary meeting. Mayor Wilkie: Yeah. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Sure. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you. I wouldn't be... I wouldn't feel comfortable on voting on something without the information that I need to make an informed decision. So, I'll wait and see. I would like to move a procedural motion that we just seek some advice and move this to the ordinary meeting for a decision. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay. So, the... Okay.
02:14:00 Speaker 2: That... Can I suggest you could let this fall and bring it back to the table at the ordinary meeting? That's a great idea. Because it doesn't have to be going now. Councillor Lorentson: Would you be happy with that, Councillor Finzel? Councillor Finzel: I'm happy with that. Given good governance, I personally was satisfied with the CEO's response, but if we wish to allay fears around the table to make sure that we're fully aligned, I'm happy to do that. We can bring it back to the table after we've sought further advice. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, that would be a... No. So, the... Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Thank you. Are you in agreement with the whole council or is it a deferral motion? Councillor Finzel: No, I think it would have to be by agreement, wouldn't it? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Can we vote on the original motion? No, we can't. You can vote on the original motion if this one lapses, if this one's withdrawn.
02:15:00 Councillor Finzel: Well, I might move another motion. Speaker 2: Yeah, you can. You can on Thursday. Mayor Wilkie: You can move another amendment today. Councillor Finzel: I'm not giving up on the chair one. Mayor Wilkie: Just a bit of clarification, clarifying question. There is no impediment to us ratifying this motion, this amendment today, seeking further information before Thursday and making changes if we need to. Councillor Finzel: Oh, can we add that? No. Speaker 2: So what Councillor Lorentson is requesting is that we don't ratify this today because we still need to seek legal advice. So what I'm suggesting is we could let this fall, seek legal advice, and then if you want to, move it on Thursday. Mayor Wilkie: That wasn't my question. Sorry. There was no impediment, legal impediment, to us approving this amendment and approving this motion today and seeking legal advice by Thursday and making any changes that need
02:16:00 to be by Thursday as well. Speaker 2: You can, but you want to make, I think you just need to make sure that it's documented that we are seeking legal advice, otherwise we're potentially doing ourselves, if that's the case. If you know what I mean. We're actually doing our job. We're adopting it, but then seeking legal advice. If the legal advice comes in as negative, then we put ourselves in a position. That's the only way I'll ask it. Councillor Finzel: There's a question through the Chair. Just to clarify the point Councillor Frank was saying, can we additionally add the wording, we will be seeking pending legal advice, just to add that onto there, and then we can pull it out at the ordinary? Speaker 2: We can do that as well. Councillor Finzel: Well, I'm happy to do that. Speaker 2: I don't see the reason. My advice would be to take it out and put it back in on Thursday if that's what you want to do. Councillor Wilson: Do you mean take the whole thing out or still vote on the substantive motion?
02:17:00 Speaker 2: Vote on the substantive motion because you can always remember at the ordinary meeting, this is not ratified until the ordinary meeting, so you're entitled to bring this whole motion back out and get the second amendment on Thursday if you want to. It's up to them. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Well, it's up to all of us. If one person wants to continue, then we continue. Councillor Finzel: So you're asking me then to wait on the table with a show of hands with agreement? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: It's up to you. Councillor Finzel: And what's the alternative to that? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Either a deferral motion or we vote on the amendment as put. Councillor Finzel: And you can still bring it to the meeting at the ordinary? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yep. Yes. Councillor Finzel: Yep. Okay. So we could potentially take it to the vote now, we get support around the table, we're enforced. Also, we could then pull it out at the ordinary and put this back on for debate, and by then we have clarity. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: That's the option. Yes. Councillor Phillips: I thought there was issues at some point, just re-tracking my memory, that you couldn't
02:18:00 put another amendment if it fell today that was similar wording on Thursday. Mayor Wilkie: Yeah. That's true. Councillor Phillips: Yeah, we can change the word. No, but if it's got the same meaning, they can't, because we've tried that before. The same meeting is certainly an issue. Speaker 2: Yeah. I was thinking we could still... Councillor Lorentson: It would be better to pull it out. Councillor Wilson: We weren't allowed to re-prosecute anything on the planning scheme amendments when it moved. Yeah. Mayor Wilkie: The same amendments can't be moved. If an amendment has been lost, it can't be moved again. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah, in the same meeting. The difference between now and... Councillor Phillips: There wasn't... Mayor Wilkie: Well, with the planning scheme, it wasn't adjourned at the same meeting. Yes, that's right. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah. It's only at the same meeting. Yeah. Certainly things can change. There's nothing... You can find something in the standing orders to that effect, but... And I know it's a general principle that...
02:19:00 Speaker 4: Okay. Yeah. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: It's only a recommendation, basically. So it's... Because the motions today become a recommendation to ordinary people. Mayor Wilkie: So the CEO is suggesting it's cleaner if we let that just... If that's withdrawn and we approve the substantive motion and then revisit it on Thursday. Yeah. That's right. That would be my purpose. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And I suppose looking at the risk of that approach is if that council... If there was more than three councillors who wouldn't support it without this being in there. But I don't know what that... Mayor Wilkie: We don't know what's going to happen. Yeah. Councillor Finzel: We could just go to the... Mayor Wilkie: The legal advice may be an impediment. Councillor Finzel: Or it may not be. Mayor Wilkie: It may not be. Councillor Finzel: Yeah. We've had two different views at the table around the interpretation of that. So... Councillor Lorentson: So we need clarity to make an informed decision. We need actual... The facts. Okay. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So we've had enough of the discussion that we're not supposed to have.
02:20:00 See, this is why you need a new chairman. Councillor Finzel: Well, maybe I'll take it to the vote. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, Councillor Finzel, I'll put it to you in the first instance. Councillor Finzel: Yeah. I'll go back to what I said. Given we want to make sure that we're aligned with good governance, happy to lay it on the table if there's agreement around the table today, and have a look at it again at the ordinary meeting. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay. So laying on the table is different to withdrawing? Oh, sorry. Councillor Finzel: Withdrawal. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Withdrawal? Councillor Finzel: Oh, I could do a procedural motion and I'll lay it on the table. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: If we lay it on the table, then we don't do the rest. Councillor Finzel: Oh, we're finished with that. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: No, we don't do that. The rest of the motion. So withdrawal is the option that allows us to make a substantive decision and then look at this as an amendment on Thursday. Councillor Finzel: Oh, gee. I'm not a bit of a vote on that one. Substantial. Yeah, I'm happy to do it. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And so is everyone else happy to withdraw for the amendment being withdrawn?
02:21:00 Yes. Okay. Speaker 2: Councillor Haynes. Councillor Haynes. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay. So we're back to the substantive motion, which is the staff recommendation with the amendment that was moved by Councillor Wilson. Yes. And currently, only Councillor Wegener has talked to it. Councillor Finzel: Councillor Finchell. I want to propose an amendment. Sure. I'd like to bring to the table a debate around option three. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Tell you what your amendment is, Councillor. Councillor Finzel: Let me have a look. Yes. Councillor Finzel: So in item B, just change it to read adopt.
02:22:00 Okay. Mayor Wilkie: I'll second it. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: For the purpose of the debate. Before you do, I couldn't accept it because it's in conflict with C. Councillor Finzel: Oh. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Because there would be no general committee meeting. Councillor Finzel: Oh, then we'd have to debate that one as well. Oh, we're going to be here for a while then. Mayor Wilkie: So the amendment would need to encompass... Councillor Finzel: We'd have to combine B and C. It's going to change the whole 16 motion, won't it? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: We'd have to read appoint all councillors to both committees, as committee members on both standing committees. Yes. And then leave out the chair and things, and that could be resolved on...
02:23:00 Councillor Finzel: Then we'd have to raise it or put it... Deputy Mayor Stockwell: We're going to raise it on Thursday anyway. So for the purposes of testing it, you would just say... Yes. Adopt option three. Councillor Finzel: No. Yes. Adoption three. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And then appoint all councillors as committee members on both... as members of both committees. Yes. We'll stop. Councillor Wilson: On 1st May. Yes. 1st May. Speaker 2: Okay. Councillor Finzel: And then what? We'll withdraw that based on... No. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: It's just silent on the chairing of it. Yes. Councillor Finzel: But I don't know... Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And A would be May 2. Yes. Speaker 4: So that is actually B and C as well. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yes. That's okay. Yes. We've got B and C. Yes. So Councillor Wilkie, are you happy to second with those changes?
02:24:00 Are you happy to move like that, Councillor Finzel? Councillor Finzel: Yes. Yes. I think we can just bring it to the table. Mayor Wilkie: And then there'll need to be a further amendment about the chairs of those committees. Councillor Finzel: That's right. Yes. Which will... Mayor Wilkie: Could they still be rotating? Yes. Councillor Finzel: Yes. Yes. But we have to wait on legal advice from the council. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So it's been moved, Councillor Finzel, seconded by Councillor Wilkie, and Councillor Finzel, you have the floor. Councillor Finzel: Yes. For the same reasons I've raised, I think the committees are a valued contribution to how council conducts itself for the meetings. When you look at the benchmark and you notice we wouldn't be the only council, we wouldn't have standing committees. I think that the two committees provide that opportunity for the chairs. It still gives us opportunity to be able to have those discussions around the table,
02:25:00 provides still the opportunity for staff or councillors to go away and seek further information. If we look at the small committee meetings, like Toowoomba Regional Council, they're running six with one ordinary meeting. Rockhampton Regional Council, they're running two with two ordinary meetings. And then, I know the majority of them aren't doing that, but I just think Noosa are different by nature, and I think that that serves us well to have the two committees. That's my personal opinion. So I'm happy to bring this today to the table for debate. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Does anyone else like to talk to this amendment? Councillor Wilson: I'll talk to it. I'll speak against it. While a few other councils do have the separate committee meetings, and I think we're the only one that has the general committee meeting, I still think that's a more efficient way to go forward,
02:26:00 especially with things like finance reports that tend to come to general committee meetings. They would have to go straight to ordinary, which then takes away that level of transparency. That's a seven-day period again for a report, but would they come to ordinary anyway, because of the timing? Okay, get that part, sorry. But I think if we're looking for efficiencies, we've got an option to drop two meetings or to drop one, and I prefer that option to... Mayor Wilkie: Just a question that Councillor Wilson raises a good point. With the other structure, would the finance reports be going direct to ordinary anyway? Yeah, at the time, yeah. Yes, yeah. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Okay, Councillor Wilkie. Mayor Wilkie: Yeah, look, I'm going to support this option, mainly because it halves the workload for councillors. Rather than councillors sitting in a full-day meeting where they have to get across the S&O and P&E items in one long, perhaps a day-long session,
02:27:00 it breaks it up into potentially two half-days, half as much reading and preparation for the meeting date, and I think better decision-making can flow from that through less fatigue. It breaks it up, and there's still adequate time prior to those meetings to receive the reports and get across the material and get answers you need from staff. So in terms of breaking up the workload, I think it's well worth considering. Councillor Wilson: Can I ask a question? Just a clarification. The two meetings would be on consecutive days, is that right? Speaker 2: That was the intention, yes. Councillor Wilson: That doesn't really change the reading time. Councillor Lorentson: Chair? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yes. Does anyone else? I'm just looking at the schedule. Yes, you're right.
02:28:00 I'm just looking at whether we get our seven days in, probably not. Mayor Wilkie: Six. Six and five. Councillor Wegener: Councillor Wegener. Well, it sounds like it might be more than that. I think it would be more efficient for the staff because they would be, you know, they're even a wider scope if it's just one general meeting for them to kind of be on deck for hours and hours and hours where perhaps I would think that staff would not be sitting around waiting to be called up, you know, with this method. Does that make sense to you guys? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So I'll ask the CEO a question. The staff have actually recommended the two meetings. Did you consider the point two? We're going to roll it. So, raises. That's it. Speaker 3: For the Chair, my view of that would be is that you know the agenda of each meeting and then prepare accordingly to the time that we are required to be there. That means you would usually, staff would usually not sit for the whole length of a meeting.
02:29:00 Councillor Wegener: Well, there's a lot of staff sitting around a lot of times. Speaker 2: Sure. But I think that would be the case for both. Mayor Wilkie: Question. Councillor Finzel, was it your intention that this meeting schedule would give more opportunities for more councillors to chair even if it's on a rotational basis than if it was just the Councillor Finzel: general committee? Yeah, that was part of that. Okay. But I also think when you look at like psychosocial hazards, fatigue around big decisions, we already can do like big meetings. Like, you know, they can go up to five to seven hours. I think that is unreasonable. And I think the committee process allows us that break. And I think that's really important to raise. We only risk like it's not much time in terms of the reading time, in terms of that.
02:30:00 I think trying to look after councillors and our mental health and wellbeing. I feel the councillors are really important. I think the committee process better serves that opportunity to have that break. I mean, with PNE, I always make a point to get out to the site, do a walkover. Like, I don't know. I'm happy to hear everyone's arguments around the table. But for me personally, I like the committee options. That's why I brought it to debate to hear what other people think. Thank you, Councillor. What they want to consider. Speaker 3: For the chair. Councillor Wegener. Councillor Wegener: Oh, you go ahead. You go ahead. Speaker 3: Yeah. For the chair, one impact that may have is that public participation. Usually the public participates only through deputation and so forth, through meetings where all councillors are present. That means if there would be unlikely to go to the smaller committee meetings.
02:31:00 They're all councillors. Speaker 2: All councillors. All right. Yeah. Yeah. That's okay. Speaker 4: Councillor Wegener. Councillor Wegener: Councillor Wegener was next. It seems to me that the concern with councillors being chairs, this is a lot better way to go. Because, you know, the SNO and the PNE is still for the councillors to break up their chair responsibilities. Councillor Finzel: Okay. Councillor Wegener: And then Councillor Finzel. Councillor Finzel: Yeah. I think the other thing this does is. Sorry. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: You can't talk to him. You can ask a question if you. All right. Okay. Councillor Finzel: I can have a question then. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yes. Councillor Finzel: Okay. Through the CEO. Do you think that this addresses the gap that caused the impact on re-prosecuting things that were referred on from the committees through the general, the committees with all councillors
02:32:00 attending as mandatory would actually minimise the risk on the productivity of your staff and re-prosecuting or finding further information and hitting repeat? I feel that. Well, I'm asking your opinion. Answer the question. On addressing that gap, which I think is a, has been a risk. Speaker 2: Well, essentially, I take your point in terms of psychosocial safety for the councillors and the timing of meetings. I also take the point that if we do two meetings, then it's two sets of preparation for meetings and papers and reports and timing and putting things out. So it actually increases or it's a heavier workload on our administrative staff in terms of having three meetings versus two meetings. So that's where I come from in terms of what we looked at. We went through these, remember, in our workshops and our preferred and our, and I think our staff preferred is the two options.
02:33:00 But it's for you to debate. Councillor Phillips: Thank you. Question to the CEO. Was there consideration with this option? Thursdays is our workshop day. Sometimes that can be a really long day. So if we're here Tuesday, Wednesday, and would there be a thought around what our diary would look like on the Thursday after? Or just roll the dice on that one? Speaker 2: Well, we haven't considered that. The thing is, it's a day. Wherever it is, there's still workshops to be conducted. So that timeline or timeframe is still required at this point. Councillor Lorentson: I'll speak to the amendment. I won't be supporting. I think that what's been proposed and what's been workshopped now over a period is the way forward. To me, the secret will be in rewriting the way forward. The way forward is in rewriting the agenda items, rewriting the reports, and finding efficiencies. I think at the moment, our reporting system can be better in terms of noting reports,
02:34:00 importing strategic items. I think we can get some serious gains by just changing the format. So I'm happy to try this. I also have an amendment that I just got. I'm going to throw into the mix, which is going to be basically asking for a review of the structure to ensure that it actually achieves its intended benefits. So I think that may allow us, give us the opportunity to potentially debrief and see if it's working and whether a different option is the way to go forward. But I'm happy with the recommendation that we've come to as a group over some time. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I will speak against the amendment as well. I've been in favour of two meetings a month for well over three years, and it's clear
02:35:00 that we are different by nature. Less than 10% of councils have standing committees, and only one of those is our size, the rest are all larger. When we went around the table in the workshop with staff, there was unanimous support that the existing structure has significant productivity impacts, and this doesn't address them as well as the option that staff have recommended. It's clear that we're duplicating organisation minutes, and while it's better than what we're currently doing. I think the only difference for councils is instead of having a meeting that may on some occasions go after lunches, we'll be sure that we rep two days rather than one each
02:36:00 month. And that's one of the things with our councils. We have far more meeting days per month than nearly every council, when you look at informal workshops as well. So to me it's really important that we start from here on to be effective, and part of being effective as councillors is to ensure that we're running and facilitating an efficient organisation. I think the most efficient option is what staff have put up. I think it's important that we use ratepayers' dollars wisely. Certainly if there is the odd occasion where a general committee meeting is getting to the point where we think our decision making is affected by the length of time, there is always the option to adjourn and come back the following day rather than making it the standard.
02:37:00 I think that's everyone's talk now. Councillor Finzel, you can close. Councillor Finzel: Thank you, everyone, for your viewpoints around the table. I think it's always good to tease it out to make sure we're heading to the best outcomes for the councillors out there. I take on the duplication of the minutes. The proof will be in the pudding. You know, in four months' time we can assess it and review it and see where we all sit. So, yep, happy to have a say and bring it to the plate. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I put the amendment, those in favour? Those against? Councillor Wegener: Ha! . .
02:38:00 Councillor Lorentson: I'm doing this at the moment, Vicki. I haven't sent it to you. I'm just talking. . Councillor Finzel: Okay, so that item may be amended to read. This is a little bit of a work on the one that you previously sent me. . Councillor Lorentson: No, I have not sent this to you. . Okay, you're good. No, I'm just writing this as we speak. . So, E, that council review option two in 12 months to ensure it's delivering its intended benefits. Councillor Finzel: . Council review option two. . Councillor Lorentson: In 12 months to ensure it's delivering its intended benefits.
02:39:00 . Can we actually, can I change option two and just add, because only we know what option two is. So, just review the new meeting structure in 12 months to ensure that it's delivering its intended benefits. The new meeting structure. . I'll second it. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: . Seconded by Councillor Wilkie. Councillor Lomington, you have the floor. Councillor Lorentson: . I won't speak too much. I think we've talked quite a lot today, the general meeting. This is a significant governance change. So, I think it's just really just good governance that in 12 months' time we sit and review
02:40:00 how it's working and whether other options are better and just get some feedback given the conversation and the amendment that was just put forth. This gives us, a review gives us at the moment, the opportunity to pause and reflect. So, I just think it's just a good, something we should do all the time, particularly when we have significant, like I said, governance changes. . Councillor Finzel. Councillor Finzel: . Question through the Chair to the CEO. What are we going to measure it against, a review? Do you think that is sufficient to, is it prescriptive at all? And how that's going to happen? Speaker 2: . Through the Chair, I think it is. It gives, what we do in the ensuring period is develop the criteria on what is efficient
02:41:00 and what's not and what we're going to measure it against. If we tried to do that now, I think we'd be here for a long time and we still wouldn't probably get it right. So, I think it's probably best that we make the commitment to review it. But we also make the commitment to work out what are the, what are the, the intended benefits. . Councillor Lorentson: And can I also just raise that the report itself actually speaks of the intended benefits. . That's true. . So, we don't need to rewrite the rules. So, it speaks of that it best balances efficiency, transparency, report review time and informed decision making while reducing overall meeting demand. That's our KPI. And we've got to then consider KRIs, the risk, you know, key risk implications as well as KPIs. But, but the report speaks of the benefits. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: . Okay. Anyone else wish to talk? Councillor Wegener. Councillor Wegener: . Are we committing ourselves, like if everything's working, you know, swimming along, are we
02:42:00 committing ourselves to, like what is it? . That doesn't need to be done? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: . A review? . Are you talking to the motioner or is this a question? . Target the motion. . Councillor Wegener: Review the new meeting structure in 12 months. If everything's going along, do we really need that? Is that, is that an extensive piece of work for staff if they, if they feel the review's not necessary? Councillor Lorentson: . Can I throw in? . No, just, I think it's. . Speaker 2: I don't think it's a massive piece of work. I think if it is working well, you'd know it and you'd be able to, it's really just to, to, to do a sense check of it, I think, is probably more the, more the point. And if it is not working really well, we'd know it and we'd be wanting to, to make some change anyway, I think. .
02:43:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: We have, given the reasons why we think it needs to change and we'd like to see those, so in 12 months, you know, the easiest thing will be the staff saying, my time was 30 hours a week doing this stuff, now it's 20. Councillor Finzel: Yeah. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: That's what I'd like to see. And then there'd be a, I suppose, the informed decision making will be something for us to make a subjective assessment of. . Anyone else wish to talk to the amendment? Councillor? Councillor Finzel: Yeah. Thank you, Councillor Lorentson. I think it's, is good practice to add a review in. You know, when we're around the table and we're seeking data and, you know, measuring our, you know, why we do what we do. What are we measuring it against? Is it efficient? Is it helping our staff? Is it helping our community? So, yeah, I think it's a good idea to have that review. Like the CEO said, we don't have to spend a lot of time on it.
02:44:00 Hopefully we can, you know, run that against the KPIs and efficiently determine do we need further changes or we're happy to proceed forward. So, yeah, I think it is good practice and I'm happy to support it. Thank you, Councillor. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay. Anyone else? Councillor Lorentson, do you wish to close? I've put the amendment. Those in favour? It's unanimous. It becomes part of the motion. And I still think only Councillor Weggen has talked to the motion. Councillor Wilson: Don't worry. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Would anyone else like to talk to the motion? Councillor Wilson. Councillor Wilson: That's not it. Sorry. Sorry. Sorry. Sorry. Councillor Wilson: Sorry. Alright. As I mentioned earlier, I've been asking for a review of the current structure for some time as it's currently inefficient. My key concerns have been duplication of debate and deferring items from the P&E and S&O meetings
02:45:00 to the General Committee meeting, rendering the smaller committees somewhat redundant. In addition, and probably more of a concern for me, is that items have been allowed to bypass the smaller committees and go straight to General, meaning Councillors have had one business day and a weekend to review the reports. When items go through the full cycle, the information is available to Councillors and the public for over a week, as we're now suggesting or proposing. This proposal, option two, means that the agenda for the General Committee meeting will be released to Councillors and the public a week before the meeting. There are some potential consequences that the General Committee meeting may be long, but I think this is actually unlikely to be a big risk, as the P&E and S&O meetings currently rarely last even an hour, so it's half an hour to an hour, and then debate and questions are duplicated in the General Committee meetings anyway. In addition, my analysis of the lengthier General meetings showed that this was more
02:46:00 often due to having significant items in the agenda that had bypassed the smaller committees. So with only one business day to prepare, Councillors had had little time to ask questions of staff or consult affected parties before the meeting. Having the reports for seven days before the meeting gives Councillors more time to resolve questions and aids transparency for the public. This should then lead to a more efficient debate on the floor, therefore hopefully shorter meetings with less need to seek clarity on the recommendations in reports. It's also in line with other Councils. For a small Council, we spend significantly more time in formal meetings and workshops than other Councils, which largely just have one ordinary meeting per month. This proposed change gives staff more time to deliver on projects versus preparing for meetings, and Councillors more time to spend in the community versus in chambers. As I mentioned, my analysis shows that longer meetings, involving multiple questions directed to staff and longer debate, were where reports went straight to General or ordinary meetings,
02:47:00 or special meetings, which currently only require two days' notice. Examples include planning scheme amendments, special meeting December 24, Lake Macdonald Drive subdivision, General Committee meeting Jan 25, large DAs for Gympie Terrace and Royal Mail, straight to General Committee meeting March 25, Tourism Noosa one-year funding agreement, straight to special meeting May 25, Lake Macdonald Drive contract award, straight to General Committee meeting in July 25. Adoption of DMP, straight to General Committee meeting December 25. Adoption of Tourism Noosa three-year roadmap, straight to ordinary meeting December 25. Perigee and Beach Active Street, straight to General meeting March 26. I do still have a concern that special meetings will continue to take us away from what we're trying to achieve here, where we're having seven days' notice to read reports and consult with people. We've had 11 special meetings in the last two years, but we will be able to address that
02:48:00 in our upcoming review of standing orders. But overall, I really look forward to having this structure implemented with the two meetings in the future, from May. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you, Councillor. Councillor Wilson: Others? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor Littleton. Councillor Lorentson: I'm going to speak from a governance perspective. I am absolutely in favour of this. I'm currently studying the AICD course, so everything at the moment I'm looking through a governance lens. So, to me, that, you know, efficient meeting structures gives us the opportunity to focus on the strategic oversights and performance monitoring, when we start changing the structure and making it more efficient, and again, I'm assuming and hoping that our agenda will be more strategic-based, noting reports become just that, less conversation.
02:49:00 It allows us to focus on the big-picture stuff and scrutinise the big-picture stuff. So, I'm actually quietly confident that this is going to achieve, you know, efficiencies, transparencies, and most importantly, informed decision-making. I think the structure, the current structure isn't conducive to proper decision-making. I just think we can do better, and we have a commitment as a Council for continuous improvement, and that means in terms of governance and meeting structures, so this is part of that commitment. Let's see if this is better, if it's not. Let's look at something else, but to do nothing. Nothing changes.
02:50:00 Mayor Wilkie: Mr Wilkie? I think Councillor Wilson has made some excellent points. The amount of reports that go direct to General has forced this change. The previous structure, the current structure, when it works as intended, that doesn't happen. And the current structure, when it works as intended, that doesn't happen. And the current structure has been in place for, not just since 2014, perhaps 30 years. And its intention was to ensure that Councillors had the time and the opportunity to get across all the reports and three opportunities in the meeting cycle, to make sure that when it comes to the ordinary meeting, the decision they make is the best they can make with all the available information and the best long-term interests of the Shire. And I have to say it has served the Shire very, very well. There is only one decision that I'm aware of that has been legally contested successfully in all that time. At one time, Council had tens of millions of dollars of contingent liabilities against
02:51:00 it. And they've all melted away because the decision making was sound. But it's a sign of the times that the Council is increasingly busy. There's more work to be done. And the amount of major changes that have taken place in the last three years have been direct to general is a sign that staff are working very, very hard to strict timeframes. And this new structure will allow them the time to get reports to Councillors with adequate reading time. And I think this new structure will be more efficient, more effective. We will be required to work harder as Councillors. But I think good decisions in the best long-term interests of the Shire will still be possible under this new structure.
02:52:00 Councillor Finzel: I think it's been a good debate and welcomed around the table. I think any time we'll get an opportunity to reflect and review about some of the things that we've done, how we behave in the chambers, in our community and in the organisation is welcomed. I think the conversation today about if we get more efficient around the table also, in my mind, brings to attention that we work towards attracting good leadership to local Council. And that includes trying to work towards bridging the gender gap that currently exists between women at the table that have been elected through local government. And then how they balance all their priorities around care and other opportunities or things that become available. So I think this is really good in terms of governance and efficiency around the process
02:53:00 to hopefully get more women interested in a broader view around politics at the local level. Because we know women play a pivotal role in the leadership of communities, but often this work is not formally recognised. So I think for good governance and meeting process, hopefully we won't be here all day. Hopefully we get the outcomes that it's going to be tick, tick, tick. We get a good review and it's all really efficient. So yeah, I look forward to moving forward to see how we measure this and provide opportunity for staff, councillors and promote good governance so that people feel that they're getting the value for money. They're getting good leadership around the table and efficiencies and productivity from our local panels. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Anyone else?
02:54:00 It goes back to Council Wigner to close. Councillor Wegener: I just would like to thank Nicola Wilson because her speech was really good and I think she was kind of a driver for this and I think it's going to work out well. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'll put the motion. Those in favour? So moved. That's unanimous. We then move on to the next item of business, which is... Thank you, Yontji. Thank you, Yontji. Thank you, Yontji. Is the Financial Performance Report for February 2026. And we welcome Acting Director Margaret Gatt and Acting Manager of Finance, Zac. And Zac, you're going to give us a brief overview. Speaker 5: Good afternoon, councillors. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Good afternoon. Thank you. Speaker 1: And through the Chair. So we'll take the report as read. And I'll provide some just additional commentary and an overview of the report itself. The February report provides us eight months of the current financial year, or roughly
8.3 FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE REPORT FEBRUARY 2026 ¶
02:55:00 67 cent of the financial year start-up. As at the 28th of February 2026, and noting the impacts of higher than anticipated operational revenue and the timing of delivery of the Capital Works Programme, there are no new financial risks that will impact Council's forecasted financial position at 30th of June 2026. Please note that the February 2026 report reflects our Budget Review 2 position for the 2526 financial year, which was adopted at Council on the 19th of February 2026. Further to this, and following adoption of BR2 at Council's honorary meeting, Council is required to update its amended budget. This is included as attachment 6 to the report today, and reflects total borrowings of 3.1 million for the financial year. The balance of the policy itself remains unchanged.
02:56:00 It's simply just the PENX aid and the amount that's referred to as loan borrowings that has been updated, which simply reflects our BR2 position. There are no other substantial changes to the policy. The need to update the policy came from our submission to QTC for our potential loan borrowings. As noted in the report, Council has recorded a favourable operating position of $2.9 million, and a net result variance of $4.8 million when you take into account $1.9 million for funding from capital sources. I would like to draw some express attention to elements of the report. On the bottom of page 2, there is a table that refers to waste management in holiday parks. In regards to some of the variances noted in that table, the revenue line item of a negative $111,000 variance is driven by materials and services related to general waste and sales
02:57:00 of recyclables being slightly lower than budget had anticipated, and it is partially offset by additional rates and annual charges. We are currently doing an exercise behind the scenes to bring back a more detailed analysis of that in the next finance report, so I am just earmarking that as the case and we expect to table more detailed results to explain those variances in a subsequent report. This is also paired with the expenditure line items, which are currently showing as a $920,000 overspend. We are again currently undertaking an effort with both the financial business partner and the waste team just to provide further clarification and details on those amounts, and intend to provide them in the next subsequent financial report. In regards to the holiday parks, revenue performance is higher than budget. This is primarily driven by the Noosa River Holiday Park of $210,000 and the Boring Point Holiday Park of $82,000. It does also exhibit a $269,000 overspend to budget of the expenses.
02:58:00 Again, we will bring a more detailed summary of this back to Council in the next finance report. There has been considerable work undertaken behind the scenes to look at credits and unearned revenue, so I hope to consolidate this in a simple manner in the next finance report. The operating revenue and operating expenditure variance tables have been modified to assist the community understanding the report. There is some complexity of reporting debits as debits and credits as credits in terms of the underlying accounting ledger, but to ensure we can actually illustrate whether it is a positive or a negative variance, there has been green shading or colouring added to those tables, so where a revenue item is higher than budget or expenditure line item is lower than budget, it is demonstrated by effectively a green colour to exhibit that. It is probably an oversimplified way of conveying that, because there are explanations possibly if expenditure is under, but it is to, in the simplest way, convey to the public where
02:59:00 we are tracking. To use a specific example to that, there are two I would like to discuss. The rates, levies and charges currently are showing as a $414,000 collection over budget. When you look at that against the overall budget, it is actually a 0.4% variance, so well below a benchmark or threshold that you would typically discuss. This leads to the existing questions around rates or whether we are over-collecting rates, and that is a primary driver of our operating surplus. So of the $400,000 revenue to date over budget, most of that is actually driven by waste utility charges. Mayor Wilkie: Only 0.1 of $1 million or $100,000 is actually attributed to rates across our $106 million budget. Speaker 1: Employee benefits is another one that regularly comes up in the finance report, which is currently exhibiting a $905,000 underspend today, which in dollar terms is material, but actually represents less than 3% of the overall budget to date of employee benefits.
03:00:00 Just like to convey that this is a continual rolling program of improvements that we are trying to do. We take feedback on board from councillors from the community, also just alignment with best practice, and we should hopefully see minor updates as we move ahead. With the capital revenue and expenditure. These have been updated to obviously reflect our BR2 position. The table on page 5 provides an overview of our major capital and grant subsidies. In regards to capital expenditure, when adjusted for asset write-offs, loan redemption payments and contributed assets, $19.6 million has been spent, or 25% of the overall capital works budget today. Noting there is the ongoing work program with the infrastructure team is a much more detailed analysis of capital works program is provided to the capital works executive group, and we are again working on that behind the scenes.
03:01:00 We will have to hope to have an update in due course as we work through that. From cash management and investment performance position. So total cash on hand at February 2026 was $159 million, of which $6.7 million is in trust. These are higher than anticipated through our standard budget, which is primarily driven by the re-profiling of our capital works program through budget review 2. As noted in the report, our investments continue to perform well against our benchmarks, with Mayor Wilkie: a summary of our investment performance provided on the table on page 6. Speaker 1: I just want to draw attention, please, not to one typographical area. The wording above that table refers to January 2026, and it is if you read 2026, you will be able to read the report. My apologies for the typo. In regards to rate arrears, page 7 of the report provides additional detail on our rates arrears to February 2026. Our rate arrears have gone up to 12.8% from 5.8% in January.
03:02:00 This is primarily driven by the fact that January, the January 2026 rates period has now, payment has now lapsed if you haven't paid your rates today, and so that is now showing up as part of the arrears balances. It is worth noting that it gets raised that a March 2026 report, or next month's report, we will provide a more detailed analysis of rate arrears, which is a regular question, which is part of our quarterly rolling program that will actually look at the ageing and categorisation of those arrears, including the January rates levy. The February results are consistent, as my normal dialogue in these meetings talk about the semi-annual pattern, or six-monthly pattern, with rates which, following the July and January levy, we find the arrears balances increase. It is worth noting that rates issuances, or reminder notices, will be sent in the mail later this week to ratepayers who are currently in arrears, and following the reminder notices
03:03:00 going out, we actually will begin to operationalise our rates and charges debt management and recovery policy. It is worth noting this question has come up a few times, just to provide commentary, that while rates arrears are secured over the land and present limited risk of non-collection to Council, it is a pragmatic step for Council actually to move through the arrears process and we're actually pragmatically looking to see how we can encourage ratepayers to engage with the Revenue Services team to actually look at what payment methods or payment profiles might be available to actually start to begin some of those arrears balances. It may be seen as negative or hard to deal with, but we would prefer in the first instance to actually work with ratepayers before we have to go through more. The policy itself will escalate through the policy. In regards to the measures of financial sustainability, there are no significant emerging risks to Council's performance metrics. It is worth noting in the report that the asset sustainability
03:04:00 ratio is currently below the 80% target. This is just as a result of the re-profiling through BR2. We expect by the end of the year and the adoption of the new budget for next year. As we re-profile the capital works into the future year, this will resolve itself and we will come in over the 80% threshold. As part of a continuing process of process improvement, we will look in the future to provide a recommendation to Council of actually providing the financial sustainability on a quarterly basis as there is some volatility to the ratios being provided on a monthly basis and they can actually provide noise that is actually unhelpful in terms of conveying our financial information. In previous month's reports, we have included a section on questions taken on notice. There were some questions taken on notice in the previous finance report. I will provide verbal updates to them today. My apologies not being able to do so.
03:05:00 Although it was briefly covered in the previous financial report, a question from Councillor Wilson was raised around the balance sheet as an attachment to or statement of financial position and just clarifying why some of the line balances have updated while others have remained the same. Again, some of these questions may not be verbatim but hopefully they capture the intent of the question. So to provide some further commentary, the 2025-26 budget was prepared in June using the balance sheets available at that time. Throughout the year, as you understand, we do a reconciliation in terms of our financial statements. We subsequently have BR1 and BR2 movements which capture updated positions and at the end of the year, we actually go through a full reconciliation and ensure our balance sheet is ready for audit and our financial statement preparation. So that's why some of the aspects are periodic, i.e. cash updates every month because we take or receive
03:06:00 cash, while other aspects are done on a monthly, quarterly or yearly basis in terms of reconciliation. So that's why some of them will exhibit movements while some won't. Question was taken from Mayor Wilkie as to the variance of property, plant and equipment in the statement of financial position. So to provide some context, there was a $3.3 million variance to property, plant and equipment from the 2024-25 financial statements and actuals to January 2026 and I can provide this in writing if that's helpful afterwards as well. The primary driver behind that is our accumulated depreciation, our work in progress movements and asset disposals during the year as well as commissioned assets. Effectively, the property plant equipment is kind of a work in progress as we move throughout the year and assets are commissioned. The biggest driver in that is about $11 million of accumulated depreciation or depreciation for the current year and that's why the balance today is actually showing a $3.3 million variance.
03:07:00 As we move closer to the end of the financial year, we will expect to bring more assets online as the commission finishes. Mayor Wilkie: Offset by disposal of some of those assets. Speaker 1: Yep, it's effectively in that account. So you've got the accumulated depreciation disposals which are tracked and as you can see from our capital project list, there's an intention of capital projects to be delivered by the end of the year and they will be then effectively added to that balance. Thank you. And just one last question which was Councillor Phillips' question around can you provide the three most significant strategic or financial risks to the community. Just in response to that question, we have noted that and put that on our strategic, sorry, on our strategic action register is the word I'm looking for, sorry, and we will look to incorporate that in future reports. The reason we haven't to date is there's some broader dependencies with ongoing work with our budget, audit and risk and it's a complex matter to work through
03:08:00 so we are hoping to have that as soon as possible in future reports, it has been noted. In summary, Council remains in a strong financial position with variances largely driven by timing differences. Thank you. Thank you, I'm happy to take questions. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillors, do we have questions? Speaker 5: I have a couple, thank you. Councillor Lorentson: Councillor Lorentson. My first one, I'm looking at legal expenses on page 4. Just can you clarify where the legal expenses including the planning and environment court appeal matters, whether they're captured within the operating expenditure categories? So I'm referencing just a high profile one that has been in the paper, a landing rise.
03:09:00 Just wondering where do we capture those expenses? Speaker 1: I would be happy to take that on notice. Just to clarify. I don't have the details of the specific one you're referencing, so I could take that on notice and report back to Council. Councillor Lorentson: That would be great. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So with the Director of Development Control. Speaker 4: Through the Chair. Yeah, so we have a list of all of our appeals that we circulate through the case management working group every month regarding the costs of each of those. I'm happy to circulate those more broadly to the Council group, which itemises particular appeals relating to each matter. That would be fine. And it does come through the operational budget. It's handled through the Government Assessment Budget. Thank you. Speaker 5: It's an operational expense, yeah. Councillor Lorentson: Just a further question in terms of emerging external risk. Given the current geo-political environment, and just in terms of emerging risks to Council's operating costs, how are these being monitored?
03:10:00 And I'm sort of referencing, I've jotted down here, fuel costs, construction materials, potential interest rates, insurance, supply chain pressures. Are these external cost pressures, where are they sort of captured in our modelling? And if they're not, will they be incorporated? Speaker 5: Through the Chair. Thank you, Councillor Lorentson. They're not reflected in the current report. But they are certainly reflected in the current report. They are certainly part of our discussions and modelling for the 26-27 year budget. But in addition to that, for the remainder of the financial year, we are very conscious of escalating costs, such as the ones that you were speaking about, in terms of fuel, construction costs, et cetera. I have mentioned previously that there may be a need for a BR3.
03:11:00 I would say, without having confirmed this with the CEO or the ET, that there may be a need for a BR3. It's not May. There will likely definitely be a budget review 3 that will reflect any of those escalating costs that are coming through to Council's businesses. Councillor Lorentson: And my last question in terms of our risk register is, does our risk register, and I'll go back to legal costs, does our risk register include any of those costs? Does it include exposure to litigation, costs and potential adverse planning and environment outcomes? Speaker 5: Through the Chair, Councillor Laurinton, I don't have the risk register right in front of me. It is quite a lengthy and it's quite a robust document that's quite detailed in nature.
03:12:00 From the top of, off the top of my head, I'm certain that there would be some reference to exactly that risk register. I don't have the risk that you're describing. I can ensure that we come back to you with some specifics on that. If I could take that question on notice as I don't have a definitive answer. Councillor Lorentson: Fantastic. And I'm not sure if this is relevant to the financial report, but I'll ask the question. In terms of room and deep dive, in terms of legal costs, and just again, given some high profile appeal cases, is that something that I can ask you to bring forward, or is that something separate that I ask through the CEO in terms of maybe getting a workshop together just to understand what are the actual costs and whether we've budgeted it and what are the risks in terms of adverse planning and environment court appeal decisions? Speaker 4: I'm happy to take that question. Yeah. So our budget has been relatively steady for appeals actually over the past about eight
03:13:00 years. It hasn't actually changed in terms of the amount we set aside every year for funding appeals. This year's tracking to be around on budget, maybe slightly above. We've obviously, it does vary from year to year depending on the cases and those matters that proceed to trial. A lot of our matters are settled outside of court, so don't actually require a full hearing. But sometimes particular matters do proceed before hearing and that will impact on the cost. It's also the number of experts appointed. Given the complexity of the issues, that can have a big variation on what the cost is as well. And also, yeah, the significance, I guess, of the breach and also the appellants who are seeking to challenge the decision made by councillors. So there's a range of factors to be considered. But in terms of overall budget, we're tracking around about what was planned for our appeals budget. Slightly above, I believe.
03:14:00 But less than previous, the last two years at the moment. So, but that does change depending on the number of matters that do proceed to trial. So happy to digest that further with you as we do report that through our case management working group. Councillor Wegener: I would love that information as well. Thank you. Can I ask a question? Because the case management, the other day we did... Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor, is this about finances? Yes. Because we're dealing with the financial report? Okay, proceed with your question or are you going to talk to the financial report? Councillor Wegener: I'll take this offline. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you, Councillor. Anyone else? Other questions or... Councillor Lorentson: My last question in terms of the revised debt policy. So we're required to adopt a revised debt policy. Can you talk to that? What specific changes have been made compared to the previously adopted version?
03:15:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, Councillor, I thought that was contained in your initial discussion and in the report. Councillor Lorentson: Yes. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So it was... Councillor Lorentson: Can I ask for a few little more details? So details, I'm also happy to bring that out. No details were given. Yes. Speaker 1: The debt policy is adopted annually through our annual budgets. We adopted it at the start of the year. As part of BR2, we had an updated capital project list that loans which were attached to that. So the only thing that is updated in the policy is appendix A of it. It refers to our borrowings in the current year. That was updated to match BR2. There are no other updates to any of the borrowings and subsequently or anything substantial in the policy. It was actually just the current year borrowings. The reason it becomes necessary is we provide the debt policy to QTC as a part of our submission process for potential borrowings that we will take by the end of the year and the debt policy needs to reflect our most recent ledger review position. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Would someone like to move the staff recommendation?
03:16:00 Councillor Wegener: Councillor Wegener. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And the seconder, Councillor Wilson. Thank you. Does anyone else like to talk to the motion? No. We are recording. Thank you. Anyone else? Councillor Wilson: Same. Very before. Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: Question, Mr Chair. The financial ratios will be, I'm often challenged to remember the formula for each of them. Would it be possible to have an appendix with the formula for each of the ratios that you provide? Sure. Speaker 1: Yeah. Mayor Wilkie: Thanks. Sorry. But is there anything that really makes you toss and turn at night about our appliances? Speaker 5: It's not a question. Mayor Wilkie: It's a bit difficult. Speaker 5: Through the Chair, at a high level. Yeah. What sort of issues generally?
03:17:00 That's a very large question. Yeah. It's a very, it's a deep question. Councillor Wilson: Point of order. Point of order. Yeah. It's our thing. The report is a backward-looking report. It's historical, year-to-date. Okay. Mayor Wilkie: Is there anything year-to-date? Sorry, Mr Chair. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yes, it isn't relating to the February financial report, so I won't accept the question. Mayor Wilkie: Can I rephrase the question? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: You can do so if it relates to the February financial report. Mayor Wilkie: No. What I'm trying to get at, Mr Chair, is... No. All right. I'll withdraw the question. But it's... Year-to-date to February, this is the... And it looks like we're well-placed to meet our budget targets. What is the greatest risk to us achieving our budget targets?
03:18:00 Speaker 5: Well, there's two that come to mind. One is the impact of the geopolitical situation that's happening and increasing costs that we all in this country and around the world suffered or were impacted by the 30% to 40% increase in cost of living post-COVID. Just as recently as the weekend. In reading lots of different articles through different media sources, credible ones, I may add, is that there is, you know, I don't want to be alarmist, but that that will be at least what the increase will be again. Maybe not immediately, but if things don't de-escalate. Yeah. So that's a concern. And the other concern is, for me, just to add it, not me. I think on behalf of the organisation is, no, I'd say it was just that one.
03:19:00 That one. It's probably the high level. Survival conflict? Yes. Survival conflict. Yeah. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you. Speaker 5: Yeah. Okay. That's all. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thanks. I'll talk to the motion. Thank you for doing it. I'd like the fact that you were reviewing elements of the report and saying which is right. And I agree that the sustainability ratios are better on a quarterly basis. I look forward to the challenge now. We've got the last rates notices and it's gone up to 12%. I really look forward to the end of year position there being what you said was a reasonable target. And being acting, I'm sure you'll be interested in making sure that happens. And I do think that all organisations will have to consider, particularly, maybe not this budget, but next budget, the implications of the way the world is at the moment.
03:20:00 And what that means and how we go forward and our reliance on fossil fuels. That's it. Anyone else? Councillor Wegener: Councillor Wegener. Well, thank you. I'm glad we are talking about global issues and wars and finances and the price of oil going up. And, of course, I think food isn't going to be a big one. We're going to see it in another massive increase in food prices. So I'm glad that the DNP is promoting regenerative farming locally. Thank you very much for your report. You're going in. You're going in. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'll put the motion. Those in favour? That is the end of the meeting. Well done, Mr Chair. So thank you, ladies and gentlemen. We declare the meeting to vote at 3.51pm. Councillor Finzel: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.