Ordinary Meeting - 19 March 2026 Transcript

2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY ¶

▶ 00:00:15

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

3 ATTENDANCE & APOLOGIES ¶

▶ 00:00:28

00:01:00 which will be answered by Kim Rawlings, the Director of Strategy and Environment. Councillor Finzel: Councillor Finzel. Thank you Mr Chair. Question 1. What is an agricultural hub? What is its purpose? How would it operate in practical terms? What are the outcomes such an initiative would achieve? And what role does Noosa Council play? Noosa Council believes it has in constructing the core infrastructure and creating ongoing operational settings for such a facility. Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you. Director Rawlings. Welcome. Director Rawlings: Thank you. Thank you Councillor Finzel and thank you Brian for that question. An agricultural hub is an emerging concept that Council is currently exploring through an initial scoping and feasibility investigation to understand its potential role in supporting Noosa's rural and hinterland communities. The study is assessing a range of domestic and international models to determine what a fit for purpose hub could look like and whether it could strengthen rural production of regenerative farming,

8.1 BRIAN O'CONNOR ¶

▶ 00:01:02

00:02:00 artisan and creative industries while building long term community and economic resilience. The study is examining how such a hub might operate, including potential functions, services and a range of potential benefits and considerations. Should a viable model be identified, detailed financial and operational modelling would occur in subsequent phases. Should Council choose to progress to a business case? The Phase 1 feasibility study is being progressed in 2026. Councillor Finzel: Thank you. Question 2. What scoping studies have occurred to establish an agricultural hub in Noosa Shire? Will they be made public? Has a business case been prepared and will the feasibility of such a venture rely upon funding from State and Federal Government sources? At the start-up stage and ongoing. What economic benefit would the hub generate? And what is the timeframe that Noosa Council is working towards getting such a project up and running?

00:03:00 Thank you. Director Rawlings: Thank you for the second question. Council is currently undertaking the Phase 1 feasibility study, which is the first formal piece of work examining the potential around the concept of an agricultural hub in Noosa Shire. Outcomes of this Phase 1 feasibility study are the following. It will be reported to Council for consideration prior to any further work. As this is just a scoping study, it has not yet been determined what any future approach or model could be or how it might be financed. The scoping phase will identify initial range of benefits and considerations. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you. Thank you, Director Rawls. Thank you, Councillor Finzel. Director Rawlings: Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: I have a mayoral minute. Mayoral minute is Council's submission on the Sunshine Coast Waterways Authority Bill. I hereby give notice of my intention to move the following motion at the ordinary meeting, Thursday 16th March 2026, that Council endorse the attached submission of the Sunshine

9 MAYORAL MINUTES ¶

▶ 00:03:55

00:04:00 Coast Waterways Authority Bill and submit to State Development, Infrastructure and Works Committee prior to 12 midday Friday 20th March, and delegate to the CEO to make any necessary changes as a result of discussion, direction or decision at this meeting and or minor amendments if required prior to submission. Mayoral minute comes today as it was felt that it was best to bring the submission to this arena and the mayoral minute is the most expeditious avenue to do that in the short timeframe. The background. On 4th March 2026, the Honourable Brent Mickleburg MP, Minister for Transport and Main Roads introduced the Sunshine Coast Waterways Authority Bill 2026 into the Queensland Parliament. The bill was referred to the State Development, Infrastructure and Works Committee for detailed consideration. The objective of the bill as described by the Minister is to establish the Sunshine Coast Waterways Authority as a statutory body.

00:05:00 The bill provides for the SCWA to be responsible for defined waterways from Palmerstone Passage in the south to Noosa Lakes in the north, including the Noosa, Mooroochee and Loolool River. The proposed functions of the SCWA include to plan strategically for the management of the Sunshine Coast Waterways by developing a waterways management strategy, develop a waterways management program to implement the waterways management strategy, install, manage and maintain infrastructure for the Sunshine Coast Waterways, manage navigational access to and within the Sunshine Coast Waterways, monitor and manage sand and sediment movement in Sunshine Coast Waterways and adjacent waters and land. The bill is currently open for submissions for a very short period. The submission is due by mid-day tomorrow, Friday 20th March 2026. Given the short timeframe and the significance of the matter, I bring forward this moment

00:06:00 for Council consideration and endorsement of the attached submission to be lodged by close of submissions deadline tomorrow. In summary, the attached submission seeks to, one, highlight areas of the bill which are critical regarding roles, responsibilities, tenure and decision making where Council seeks further clarity. Two, seek confirmation of representation on the Sunshine Coast Waterways Authority for three local governments. Three, identify risks of functional overlap or conflict between the Sunshine Coast Waterways Authority and Council, particularly in infrastructure planning, tenure management, environmental protection, climate change response and foreshore integration. Four, emphasise the role of the SCWA in the development of the Sunshine Coast Waterways Authority. Five, ensure the Noosa's distinct environmental and waterway values, community expectations and statutory land use frameworks are appropriately recognised in the establishment and ongoing

00:07:00 operation of the SCWA. Six, propose amendments or safeguards to support collaborative, transparent and place-based waterway governance to meet the objectives and aspirations of our community. Five, ensure the Noosa's distinct environmental and waterway values, community expectations A public briefing was held in Brisbane yesterday in which it was stated that local government had been consulted on the bill. It is my understanding that this is not accurate to my knowledge. Apart from a meeting I had with Minister Mikkelberg, Minister for Transport and the Main Roads, Minister Council was not consulted on this bill prior to it being made public by a state government website. I note that the Crucifilly government has committed publicly to work in partnership with local governments and we welcome this commitment. We trust that local government's feedback into this process will be considered seriously given the significance of the bill.

00:08:00 We look forward to continuing to work in partnership with the state government on all matters relevant to Noosa and important to our community such as this one. Councillors, we'll have Director Rawlings here to answer any questions you may have. Anyone wish to speak to the Mayoral Meeting? Councillor Stockwell? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I would like to move an amendment. Amendment? And I'd like to add a C. And the item C to read. Based on the concerns raised within the submission, Council does not support the bill in its current form. Mayor Wilkie: Can I have a second for the amendment to test it? Councillor Wilson: I'll second. Mayor Wilkie: Councillor Wilson? Councillor Stockwell? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillors, the submission raises areas where it says, Council does not support the bill in its current form. And I'll list them. They suggest the staff's assessment of the bill is that it's ambiguous in terms of functional boundaries between the SCWA and local government.

00:09:00 It lacks clarity around tenure and land-based integration. It doesn't give appropriate recognition of local policies and plans. It's imprecise in its definition of infrastructure for the waterways. There's potential overlap in sand and sediment management responsibilities. It perceives there's infrastructure planning and delivery conflicts. And tenure and land-use conflicts on foreshore and reserve land are perceived to be an issue. And there is navigational access concerns that needs clarity around how we resolve the issues. And perhaps different objectives between navigational access and local waterway management objectives. And as needs more precise clarification of the extent of the remit in terms of the geographic

00:10:00 extent. Councillors, you know, specific issues around our Noosa ferry service and commercial marine leases, how they'll be handled. How it'll deal with separate waterway management strategies and programs for distinct river systems such as Noosa compared to the other rivers and waterways captured by the legislation. The impact of the authority on sand pumping and sediment management at the Noosa river mouth. And the funding model for long-term resourcing. I'll leave it there. So, Councillors, the bill as drafted is quite minimal. And as such, it could be interpreted quite broadly. Its limits are constrained by a very brief drafting process. And for me, I can't support a bill that may usher in the same sort of problems we had

00:11:00 when this council was amalgamated into the Sunshine Coast Regional Council, where the specific interests, objectives and values of this Shire are not considered in substantive decisions that affect our community and the values of the Noosa river system. It is a real threat because the bill does nothing to identify how the balancing objectives of maintaining and preserving the low-key recreational access and world-recognised conservation value of the Noosa river system will be balanced against the values of the Shire. So, for me, we should make it very clear that as drafted, this bill does not meet the expectations of our community in terms of setting out a coordinated management framework for rivers

00:12:00 between the Moreton Bay area and Noosa, and therefore I propose the amendment. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you, Councillor Stockwell. If the Councillors wish to speak to the amendment, or are against it, Councillor Wilson? Councillor Wilson: No. I'm happy to support it for all the reasons Councillor Stockwell has stated. I just wanted to question the wording of the amendment, because the substantive motion is that council will have A, endorse, B, delegate. So, I think C doesn't follow on from that council. So, we might just need to have somebody who might be that that council does not support the bill in its current form based on the concerns raised within the submission. So, just to re-order the sentence. Mayor Wilkie: The word smith strikes again.

00:13:00 Councillor Wilson: You just take the first half of the sentence and switch it to the beginning. Sorry, the second half of the sentence. Yes. Mayor Wilkie: Does not support the bill in its current form. Comment, based on concerns raised in the submission. Councillor Wilson: Yeah. Good. Based. Sorry. Director Rawlings: Based. Oh, OK. Sorry. Councillor Wilson: Does not support the bill in its current form, based on concerns raised in the submission. Mayor Wilkie: Based on the concerns raised in the submission. Councillor Wilson: Based. Speaker 3: OK. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you, Councillor Wilson.

00:14:00 Any further discussion on the amendment? Councillor Wegener. Speaker 3: Quickly, there's so many elements, as Brian mentioned, but I think of the sand pumping at the River Mouth when we had the dog beach area, and we had two cracks at it the first time. We had to evolve quite a bit within our own council to figure out how to actually do it at a reasonable cost. It was a very big deal, and since then we have an incredibly wonderful, I would say award-winning style dog beach there, where people enjoy it the way through manicure and so forth, and I really want us to maintain control over that. That's not something that we would want to pass on to the state government, to this authority, which when we've already gave ourselves an incredible education and spent a lot of money learning how to do it ourselves. So I think that template of us managing the waterway that's completely within our own Shire, that's completely within our own control, to maintain as much control over it as we can because we do a good job.

00:15:00 Councillor Wegener: It's just like we did with the sand pumping at the River Mouth. We've got the dog beach, so I support that. Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: Councillor Kintel? Councillor Finzel: Yeah, thank you. I just also have a question around the dredging. When we talk about safe haven and then disaster management, can the staff perhaps answer a question around how dredging at the River Mouth will affect, is that our rule? Mayor Wilkie: It's probably beyond the scope of this amendment that's before us at the moment. Councillor Finzel: Right. My apologies. I got ahead of myself. Thank you, Mr Chair. Mayor Wilkie: That's all right. Did you wish to speak to the amendment, Councillor Finzel? No, Mr Chair. Thank you. All right. Councillor Stockwell, do you wish to close unless any other councillors wish to speak to the amendment? No. I'll put the amendment. Those in favour? Councillor Wilson? Councillor Wegener? Councillor Stockwell? Councillor Finzel? Councillor Wilkie? Those against? Councillor Phillips? Councillor Lorentson?

00:16:00 The amendment becomes part of the substantive motion. Anybody else wish to speak to the motion? Councillor Lorentson? Councillor Lorentson: I'll speak to it. Firstly, thank you for the work that has gone in preparing this submission. It's comprehensive. Thoughtful. And clearly seeks to improve the proposed framework. I support many of the issues raised, particularly around governance clarity, the risk of duplication, the need for genuine consultation, and the importance of protecting the unique environment and community values of the Noosa River. However, after careful consideration, I am unable to support the submission in its current form due to a number of key differences in approach. The primary issue for me is the position on board representation. And I refer to the submission, I think it's B2 and B3, the recommendation inclusion of

00:17:00 a statutory local government representative on the SCWA board, nominated local government rep, and B3, which requires council endorsement, not only consultation for the 10-year strategy plan. So the submission seeks a formal local government representative on the board of the authority. While I understand the intent behind this, to ensure local knowledge and alignment, it's my personal belief that I don't believe a designated council seat is the most appropriate way to achieve that outcome. This is a significant reform, and in my view, it requires a governance model grounded first and foremost in lived-on-order integration. The long-term management of the Noosa River and connected waterways should be shaped, in my opinion, by those who interact with it every day. Recreational users, commercial operators, boating and paddling communities, environmental

00:18:00 stakeholders, and those working in tourism. These groups bring practical, place-based knowledge that can't be replicated through institutional representation alone. Ensuring that this breadth of experience is reflected at the board level, and that it is critical to building trust, making balanced decisions, and delivering outcomes that generally reflect how the river is used. Council has a very important role to play, and I strongly support that role. Council's responsibility in land use planning, foreshore management, environmental protection, and community advocacy are essential, and should continue to guide how we engage with the authority. However, I believe it's equally important that we remain clear about staying within that role. Introducing a formal council position on the board, in my opinion, risks blurring governance boundaries, and may unintentionally contribute to the very concerns raised in the submission

00:19:00 around overlapping responsibilities and role clarity. There is also a broader consideration around independence and community confidence. For a body like this to succeed, again, in my opinion, it needs to be seen as balanced, inclusive, and representative of all users. Not weighted again towards any single institutional perspective. Prioritising lived experience and equitable representation of all river users at the board level helps to achieve that. We have seen here in Noosa how quickly community confidence can be impacted when people feel decisions are being made without sufficient local understanding or involvement. Concerns raised in relation to marine park legislation, or conservation legislation, demonstrated how important it is that communities feel informed, heard, and genuinely included in decisions that affect access to and use of the river.

00:20:00 That experience underscores the importance of getting governance settings right from the outset, and avoiding models that may be perceived as top-down or institutionally driven. I've also concerns regarding the inclusion and reliance on the Coastal Hazard Adaptation Plan. As a central alignment requirement for the authority and identified in the submission. Again, while I acknowledge the intent to ensure coordination between water-based and land-based planning, the CHAP has been a complex and, at times, controversial process within our community. There remains a level of concern and sensitivity around how it's interpreted and applied. Given this, I don't believe it should also be positioned as a primary or secondary or determinative framework for the authority at this stage. Embedding CHAP too strongly within governance structure risks reintroducing community concern and may limit the authority's ability to consider a broader range of perspectives

00:21:00 and emerging information. Local governments absolutely have a responsibility for coastal hazard adaptation, land use planning, stormwater management, and foreshore areas. An alignment between these functions and waterway management is important. However, that alignment should be achieved through collaboration and information sharing, not through rigid or prescriptive requirements that may constrain decision making or elevate one framework above others that are still evolving or contested. More broadly, this proposal represents a major shift in how our waterways are managed. Because of that, it's essential that the foundations are built on strong community representation, equitable consideration, and a strong community engagement. These are governance models that reflects lived experience alongside technical expertise. Lastly, and most importantly, the community has not had time to review this submission.

00:22:00 We only received it late last night. They haven't had the opportunity to provide any feedback and for the reasons that I've just mentioned I can't ratify it unless I understand the community's position on this and whether or not the submission that we're putting forward is genuinely supported by those who live, work and recreate on the river. Again, I remain supportive of many, many elements of the submission and the intent to strengthen the bill. However, I believe these issues, particularly board composition, the approach to CHAP and ensuring community support are fundamental and for that reason I am unable to support the submission as it currently stands. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you, Councillor Lorentson. Would any other councillors like to speak to the minute? Councillor Stockwell. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah, I will. I mentioned the similarities of the Amalgamated area where regional control was placed

00:23:00 and where the interests of Noosa were seen to be threatened. And the legislative fix for that at the time was the iconic Queensland Places Act where the state government recognised the iconic values of Noosa, which this bill could do, the iconic values of the Noosa River system. And then the legislation then, natural and environmental and in this case it will be recreational values of the Noosa River, and established an independent development assessment panel to evaluate the impacts of development applications in iconic locations, ensuring appropriate development aligns with local planning regimes. I think that this bill, to be acceptable to me and to our community, a similar mechanism would need to be put in place, that we have confidence that the decisions of the authority is recognising the planning, the community values,

00:24:00 the iconic natural environment recreational values and that there is Noosa-centric assessment processes of people with the appropriate qualifications feeding into the process. That may be simple in this case. It may be giving Council the right to endorse and approve things like the waterway management plans. But I think there needs to be a trigger in the bill that recognises the values of the Noosa River systems. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you, Councillor Stockwell. Councillor Finzel. Councillor Finzel: Yeah. Look, I think this has been a rush to do. I met last night quickly with some people from my neighbourhood that had grave concerns around the timeframe to deliver their own voice. So people are moving fast in the space. I think the most important thing here for Noosa Council, being the closest to our people and understanding our values, our identity, our connection to place, that we are best placed to put a submission in. It may not be exactly what we want,

00:25:00 but I do believe, given the timeframe, it's prudent to submit something and hopefully that we can smooth that out along the way. I think, you know, as a Noosa councillor, I think our most important job is engage our people, understand all the people that use our waterways, our ocean, our rivers. You know, it's really important that we do stand tall and put our voice forward that protects our identity and who we are through placemaking, through all the strategies and the plans that we have in place. So I'm confident today that putting forward this attached submission will give us a voice at the table. It may not be exactly what we would have liked to have submitted if we'd had more time, but I feel that we've got to put something up and it gives us opportunity to at least put our voices and represent our people. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you, Councillor Finzel. Councillor Wegener: Councillor Williams. You can go ahead and do it. Thank you, Councillor Williams. Yeah, the process that the State has put this out to us

00:26:00 is a very long and difficult bill. I would like to hugely thank Kim Willink and the staff for working tirelessly to put this submission together. It's a very long, detailed submission. Admittedly, it came last night. It was a struggle for me to read it last night. Definitely helped me go to sleep. It is important. And we did run through the points that Brian did as you just did in the mayoral minute and in the briefing that we had. So the headlines are there. Yeah, I thoroughly support this. Thank you very much. Councillor Phillips: Councillor Phillips. I have a question. It'll be to Director Rawlings. Oh, thank you. Can we just recap that question? Councillor Phillips. Oh, no. Sorry. Recap a question from the quick workshop we had on it. There was a question around whether or not...

00:27:00 Well, I think there was... Can you refresh my memory? There was something around it's already happening and there was a timeframe to get the bill or the submission in. What did you mean by it's already happening? Director Rawlings: So, yeah, the bill was announced Friday a week ago and what I meant by that is that the process is underway. There's a bill out, which is draft legislation. So, you know, there's a serious proposition by this government that this is happening. There's also an allocation of $33.6 million in the state budget towards the establishment of this authority and the minister, relevant minister, has also advised that the authority will be established by the 1st of July. So if I made a statement to say this is happening,

00:28:00 it's in that context. This authority is going to be established. So we've been given an opportunity, a very short opportunity, 10 days, to understand the bill and the explanatory material. The public briefing of the bill only happened yesterday. So, you know, between public briefing and explanation of the bill, there's 48 hours to put in a submission. So I fully acknowledge that this is rushed. This is not by our making. I would also just like to acknowledge that we did have a discussion with Councillors last week where we prepared a briefing note and, you know, I've sent three subsequent emails keeping you up to date with all the relevant documentation that's been emerging. So we've done everything we can possibly do to keep you informed and give you the information that we have to inform this submission.

00:29:00 Councillor Phillips: Thank you. It might be a question then to the CEO because I had... I'm just trying to put the pieces together because the last note that I had was that we would be in a position why we wouldn't support the bill. There was sort of a council... Why would Council not support what we had in front of us? I'm just concerned now, today, we're not supporting it. Just trying to put my timeline together, what's happened between then. It's a bit hard to put you on the spot. I thought we had time between. I thought the mayoral minute was going to come at the end of today as well. So I'm sorry to put you on the spot. Yep. I had wanted to put my questions more appropriately. But it took me off guard with the mayoral minute straight up. Mayor Wilkie: Are you certain of the question? Director Rawlings: Could I answer that? Mayor Wilkie: Yes. Sure. Director Rawlings: I'll answer it. So the submission as it's currently attached to the mayoral minute

00:30:00 doesn't not support the bill. The submission doesn't say we don't support the bill. The submission says there are a raft of issues. It's structured in two parts. There are a raft of concern issues around clarity that we think need to occur. And then there's a raft of recommendations that we have put forward to seek to improve the clarity of the bill and the understanding in the areas of uncertainty. The idea of not supporting the bill has been an amendment from a councillor today, which has been. So just to be clear, to fill in the gaps. Thank you. The draft submission does not not support the bill. It just raises a range of issues. Double negatives there. Councillor Phillips: Sorry. That's right. That does answer. That answers my question. Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: And the councillors wish to speak to the motion. Councillor Wilson. Councillor Wilson: I'll just speak briefly as a lot of the comments have already been made around the room.

00:31:00 It was a short timeframe to read the submission. I do appreciate all the work that's gone into that submission. And largely supportive of the comments made in it. But I will echo Councillor Lorentson on a couple of the things about the, I'm not sure about the representation on the board or the endorsement of the strategy. But I'm happy for those still to be put forward to be considered by the government. So I will support this resolution. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you, Councillor Collins, for your comments on the mayoral minutes and the submission. I also would like to thank the staff for moving very quickly in a limited timeframe to produce a 25 page, very comprehensive submission on all the, raises a whole lot of questions about a bill which is drafted very broadly and raises a lot more questions and provides answers. So I think the submission will be considered by the state government.

00:32:00 They have all the authority to approve or not approve elements of it. The biggest, the most glaring omission in the bill from my perspective is there is no reference to there being any local representation from any Noosa representative, be they in the community or in local government or the commercial sector or environmental scientists. It is not geographically based at all. And I think the submission seeks to rectify that. I also see part C as not Council's opposition to the bill. It's basically saying what we're doing. We do not support the bill in its current form because there are concerns. We want more information and we would like the final version of the bill to have more clarity. So we're not supporting the bill in its current form because it is quite vague. It doesn't mean we do not accept the real politic that is going to happen. And we want to work with the state government

00:33:00 and get the best outcome for this community if we possibly can. Thank you, Councillors. I put the motion. Those in favour? Councillor Wilson, Wegener, Stockwell, Finzel and Wilkie. Those against? Councillor Phillips, Councillor Lorentson. The minute is carried. We have no notified motions. That brings us to consideration of committee reports. First, 11.1.1, Audit and Risk Committee Recommendations from the meeting on the 20th of February. 11.1, CEO Update. 11.2, Capital Audits Program Status Update. 11.3, Final Management Report, Queensland Audit Office. 11.4, Audit and Risk Committee Briefing Paper, Queensland Audit Office. 11.5, External Audit Plan, Queensland Audit Office. 11.1.6, Assessment of Council's Regulatory Practices. 11.1.7, Risk Management and Business Continuity Plans Update. 11.1.8, Internal Audit Update. 11.1.9, Annual Review, ARCO Charter

11.1 AUDIT & RISK COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS DATED 20 FEBRUARY 2026 ¶

▶ 00:33:28

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

11.1.15 AUDIT & RISK COMMITTEE RECOMENDATIONS ENBLOC ¶

▶ 00:33:41

00:34:00 and Annual Review, Internal Audit Policy. 11.1.10, ICT Cyber and Security Risk Update. 11.1.11, Review of Non-Compliant Audit Samples of Suppliers. 11.1.12, Project Update F-SHORE Implementation. 11.1.13, Asset Valuation and the Impact of AASB 2002-10 on the Valuation of Land. 11.1.14, Financial Services Workforce Planning and Financial Management Assurance Framework Development. 11.1.15, Audit and Risk Committee Recommendations on Block. May I have a mover and a seconder for the Audit and Risk. Thank you. Thank you for the Audit and Risk Committee Member, Councillor Wilson. May I have a seconder, fellow Audit and Risk Committee Member, Councillor Wegener. Any discussion? All in favour? That's carried unanimously. Apprentices 2, 11.2, Planning and Environment Committee Recommendations,

00:35:00 dated 10th March. 11.2.1, Noosa Plan 2020, Section 18, Amendment Process for 94 and 170 Holts Road, Cooroy. 11.2.2, Noosa Plan 2020, Amendment Number 3, Minor Amendment. 11.2.3, Request for Delegation under Section 42 of the Transport Infrastructure Act 1994, associated with Operational Works 250072, Development Application for Operational Works, Vehicle Crossover, Road Works, Drainage Works, Earthworks, Vegetation Clearing and Waterway Barrier Works at 36 Roses Road, Federal. 11.2.4, Planning Applications Decided by Delegated Authority, January 2026. 11.2.5, Planning and Environment Committee Recommendations on Block. May I have a mover and a seconder for the Planning and Environment Committee Recommendations. Happy to leave. 3. Councillor LORENSON, seconded by Councillor Wegener. All in favour? That's carried unanimously.

11.2.5 PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE RECOMENDATIONS ENBLOC ¶

▶ 00:35:12

00:36:00 Leans us to 11.3 Services and Organisation Committee recommendations dated 10th of March 2026. 11.3.1 Administrative Action Complaints Management Policy and Procedure. 11.3.2 Review of Sitting Fees Audit and Risk Committee. 11.3.3 which was the Various Groups and Boards of External Groups mid-term review is referred to the General Committee. 11.3.4 is the Noosa Holiday Parks Update Report to 31st of December 2025. 11.3.5 was a Confidential Report the proposed process for Council to explore future options for operating the landfill and associated functions at the waste facility. 11.3.6 is the Services and Organisation Committee recommendations on block. I have a mover and a seconder for Services and Organisation Committee recommendations. Happy to move Mr Chair. That's the SNO Chair Councillor FINZEL. Seconded by SNO Committee Member Councillor WILSON.

11.3.6 SERVICES & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS ENBLOC ¶

▶ 00:36:19

00:37:00 All in favour? That's carried unanimously. It brings us to the General Committee recommendations which is the 11.4.1 is Update to Councillor Representation on Various Groups, Boards and External Groups mid-term review. Referred from the Services and Organisation Committee meeting 10th of March 2026. 11.4. I believe we can draw that item out. Well this is the um this is the external committees not the meeting structure. Am I wrong? Yes. Meeting structure. I'm wrong. That's all right. I'll just draw my wrongs. I had to think carefully about it myself. I had to think carefully about it myself. 11.4.2 the Prision Beach Active Street Progress

11.4 GENERAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS DATED 16 MARCH 2026 ¶

▶ 00:37:26· Carried 7-0 · 1 division from council's minutes

00:38:00 Update next steps was deferred to the ordinary meeting today. We'll deal with this at item 12.2 on the agenda. 11.4.3 is the review of Noosa Council meeting structure and we will discuss this one today. So we're going to pull this one out because there is a an alternation. There was some legal advice we were awaiting. So we'll call Yancey Wolfe to the table. Yep. Morning councillors. Morning. Speaker 2: So item D was amended to provide the updated um schedule including May and June and I think then there was another amendment brought. Councillor Wegener: Brought to you as well Peter. Forward. Yeah. Speaker 2: So legal legal advice has been sought regarding whether the withdrawn amendment was supported or permitted. So legal advice has been received confirming that the proposed amendment that was withdrawn at the last meeting is permitted under the relevant legislation and counts the

11.4.3 REVIEW OF NOOSA COUNCIL MEETING STRUCTURE ¶

▶ 00:38:10

00:39:00 standing orders. As a matter of good governance minor amendments to the standing orders noting the rotational arrangement for the role of chairperson will be considered as part of a future review of the standing orders. However regardless of any such future updates council can proceed with a proposed amendment today. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: Well we'll give them a motion up first. Would someone care to move this motion? Councillor Stockwell? Yeah I'll do that. And a seconder? Second. Seconded by Councillor Phillips. Councillor Stockwell would you like to speak to the motion? No. Okay anybody Councillor Finzel would you like to move an amendment? Councillor Finzel: I'd like to move an amendment and add item C based on the um feedback from the legal team. Mayor Wilkie: It'll have to be um.

00:40:00 Councillor Finzel: Amend item C. Amend item C to read. Appoint all councillors as committee members and appoint councillors on a full monthly rate. And be sure to have a rotating schedule on agreement with Councillor Stockwell retaining the chair for the first period on the schedule commencing from 1st of May 2026. Mayor Wilkie: May we have a seconder for that please? I think you're second. Seconder Lawrence. Councillor Lorentson and Councillor Finzel. I wish to speak to it. Councillor Finzel: Um I think we covered it all the other day but um just briefly I think this creates a really good opportunity for diversity in the chair role. Um give people opportunity to gain experience. Um I think it's a really good opportunity um as I've said for that chair to be able to gain experience and um I think just bring diversity to the table in the role. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you Councillor Finzel. Councillor Wilson. Question please. Councillor Wilson: Can I just um confirm what it is that we're amending? What was the sub-funtive?

00:41:00 Uh what are we actually amending? What was the original? The original? I'll just give that for you. Speaker 3: Yeah. Councillor Wilson: That's not what we voted on the other day. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah. Councillor Finzel: Because it was withdrawn. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah. This is. That's correct. It would have been the staff recommendation in C. Councillor Finzel: Oh right. Right. Okay then that is yeah. Mayor Wilkie: Okay because C is actually reflects the amendment doesn't it? Yeah. Yeah. Well um there's there's two ways we can go about this. We can rescind the amendment and note that item C already contains your amendment and move that at that move decision. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yes but I don't think I mean I don't think that would be appropriate because what has been presented is not a reflection of the recommendation of the committee. I think we need to rectify the record.

00:42:00 Mayor Wilkie: So um so let the um both laps. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yes. Mayor Wilkie: Now this is this is the the motion that we've just passed. Councillor Wilson: That was the motion from Monday and now now there's the amendment to C in it from the Councillor Finzel: original one so this is back to the alternate motion with the original C and the update of WD there. Mayor Wilkie: Right yeah this is this is what we started with yeah that's correct so this is right. Councillor Wilson: No it's just been it's been it's been changed now. Mayor Wilkie: It's just been amended. Councillor Finzel: Would you like to do a new mover and seconder are we okay to keep that and then. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah sorry. Mayor Wilkie: Councillor Stockwell. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Um I've just looked at the the agenda and C is printed as that so.

00:43:00 So that's correct. That's what should have been moved yeah yes. Councillor Lorentson: Can we just vote vote on it that it was just a technical mistake the wrong thing was put on the Mayor Wilkie: Happy to accept this is the motion yes yeah and Councillor Finzel is Councillor Finzel's amendment still relevant yes yes all right so we can move on to Councillor Finzel's amendment yes yeah can we bring that up. Yeah that's fine that's okay thank you I'm happy to speak in support and we Councillor Lorentson: had a great conversation at the general meeting about this the only thing that wasn't raised and I want to raise today is the rotating chair sorry the position of chair has real influence including a casting vote so to me having a rotating

00:44:00 councillor chair is spreading that responsibility around and just keeps things fair and also reminds us that councillors were all actually equal at the table so I think it's good governance and builds trust in our decision making so totally supportive of this. Mayor Wilkie: Any further discussion on the amendment Councillor Wilson. Councillor Wilson. Councillor Wilson: Councillor Wilson. Speaking to it but I just want to question the four monthly rotating schedule whether we should be fixing that four months because if it is an opt-in opt-out then the number of councils that we're dividing the number of months by might change so do we always want it to be fixed as four monthly or is it just that we have a an agreed schedule that we prepare after this meeting based on who want to be included.

00:45:00 Councillor Finzel: Thank you. I think from memory the other day we talked about this and the CEO from memory asked for like the schedule to at least put the framework there and I think it's probably a question then to the CEO. I thought it was then, is this correct, through the changes to the standing orders we will talk down to this and address the concerns you raised. Is that the right process? Speaker 1: I think the concept is to agree the idea I think of the four month thing in terms of who does which month. That's something we can consider at either a workshop or bring it back to a council. We'll work through that in terms of when we do the standing orders and reflect this in the standing orders. It's not something we will put in the standing orders in terms of who does what, who gets which four month period.

00:46:00 But I think it's just something we have to agree and then bring it back to the council to ratify it. But it's not something we can do today I don't believe. I have a question. Councillor Wilson: Yeah, my concern is just that we're walking in four months which might not actually be practical. Whether we need that specified in the motion or whether we just have an agreed rotating schedule. Speaker 1: Okay. Mayor Wilkie: Council please go. Councillor Finzel: Well, I think we did discuss that at some depth at the previous meeting. However, if you feel that you want to bring that to further debate to the table to change it, I think the full monthly from my memory was around just trying to at the moment get equity and then we discussed in length the opt on, opt off and I think we came to the conclusion we'd do it through further workshops or standing orders.

00:47:00 Okay. Thank you. And I'm happy to, if you want to put forward an idea to reword that more effectively. Councillor Lorentson: A question through the chair. So the wording as it stands, which is a four monthly rotating schedule on agreement, does the agreement actually capture that a could be opt in, opt out, and that will determine what the rotating schedule, monthly rotating schedule will look like? I'm just wondering, you know, to me that reads okay. Mayor Wilkie: I think that was the important thing. But the council's could approve this. They become part of the substantive motion and then test alternative wording. Councillor Finzel: Yeah. Mayor Wilkie: Yeah. Councillor Finzel: Yeah. Mayor Wilkie: Any other council wish to speak to this amendment? Yeah. Councillor Wilson: I'll speak to it so that I can explain what I'm talking about. So I think this has been based on 24 months remaining, six councillors, four months each.

00:48:00 But if one councillor was to opt off, that would actually give one councillor a second rotation. And so then there wouldn't be equity. Someone would get eight months. So that's why I prefer it to just be an agreed schedule. Once we know how many councillors will opt in, and then we can divide the number of months by the number of councillors who want to participate. Mayor Wilkie: Understood. So just as a procedural thing. Rather than lose the amendment, we can pass this, and then we can test a change of wording for another amendment. Councillor Wilson: Okay. Mayor Wilkie: Any other councillors wish to speak to the amendment? Councillor Wiegand. Speaker 3: Yeah. Well, Councillor Will said no.

00:49:00 I'm sorry. I don't know if we'll be able to sign the dotted line or not right now. Councillor Wegener: I think a lot of us might be in that boat. So I'm going to stay with this. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor Stockwell. The specification of the time period was to try and address the concern that if it was monthly rotating, it would be too frequent. The six monthly rotating, it wouldn't give everyone the opportunity. My reading of one agreement is if we had to, there's nothing going to be here saying that if you agree to a lesser or greater amount, that would be precluded. As soon as we adopt the schedule itself, that supersedes this motion. Mayor Wilkie: Any other councillors wish to speak to the amendment? Any questions? Councillor Finzel, would you wish to close? Councillor Wilson: No, thank you. Thank you, Mr Chair. Mayor Wilkie: We'll put the amendment. Those in favour? Councillor Phillips, Wegener, Lorentson, Stockwell, Finzel, Wilkie.

00:50:00 Those against? Councillor Wilson. The amendment's carried. Do you wish to try a different amendment? Councillor Wilson. Bearing in mind we are reviewing the meeting structure in 12 months. Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Wilson: I move the amendment to item C please. Okay. I just get the new ones. So that the time is right. Is that a no? No? Okay.

00:51:00 Councillor Wilson: So, I would take out a full monthly and book degree, sorry, on appoint all councillors as committee members and appoint councillors on an agreed rotating schedule. And then you can take out. On an agreed rotating schedule? Yes. And that's it. Oh, there's two ones in there, sorry. Councillor Finzel: Oh, okay. Speaker 5: And?

00:52:00 And agreed. Yep. Mayor Wilkie: Someone like to second that for the purpose of debate? Councillor Stockwell? Karen, no, Councillor Stockwell, you moved the original motion. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Oh, I seconded it. I won't do that again. You can't do that. No, I'm sorry, I'm sorry. Councillor Finzel: I can't either. Mayor Wilkie: Yes, you can, why not? I'm getting excited. I'm sorry. Councillor Taylor? Yeah, you can. I'm sorry. Councillor Phillips: I'm sorry. I'd be there anyway. Councillor Lorentson: I've already outlined the reasons for this. Councillor Wilson: I don't think it's necessary to specify a monthly period, and I think that might actually cause trouble in the future that either one or two councillors get two rotations or the mathematics don't quite work out and we can't actually fulfil that. Somebody might just get three months at the end or something. So, I think it's just better that we agree it once we know how many councillors want to opt in, and then we determine mathematically how it can work.

00:53:00 Mayor Wilkie: Councillor Finzel? Councillor Finzel: Yeah. I see your mathematical perspective. I think we came from that the other day to try and, you know, address some of the issues that couldn't be addressed at the table to get the refinement, and that one is going to be done, I understood, through the alternative, the workshop. Noting also the four-monthly rotation through the discussion the other day was around the fact that we are changing our meeting schedule, and that I think we did the four-month thing to find that we did have the deputy mayor still in the chair, so that we went through that, you know, bit of just readjustment to the new meeting standing orders that we had remaining the deputy in that position. So, that we had confidence in moving forward as other glitches or things that might come up as we make that adjustment. So, I think that's where we arrived at the four-monthly. I think it wasn't just a mathematical, it was having that, you know, more confident share.

00:54:00 Councillor Wilson: Point of order, that's not being amended. Pardon? That's not being amended. Mayor Wilkie: What's not being amended? Councillor Wilson: The four-monthly. The Councillor Stockwell retaining the first period. Mayor Wilkie: Yes, that's not in, that's not in contention, that's true. Councillor Finzel: Yeah, I was just giving my voice about how we sort of, from the meeting the other day, arrived at the four-monthly, just giving a broader context. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you, Councillor Finzel. Any other Councillors wish to speak to this amendment? Councillor Lorentson: Councillor Laurinsey. I think either or was actually fine, but I do understand Councillor Swilson's perspective when equity was the intent and the motivation behind the amendment. I think the wording as it sits at the moment actually reflects that intent more clearly, so I'm happy to support. Mayor Wilkie: Anybody else? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I agree, actually. If it starts on the 1st of March, that's fine.

00:55:00 We can work out. So, this makes it flexible. Mayor Wilkie: Any other Councillors? Councillor Phillips: Oof, I don't think you want me to speak. Mayor Wilkie: Okay. Councillor Wilson, you wish to close? Put the amendment. Those in favour? That's unanimous. We'll go back to the substantive motion. To which? Opposite. Nobody has spoken. Anybody wish to speak to the motion? Wish to close? Councillor Stockwell. Put the motion. Those in favour? That's unanimous. Now up to 11.4.4, Financial Performance Report February 2026. 11.4.5, General Committee Recommendations on Block. Can I have a mover and a seconder? Councillor Phillips. Speaker 5: Councillor Phillips.

00:56:00 Mayor Wilkie: Seconded. Councillor Stockwell. All in favour? Just to prove you were here. Speaker 3: Thank you. Mayor Wilkie: We have two reports direct to the ordinary meeting. 12.1, Noosa Heads Lions Park Proposed Easter 2026 Usage for Temporary Car Park. We have Acting Director of Infrastructure Services, Craig Young, here. Craig, could you please come and welcome and give us a summary of the report, please? And Bernadette. And Bernadette. Welcome. Speaker 4: Thank you, Mr Mayor. Councillors, this report is in relation to utilising the Noosa Heads Lions Park for car parking over the four days of the Easter period. As the Councillor is aware, this park has been used for overflow car parking in previous years. And during the current period, the proposal is to use it just for the four days of Easter and then outside of the four days of the Easter period.

11.4.5 GENERAL COMMITTEE RECOMENDATIONS ENBLOC ¶

▶ 00:56:01

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

12.1 Noosa Heads Lions Park Proposed Easter 2026 Usage for Temporary Carpark ¶

▶ 00:56:22· Carried 6-0 · 1 division from council's minutes

00:57:00 So, we are going to look at the other remaining school holidays, actually look at the impacts of having paid parking at the Lions Park versus when the park's not there and the impact to the surrounding roads and streets. If it's approved, the Tewantin Noosa Lions Club will be managing the paid parking component. And as part of the supporting activities, Council officers will be undertaking traffic counts, pop-up surveys. And as part of the supporting activities, Council officers will be undertaking traffic Mayor Wilkie: Thank you, Craig. Any questions? Councillor Phillips: Just a quick question, just to be clear for the community, and so I'm present at the meeting.

00:58:00 Just the traffic and transport monitoring, can we just confirm that's going to be done whilst the lines park are utilising and outside, so then we've got a comparison of the data? Speaker 4: Yes, exactly. Councillor Lorentson: Councillor Lorentson? I'm happy to move the motion. Moved, Councillor Lorentson. Seconded, Councillor Phillips. I support the four-day Easter trial, and I thank Bernadette, Craig, and your team for presenting the report in front of us. I support the four-day Easter trial because it gives us something that we've never had before, real data. Data on congestion, data on parking behaviour, and data on how people actually move through Noosa Heads during one of our busiest weekends of the year. Four days is sensible. It's a slow impact, and it's a great way for us to understand the effects before making any potential future long-term decisions.

00:59:00 Over Christmas, the Overflow area accommodated 5,908 vehicles. That's thousands of families, visitors and locals who are able to access Haston Street, the beach, and our small businesses without circling endlessly for a park. Anyone who was here over Christmas knows how intense it was. Anyone who was here over Christmas knows how intense the pressure was, and how valuable that extra capacity proved to be. Catching a bus. Catching a bus is an excellent alternative to driving, but catching a bus with prams, beach gear, surfboards, elderly parents and people in wheelchairs is hard. It's not always practical, and for many families, especially those with young children, all mobility challenges, having a place to park close to the beach makes a huge difference. It's not always practical, and for many families, especially those with young children, all mobility challenges, having a place to park close to the beach makes a huge difference.

01:00:00 That's why the community benefit component is so important. That's why the community benefit component is so important. We need to be clear about who benefits with this car parking. We need to be clear about who benefits with this car parking. And in this case, it's not a commercial operator. It's not a private company. It's the Tewantin Noosa Lions Club, a not-for-profit group of incredible volunteers who give so much to this community. It's not a commercial operator. There is honestly nothing better than parking at Lions Club Park and being greeted by one of the wonderful Lions volunteers with their big smiles. There is honestly nothing better than parking at Lions Club Park and being greeted by one of the wonderful Lions volunteers with their big smiles. For so many visitors, they are the very first point of contact. For so many visitors, they are the very first point of contact. The first welcome to Nisa moment. The first welcome to Nisa moment. As ambassadors for this beautiful place we call home, they are the best. As ambassadors for this beautiful place we call home, they are the best. The Lions Club has already supported around 40 different local causes and organisations and only this morning I got sent a photo. The Lions are up in Morayfield at the moment.

01:01:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: We're dealing with an appointment of car parking over the Easter holiday, not the performance of the Lions Club. I think it's outside the scope of our matter in front of us. Thank you Councillor Stockwell. Councillor Lorentson: In terms of the Lions Park, I think it's also worth remembering the history of the Lions Park and I'm not sure whether many around this table know how the name actually came to be. Many years ago, Council was halfway through building a toilet block on this site when there was a national shortage of roofing materials that stopped the project. The Tawantin News Alliance Club stepped in. They had a builder who supplied the roofing materials so the project could be completed. The Mayor at the time was I think Bert Wansley and he recognised that contribution by naming the park in their honour and I think that history matters when we potentially start talking about equity and fairness.

01:02:00 Also important to note that Hastings Street Traders Association strongly support the temporary use of Lions Park during peak periods. Again, helps balance the needs of residents, visitors and businesses. It's a low impact and temporary measure that forms part of Council's integrated visitor management and transport strategy. Under the Land Act changes, again also important to note, Council now has full responsibility for these decisions. The temporary use does not alter the reserve. It supports transport and event management during peak periods and it also aligns with long-standing operational practice. Again, trial is not a commitment to a long-term arrangement. It's a long-term commitment to a long-term arrangement. It's simply a chance to gather evidence through traffic monitoring, parking surveys, community engagement and pedestrian management trials.

01:03:00 So that future decisions are informed and not assumed. So thank you again for the report. Four days is a reasonable measured approach to give us the information that we need to make good decisions going forward. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Lorentson. Councillor Phillips: Councillor Phillips. I've got a question please, just around the monitored operational trial. Councillor Phillips. Will this give, or the survey, will that give us an indication of residents versus visitors? Yes. And how will you capture that? Postcode. Postcode. Okay. Further question. So just break it down, how we say that, as the Lions volunteers doing that, collecting that data or how will we capture that so then I can see the end of it? Our team are collecting the data. Speaker 5: Yeah. In person. In person. I've got surveys written. But I've also got QR codes if people want to do the surveys, take them away.

01:04:00 The questions start off. Oh, so sorry. The survey starts off with where, where do you live? So, and what is your, and then I go into what is your purpose here today? Shopping. I've got a list of drop downs to choose from. Beach, etc. I think that's everything regarding who you are. It's quite a lengthy survey, between three and five minutes. I do go into a lot of detail. How many people are you travelling with? How long do you spend, plan to spend here? I do have two slightly different surveys because I'll be doing some at the bus stop and some within the Lions car park. Okay. Does that answer your question? No. Okay. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you, Bernadette. Councillor Lorentson. So, for clarity, Bernadette, the survey and data collection is undertaken by Council officers and not the Tewantin Noosa volunteers.

01:05:00 Speaker 5: That is correct. Thank you. Okay. Mayor Wilkie: Any other Councillors to speak to the motion? Councillor Stockwell. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah, I will. So, Councillors, the issue of car parking on the holidays, the Noosa Head Lions park, had a motion in the 2016 to 2020 Council which said we're phasing it out. We've subsequently got a letter from the Department in 2020 and 2023 identifying that it's an inconsistent use of a recreation reserve and it's a use that, if it was to be approved, required a land management plan. So, well over six years, we haven't done the land management plan because the policy direction on each step has always been the intervention. The last time we wrote to the Minister, who previously had to approve this, we said we were awaiting the results of the consultation on the DMP, and what did those results say?

01:06:00 Those results said 72% of respondents said to maintain and prioritise public open space for recreational use, not car parking, e.g. Noosa Head Lions park, unless there is an overriding community benefit to do so. Councillors, all our transport planning says there's not an overriding community benefit. And when you put that specific question together with the qualitative assessment, what was the summation? The summation of what an overriding community said was that the emphasis is on limiting vehicle access to central areas, promoting the use of electric vehicles and ensuring that open spaces are preserved for recreational use rather than parking. It can't be clearer. We said we're putting off this decision until we've got feedback from the community. We've got feedback from the community which is overwhelming, saying we don't want to do it. So while I understand what the trial might do, why would we go to the extent of allocating resources to do a survey when all the policy direction is, that's the wrong direction?

01:07:00 It's not what this council has resolved over, I'm thinking, since 2019. So to me, this debate has been confused by the concept of community benefit flowing from the great work of the Noosa Head Lions. The decision is not about how we provide welfare and support to our community. The decision is about land use. And my involvement with that goes back way before, I think probably 2008, 2009 when residents of the Noosa Heads Precinct started complaining because Noosa Heads hasn't got sufficient parks, well below the standard for park provision for that locality. Speaker 4: And when do people like to use parks? When they're on holidays. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So for me, we don't need to outdo them.

01:08:00 We don't need to allocate resources. We don't need to do the trial. Because the overwhelming strategic direction over many years is this was to be phased out. We've got the data. We told the department last time we need it. And the community, overwhelming community said, don't use it for car parks. So I can't support it. Mayor Wilkie: Thank you, Councillor Stockwell. Councillors wish to speak to the motion. Councillor Lorentson, do you wish to close? No, thank you. Put the motion to the vote. Those in favour? Councillor Phillips, Wilson, Wegener, Lorentson, Finzel, Wilkie. Those against? Councillor Stockwell. Thank you. Brings us to item 12. Thank you, Bernadette. Thank you, Craig. Thank you, Bernadette. Thanks, Craig. Thank you, Craig. Thank you, Craig. Bridgerton Beach, Active Street, Stage 1, Progress Update. Next steps. Councillors and community, pending further legal advice, I wish to upfront apologise unreservedly to my fellow Councillors, staff and the community for a mistake I have made

12.2 PEREGIAN BEACH ACTIVE STREET - STAGE 1 PROGRESS UPDATE AND NEXT STEPS (Deferred from the General Committee Meeting dated 16 March 2026) ¶

▶ 01:08:46

01:09:00 regarding my conflict of interest declaration in this matter. I take my responsibilities under the Local Government Act seriously and I'm committed to full disclosure. I am aspiring to the highest standards in my role as a Councillor and Mayor. I acknowledge I have misunderstood the conflict of interest regulations as they apply to this project and will provide a revised COI declaration. As I live near the Active Street project site, I declared last year in internal briefings with staff and Councillors that I live in this neighbourhood affected by the works. It is not ordinary Council business. At this stage, the Active Street project was intended to progress on an operational level and not require a Councilor decision. As public consultation continued, it was decided to bring the matter to Council for a decision. The public report released last week included a new recommendation that works now also include traffic calming directly in my street. I was also aware that my mother, who lives nearby, had attended public information sessions

01:10:00 and made a comment during the public session in February. My mother also donated an amount to my campaign above the prescribed threshold amount of $2,000. As this week was the first time the matter was to come to Council for a decision, I believed a prescribed conflict of interest declaration that openly covered the new and all other elements ought to be made. Subsequent legal advice received yesterday from King & Co advises that living nearby or having works in my street is a declarable conflict of interest and does not trigger a prescribed conflict of interest declaration. The King & Co advice is that my mother's campaign donation above the prescribed threshold amount of $2,000 makes the matter a prescribed conflict of interest. They advise this donation from my mother ought to have been declared in internal project briefings last year and would have excluded me from such briefings. Based on this legal advice, I have clearly made a mistake and apologise unreservedly to my colleagues and community for this error.

01:11:00 When I received this advice, I felt sick and I am deeply sorry. I take my responsibility seriously. Though I acted in good faith, I have misunderstood the conflict of interest regulations as they apply to this project. Given this latest advice, I would like to declare a revised prescribed conflict of interest declaration as follows. 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, Bridge and Beach Active Streets Stage 1 Progress Update Next Steps, being that my mother who lives on a street adjoining the project donated an amount above the prescribed amount of $2,000 to my 2024 election campaign. For the record, I also declare that I live near the project site and works are now recommended to also occur in my street. As a result of this prescribed conflict of interest, I will now leave the meeting room while the matter is considered and voted upon.

01:12:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, Councillors, I will take over the Chair in the absence of the Mayor, and I'm going to move straight to a deferral motion. So, I will move that the matter be deferred in accordance with Sections 31 and 3 of Standing Orders until the General Committee meeting of June 9, 2026 to allow for further consideration of relevant matters. Councillor Lorentson: I would just second. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: No need to. Councillor Lorentson: Oh, excuse me. No need to. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I think you did come to. Councillor Lorentson: Oh, I did. Yes, excuse me. Seconder? Yes. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'm just saying no need to discuss the matter. Anyone else wish to discuss it? Put the motion. Those in favour? That's carried unanimously. Nothing but Councilor Wilkie is outside the room, and we can invite him back in. Thank you.

01:13:00 Thank you, Mr. Chair. The President of the Assembly will present his statement. Mr. Chair? Aye. Mr. Chair? Aye. Mr. Chair? Aye. Thank you very much. We are adjourned. Mayor Wilkie: Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Stockwell. Thank you, Councillors. We're up to item 13 in the agenda. Item 13, no confidential session. Item 14, the next ordinary meeting will be at Council Chambers, 9 Pelican Street, Tewantin on 10am, 16th of April, 2026. I declare the meeting closed at 11.15. Thank you, Councillors and staff, Mr. CEO.

15 MEETING CLOSURE ¶

▶ 01:13:59

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