Original source · versioned page text
2014-03-31 General Committee Agenda
Text sections have not been matched to the original PDF pages. Use the original document to check page numbers.
AGENDA
General Committee
Meeting
Monday, 31 March 2014
commencing at 10am
Council Chambers, 9 Pelican Street, Tewantin
Committee: Crs Tony Wellington (Chair), Bob Abbot, Sandy Bolton,
Joe Jurisevic, Frank Pardon, Noel Playford, Frank Wilkie
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalSearchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.
Full text of the other 37 sections
Section 2
GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 31 MARCH 2014
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ITEM SUBJECT PAGE
ATTENDANCE & APOLOGIES 3
PRESENTATIONS 3
ITEMS REFERRED FROM INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE 3
ITEMS REFERRED FROM PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE 3
REPORTS TO GENERAL COMMITTEE 4
1. COMMUNITY GRANTS POLICY AND PROPOSED GRANTS FRAMEWORK –
FURTHER REPORT 4
2. PROPOSED ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURE FOR NOOSA SHIRE
COUNCIL 14
3. NOOSA BIOSPHERE RESERVE – REVIEW OF MANAGEMENT MODEL 28
CLOSED SESSION 39
4. CLOSED SESSION ITEM: MULTISPAN –
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COURT APPEAL NO. 4341 OF 2013 39
Page 2 of 42
Section 3
GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING REPORT 31 MARCH 2014
ATTENDANCE & APOLOGIES
PRESENTATIONS
10am Public Transport in Noosa
Andrew McGill, Senior Service Planner (presenter);
Adam Noller, Senior Infrastructure Planner; Sophie McGuirk, Stakeholder Manager
The presentation will cover the role of Translink, fast facts about Noosa Public
Transport and Translink Programs with the opportunity for questions.
ITEMS REFERRED FROM INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES COMMITTEE
1 COMMUNITY GRANTS POLICY AND PROPOSED GRANTS FRAMEWORK
(Previously distributed in Infrastructure & Services Committee Agenda, Page 4)
Reason for referral – Request for a Further Report with additional information, updated
attachments and amended recommendation (including the repeal of the existing Sunshine
Coast Council Policy).
(Further report provided at Item 1, Page 4)
ITEMS REFERRED FROM PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE
2 KIN KIN QUARRY BACKGROUND
(Previously distributed in Planning & Organisation Committee Agenda, Page 15)
Reason for Referral – Cr Wellington proposes an amended motion which due to the
significance of the issue, he would like considered by all Councillors.
4 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL FOR MATERIAL
CHANGE OF USE FOR A MIXED USE COMMUNITY TITLE DEVELOPMENT AT EENIE
CREEK RD, 99 & 191 HOLLETT RD NOOSAVILLE AND 106, 108-142 TIDSWELL RD
WEYBA DOWNS
(Previously distributed in Planning & Organisation Committee Agenda, Page 81)
Reason for Referral – Significance of issue
11 EXPRESSION OF INTEREST FOR LEASE AT 33 RINGTAIL CREEK ROAD, RINGTAIL
CREEK
(Previously distributed in Planning & Organisation Committee Agenda, Page 199)
Reason for Referral – Cr Pardon disagrees with recommendation
Page 3 of 42
Section 4
GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING REPORT 31 MARCH 2014
REPORTS TO GENERAL COMMITTEE
1. COMMUNITY GRANTS POLICY AND PROPOSED GRANTS FRAMEWORK – FURTHER
REPORT
Author Sport and Community Development Coordinator, Alison Hamblin
Community and Development
Manager Community Services, Charlie Eames
Community and Development
Index ECM/ Project/ Grants
Attachments 1. Amended Community Grants Policy
2. Amended Community Grants Framework and Criteria
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Not applicable.
RECOMMENDATION
That Council note the report by the Sport and Community Development Coordinator and the
Manager of Community Services to the Infrastructure and Services Committee Meeting dated 25
March 2014 and the further report to the General Committee Meeting dated 31 March 2014 and:
A. Repeal the Community Grants Policy that transferred to the Noosa Council from the
Sunshine Coast Regional Council under the Local Government (De-amalgamation
Implementation) Regulation;
B. Adopt the amended Community Grants Policy (Attachment 1);
C. Adopt the proposed amended grants framework and criteria (Attachment 2); and
D. Delegate to the CEO the development of operational requirements for the application and
distribution of community grants to ensure compliance with the adopted Policy and relevant
legislative requirements.
REPORT
Under the provisions of the Local Government (De-amalgamation Implementation) Regulation
2013 and De-amalgamation Transfer Methodology, the Community Grants Policy adopted by the
Sunshine Coast Regional Council (SCRC) in 2013 was transferred to Noosa Council.
A review has been undertaken by staff to ensure the policy reflects the operational needs and
resources of the new Noosa Council. Accordingly, the attached Community Grants Policy is
presented for Council consideration.
Following discussions at the Infrastructure and Services Committee Meeting dated 25 March
2014, changes were requested to the proposed Community Grants Policy to reflect the current
Office and Liquor and Gaming Regulation terminology used.
Page 4 of 42
Section 5
GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING REPORT 31 MARCH 2014
Changes to Policy
Changes have been made to Page 8 of the Community Grants Policy that was presented to the
Infrastructure and Services Committee under the section ‘Who cannot apply.”
Organisations with full liquor licences and/or organisations with supporters clubs with full liquor
licences has now been replaced with – “Organisations with a licenced supporters/associated club
who commercially trade seven days a week”.
Refinement of the definitions supporting the Community Grants Policy has also been undertaken
to remove anomalies.
Changes to Grants Framework & Criteria
After consideration of feedback received at the Infrastructure and Services Committee and
subsequent discussions with the Mayor, changes have been made to the framework & criteria for
Community Partnerships funding category including:
The title Community Programs has been amended to Operational Expenses to better
reflect the intent of this type of funding;
Ineligible item “salaries & wages” removed with wording amended to provide more flexibility
around operational costs for activities that cannot reasonably be undertaken by volunteers;
and
Projects funding – wording amended to include programs & initiatives and allow flexibility
for items that Council may wish to fund for more than one-year.
Page 5 of 42
Section 6
GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING REPORT 31 MARCH 2014
ATTACHMENT 1
Council Policy
COMMUNITY GRANTS
Corporate Plan Reference:
Endorsed by Council: 3rd April 2014
Policy Author: Alison Hamblin
Coordinator Sport and Community Development
POLICY BACKGROUND
This policy is to be read in conjunction with any supporting guidelines for specific funding
programs.
This policy applies to the Community Grants Program.
This policy does not apply to sponsorship, donations, advertising, naming rights and service level
agreements.
The outcomes of this policy include:
Providing community organisations and individuals* with financial support to meet identified
community needs;
Building community skills and resilience;
Developing and maintaining sustainable community infrastructure;
Providing opportunities for community organisations to leverage Council’s financial
assistance to obtain funding from other sources; and
Contributing to the environmental values of Noosa Shire.
*Individuals may be funded under the Regional Arts Development Fund (RADF) and those with
covenants under the Volunteer Conservation Agreements (VCA) only.
COUNCIL POLICY
The purpose of this policy is to guide the administration of Council’s Community Grants Program
so that the grants:
Help achieve Council’s strategic priorities; and
Align with the intent of the Local Government Act 2009 and the Local Government Regulation
2012, which state that (community) grants will be used for a purpose that is in the public
interest.
Who can apply
Not for profit incorporated community organisations can apply if they meet the following criteria:
The project or program will benefit residents of the Noosa community
The application meets the specific eligibility criteria of the funding program as set out in the
supporting grant guidelines
Page 6 of 42
Section 7
GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING REPORT 31 MARCH 2014
The organisation:
- services the Noosa community;
- has appropriate insurances and adheres to sound Workplace Health and Safety
practices;
- complies with all requirements of the Office of Fair Trading as at the closing date for the
grant program; and
- has no debt to Council, or has entered into scheduled payment arrangements with
Council which are being adhered to, and/or has met acquittal conditions for previous
Council grants.
If a community organisation is not incorporated, the organisation is still able to apply for a grant
provided that the application is auspiced and administered by an incorporated not for profit
community organisation who are able to accept legal and financial responsibility for the project or
program.
Individuals can apply under Regional Arts Development Fund (RADF) and those with covenants
under the Volunteer Conservation Agreements (VCA) only.
Who cannot apply
Government agencies or departments of local, state or federal government;
Educational, political, religious organisations or primary health care providers, where the
application is for the organisation’s core business;
Businesses; and
Organisations with a licenced supporters/associated club who commercially trade seven days
a week.
Eligible Projects or Programs
To be eligible to apply for funding, community grant applications must adhere to the terms and
conditions set out in the supporting grant guidelines for the specific funding program.
Ineligible Projects or Programs
Ineligible projects or programs include, but are not restricted to:
Events, programs, facilities or services run for commercial profit or funded under the Tourism
Levy
Activities that have already commenced prior to the grant application being submitted
Payment of debt
Other eligibility restrictions may apply to specific grants. These are set out in the grant guidelines
of the specific funding program.
ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
Council will promote the availability of its grants programs widely and in such a way as to
promote public confidence in the process.
Applications must be submitted by the closing date and time. Applications received after the
closing date and time will not be accepted.
Applications must be submitted on the current grant application form made available by Noosa
Council.
Page 7 of 42
Section 8
GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING REPORT 31 MARCH 2014
In assessing the grants, Council will:
Ensure public monies are allocated in a fair and equitable way;
Ensure best possible value for money;
Check each application against eligibility criteria and particular assessment criteria, as set out
in the grant guidelines; and
Seek recommendations from an expert panel which can comprise Council officers or
community representatives.
All community grants funding must be acquitted. Timeframes and acquittal requirements are
outlined in the supporting grant guidelines for the specific funding program.
The number and types of grants approved will depend on the demand for funding, available
program budget and corporate priorities. In some instances, part funding may be offered.
Funding priorities for individual grant programs will be reviewed to ensure relevance to achieving
Council objectives.
Council determines the total allocation of funds to the community grants program through its
annual budgetary processes. Council officers are available to provide advice to community
organisations to help develop Council grant applications. They will also assist organisations to
identify additional and alternative sources of funding relevant to their project or program.
Council officers are to follow this policy when supporting, facilitating, or delivering grants-related
activities. It is the responsibility of Council officers to ensure that grants and funding provided
from public monies are:
Administered transparently and accountably;
Aligned with Council’s objectives, goals and priorities;
Communicated effectively to the community so that all potential applicants have equal
opportunity to apply for funds; and
Monitored for compliance against set performance measures.
All officers or Councillors are responsible for recognising and declaring any actual or potential
conflicts of interest. This may include, but is not limited to, personal connections with the
applicant. Anyone having a determined conflict of interest should not debate or be involved in any
discussions on any matter relating to that application. Final decisions in the community grants
program are made by Council, CEO or delegate.
RELEVANT LEGISLATION
Queensland Government
Local Government Regulation (2012)
Local Government Act (2009)
Statutory Bodies Financial Arrangements Act (1982)
Page 8 of 42
Section 9
GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING REPORT 31 MARCH 2014
DEFINITIONS
Accountably
“Public entities should be accountable for their performance and be able to give complete and
accurate accounts of how they have used public funds, including funds passed on to others for
particular purposes. They should also have suitable governance and management arrangements
in place to oversee funding arrangements.”1
Acquittal
The process by which a recipient demonstrates in writing to the funding body that it has
expended the funds in accordance with the terms and conditions of the funding agreement on
completion of the activity or project.
The acquittal process, when conducted correctly, demonstrates that these monies were being
used efficiently, effectively or that the community is getting value for money for services.
Auspice
Auspice means that an organisation takes responsibility for ensuring the funds are used as
specified in the grant allocation. An auspicing organisation will be responsible for:
the receipt, banking and administration of all moneys
project monitoring and completion
ensuring the applicant acquits the funding on time
sign off on the acquittal form.
Business
For the purpose of this policy, business is defined as an organisation or enterprising entity
engaged in commercial, industrial or professional activities for profit.
Community
For the purpose of this policy, community refers to a group of people living within the Noosa
Shire local government boundaries.
Conflict of Interest
A conflict of interest is a conflict between:
an officer’s or Councillor’s personal interests (including personal interests arising from their
relationships or club memberships, for example); and
the public interest;
that might lead to a decision that is contrary to the public interest. 2
Donations
A voluntary gift of product, service or cash without expectation of return.
Grant
Funds provided to a recipient through a formal program for a specified purpose, directed at
achieving goals and objectives consistent with Council policy, where the recipient is selected on
merit against a set of criteria. Funding is subject to entering a written agreement with Council
that outlines accountability requirements.
1
Auditor General Report to Parliament No. 7 for 2008, Administration of Grants and Funding to Community Organisations by Local
Government in Queensland, Page 10
2
Local Government Act 2009, s173, p. 154
Page 9 of 42
Section 10
GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING REPORT 31 MARCH 2014
Grant Guidelines
The grant guidelines will include:
Aim of the grant
Criteria
Assessment information
How to apply
How to acquit
Terms and Conditions
Glossary
Individuals
Individuals are classified as a singular person or couple, as distinguished from a group, who
carry on activities for a community purpose and benefit.
Naming Rights
The right to name property, either tangible property or an event, usually granted in exchange for
financial consideration.
Not for profit incorporated community organisation
A community organisation that operates as a legal entity with a primary purpose of providing
services to the community. An organisation is non-profit if it is not carried on for the direct or
indirect profit or gain of its members, both in its operations and winding up.
Public Interest
For the purpose of this policy, public interest refers to ‘the welfare of the general public in
contrast to the interest of an individual or group’.
Service Level Agreements
A formally negotiated agreement between Council and an organisation, individual or community
group that details the nature, quality and scope of a service to be provided. The purpose of a
service level agreement is to formalise the services of a provider and outline the responsibilities
of both Council and the provider in the provision of a defined service.
Sponsorship
Sponsorship is a contractual business arrangement under which a sponsor, for a specified term,
provides a contribution in cash and/ or in kind (“contra”) in return for specified commercial
benefits.
Transparency
Transparency refers to the openness with which the administration of funds and obligations
between entities are discharged.
Version control:
Version Reason/ Trigger Change Endorsed/ Reviewed by Date
(Y/N)
1.0 New Policy
Eg. Review
Page 10 of 42
Section 11
ATTACHMENT 2
Page 11 of 42
as . ATTACHMENT 2
er eee eeleN(ete Community Grants Program
Policy — Structure — GuidelinesSection 12
Page 12 of 42
fe) NOOSA COUNCIL | Community Grants Program
Community Facilities CriteriaSection 13
Page 13 of 42
w mPNOesReOle Nell om Community Grants Program
Community Partnerships CriteriaSection 14
GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING REPORT 31 MARCH 2014
2. PROPOSED ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURE FOR NOOSA SHIRE COUNCIL
Author Chief Executive Officer – Brett de Chastel
Executive Office
Index ECM/ Subject/ CEO-Governance and Administration
Attachments 1. Benchmarking information
2. Proposed Structure
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On 2 January 2014, the Council adopted an Interim Structure in order to establish the new
organisation. The intention was to review the Interim Structure once a permanent Chief
Executive Officer (CEO) had been appointed.
The CEO has undertaken an internal consultation process and reviewed the Interim Structure.
This report proposes that the Council adopt a new Organisational Structure subject to five areas
being identified for further consideration by Council. The proposed new structure delivers:
Net annual savings of approximately $680,000 (plus oncosts);
No redundancies;
The abolition of a range of unneeded administrative and management positions;
Three new front line positions (one additional frontline customer service role and two new
parks workers); and
A Council structure with a total EFT of 348.3 with Department and Branch level EFTs as set
out in Attachment 2.
RECOMMENDATION
That Council note the report by the Chief Executive Officer to the General Committee Meeting
dated 31 March 2014 in relation to the new Organisational Structure and:
A. Adopt the Organisational Structure and EFT levels as set out in Attachment 2 of the report;
B. Note that five areas have been identified for further consideration; and
C. Authorise the Chief Executive Officer to take all necessary action to implement the new
Organisational Structure.
REPORT
This report proposes an Organisational Structure for adoption by Council. The report sets out the
process for developing the new Organisational Structure, benchmarking with other like Councils
and details of changes from the interim structure.
Page 14 of 42
Section 15
GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING REPORT 31 MARCH 2014
1. Review Process
This review has been conducted in a number of stages as follows:
Benchmarking
This stage involved benchmarking staff numbers to identify how Noosa Council compared to
other similar sized Councils in relation to staff numbers;
Consultation
Detailed discussions have been held with the Interim Directors and some Managers
regarding the proposed new structure. All staff (both inside and outside staff) were provided
with the opportunity to put forward their ideas on the Organisational Structure. The CEO
invited comment via a staff newsletter and more than 45 staff provided responses. Those
responses varied from general observations, to personal circumstances of individuals to quite
specific detailed proposals for Organisational Structure changes; and
Councillor Workshop
A workshop on the draft structure was held with Councillors on 20 March 20014. Feedback
from that workshop has been incorporated into the final structure.
2. Context
In any Organisational Structure review, it is important to understand the context of the review.
Ultimately, the Organisational Structure is one component of achieving the Council's goals and
implementing strategies. However, it is important to note that there are other more important
components that impact on the achievement of Council's goals. Current research into best
practice indicates that organisational culture and strategy setting are the two most important.
As the CEO, I am very pleased with how the new Council work culture is developing. Our
organisation is populated by staff who are going above and beyond almost every day to deliver
excellent service to the Noosa community. Councillors would be aware of many examples where
our staff have already excelled in achieving great outcomes by working smarter. The Munna
Point Bridge and the Noosa North Shore camping grounds are just two examples.
Page 15 of 42
Section 16
GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING REPORT 31 MARCH 2014
3. Benchmarking
The Noosa Council is a Category 4 Council in the Local Government Remuneration classification
system. It is also classified as URM (Urban Regional Medium) in the Australian Local
Government classification system. As such, it is appropriate to benchmark with other
Queensland Local Governments in those or similar categories.
The benchmarking outcomes are listed in Attachment 1.
Key points to note in relation to this benchmarking exercise are as follows:
Noosa Council is in the lower range of staffing levels;
Staffing levels depend on the degree of contracting for services by different Councils (for
example, one Council may contract out garbage services and another may use day labour);
Staffing levels and ratios (e.g. salaries as a percentage of expenditure) may also depend on
the range and level of services provided by each Council; and
Nevertheless, across the range of comparable Councils, Noosa Council is running as a lean
organisation.
4. Key Changes Proposed to the Interim Structure
The key changes proposed to the interim structure are:
The three Departments to be named Corporate Services, Community Services and Planning
& Infrastructure Services. The existing Executive Office to be retained (with the title of Chief
of Staff to be changed to Executive Manager);
The Town Planning functions to be transferred to the Planning and Infrastructure Services
Department;
The Pest Management function and Environmental Health function to be combined with the
Waste Services area to form a Waste and Environmental Health Section to be located in the
Community Services Department;
The natural areas function to be transferred from the environment function to the Parks and
Natural Areas section (formerly parks and gardens).
An additional position to be added to Customer Service area to improve response times to
customers;
The Libraries and Art Gallery functions are located under the Cultural Facilities function;
The existing Infrastructure areas are structured into Asset Planning, Asset Design &
Investigations and Civil Operations; and
A range of vacant positions have been abolished creating savings. Most of these positions
are unwarranted management positions or back-office positions that are not required.
Two additional resources are being allocated into frontline parks workers positions.
Establishing Staff Working Groups
One of the risks of having an Organisational Structure is that silos can develop. One way
(besides the organisational culture) to make sure this does not occur is to have a series of cross
Council Working Groups that cut across boundaries. A number of staff Working Groups are
proposed – Design, Community Engagement, Asset Management and Sustainability. The
Community Facilities Manager will also be given responsibility to look at business improvement
and business opportunities to improve Council’s bottom line.
Page 16 of 42
Section 17
GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING REPORT 31 MARCH 2014
Five Areas for Further Review
The final structure identifies five areas that have been identified for further consideration. This
means that these areas have not yet been fully reviewed. Rather than wait until every single
area has been fully reviewed, it is suggested that these areas be reviewed during the budget
process and a determination made on structural issues at that time. This will enable the balance
of the organisation to move forward.
Areas identified for further review are as follows:
Transport function – to be determined following consideration of the Transport Levy, funding
levels and Transport Strategy;
Environment function – to be determined following consideration of the Environment Levy,
service delivery model and funding levels. In the meantime, the Pest Management function is
to be transferred to the Waste and Environmental Health area. Also, the Natural Areas
function to be transferred to Civil Operations as part of the Parks and Natural Areas section.
Finally, all Environment Officers are to operate within the Environment Section;
Community Engagement and Biosphere - pending consideration of the Biosphere and
Community Engagement issues, the current Biosphere, Sustainability and Economic
Development staff be transferred to this area and the structure be finalised once those issues
are determined by Council. In the meantime due to its importance, the role of
Communications Manager will be advertised;
Community Development and Sport and Recreation - the Council has not yet resolved its
community funding or community support models. The structure of this area can be reviewed
once the level of direct and indirect support has been determined; and
Libraries and Art Galleries - the Council has not yet reviewed these areas or determined
appropriate service levels. This will be finalised during the budget process.
5. Staffing implications
In relation to staff matters, it is noted as follows:
There are no redundancies proposed as part of the adoption of this report;
Like any Council in Queensland, it is not possible to rule out future redundancies but as can
be seen from the benchmarking exercise, the Council cannot be said to be overstaffed.
Changes to service levels, funding sources or changes to strategy are likely to be future
drivers of any change in EFT’s;
Quite a number of vacant positions are being abolished. These are primarily administration
and management positions which are not required;
Three new positions are being created. These are all front line service positions including
two new Parks Workers and a new Customer Service Officer; and
The ongoing net saving for the Council budget is approximately $680,000 per year (plus
oncosts).
Details of the individual positions being abolished and created are contained in Attachment 2.
Page 17 of 42
Section 18
GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING REPORT 31 MARCH 2014
6. What next?
The adoption of the Organisational Structure is a significant milestone in the establishment of our
new Council. Upon the adoption of the structure, the following can occur:
Staff who are directly translating to their permanent roles which are substantially the same as
their role in the interim structure will receive letters confirming their translation. This will bring
certainty to many staff, particularly those in the outside workforce. Any positions requiring
reassessment of level will be determined at this stage as well;
The role of Directors will be advertised as soon as possible. Under the Local Government
Act, the interviewing and appointment of senior staff reporting directly to the CEO is
undertaken by a Panel consisting of the CEO, Mayor and Deputy Mayor;
Managers’ roles will be assessed as required to determine the correct pay level based on the
range and levels of responsibilities. In some limited instances, there may be a requirement
for an internal competitive process. In most instances, it will be a case of determining the
correct position level;
Position titles will be determined at an individual level by our Human Resources staff in
consultation with Directors and managers. As a general rule, we will keep similar titles but
look to recognise the practical reality of what positions should be called rather than using
unrealistic titles. Where possible, we will use the term “manager” rather than “co-ordinator” or
“team leader” to reflect what a member of the public may ask for if they contact council. ; and
Management of the establishment will occur via adherence to both the total EFT adopted by
Council and also the EFT identified at Department and Branch levels. The total EFT being
adopted by Council is 348.3 with each individual Department and branch having an EFT
allocation.
7. Noosa Council Organisational Principles and Values
In preparing this report to Council on the organisational structure, I came across the principles
and values espoused by the former CEO Mr Bruce Davidson prior to 2008. Those principles and
values are as relevant today as they were previously.
The Noosa Council will use the following principles and values:
1. Matters under Council’s control are treated with a whole of Council approach as distinct
from a fragmented Department approach;
2. Corporate objectives, practices and policies and the knowledge of them is a responsibility
shared by all staff;
3. Systems, procedures and actions of staff are viewed from the customer’s perspective;
4. Staff have the knowledge and authority to provide definitive responses at the point of
contact with our customers;
5. Management and operations are based on a team approach recognising the importance of
involving all staff in the decision making process;
6. Information is shared throughout the organisation through regular vigorous and open
communication;
7. Staff are never satisfied with the status quo, there is a climate of striving for continuous
improvement and an enthusiasm for innovation;
8. Directors, Managers and Supervisors are seen as coaches, supporting and leading through
cooperation, commitment and influence and do not gain authority through coercion or fear;
and
9. Council practices equal employment opportunity.
Page 18 of 42
Section 19
GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING REPORT 31 MARCH 2014
Previous Council Consideration
Ordinary Meeting, 2 January 2014, Item 6.4, Page 5
6.4 INTERIM ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURE
Council Resolution
Moved: Cr Abbot
Seconded: Cr Bolton
That Council note the report by the Acting Chief Executive Officer to the Ordinary Meeting
dated 2 January 2014 and:
1. Adopt the Interim Organisational Structure as attached to the report; and
2. Delegate authority to the Acting Chief Executive Officer to manage all related staff
matters.
Finance & Risk
This proposal will provide a direct budget saving of approximately $680,000. There are no
redundancy costs incurred. Savings come primarily from eliminating vacant positions,
particularly in administrative and management levels.
CONSULTATION
External Consultation - Community & Stakeholder
Nil.
Internal Consultation
Detailed consultation has been held with all of the Interim Directors and many of the Interim
Managers. Further, during the review process, over 45 written staff submissions were provided
to the CEO which were reviewed.
Departments/Sections Consulted:
X Community Infrastructure X Community & Development
Asset Planning & Delivery Community Services
Civil Operations Planning & Development
Environmental Services Health & Regulatory Services
Waste Management Business Facilitation
Community Resilience & Disaster Management
X Executive Office X Organisational Services
Communications & Governance Financial Services
Human Resources ICT
De-amalgamation Coordination Property & Contracts
Page 19 of 42
Section 20
ATTACHMENT 1
Page 20 of 42
ATTACHMENT 1
Noosa (2014) RC 4- URM 53,546 - - 360 0.67 30.6%
(estimated 2014) (2014)
Noosa (2006) URM 45,831 148 304 452 0.93 32.58%
Bundaberg RC-5 93,082 483 346 0.9 44 6%
Cassowary Coast RC 4-URS 28,667 193 121 314 1.1 30.3%
Central Highlands RC 4-URS 30,545 248 214 462 ees 20.3%
Gladstone RC -5 61,170 270 373 643 1.1 35.9%
Gympie 4 47,347 221 247 468 1 34.7%
Isaac RC 4-URS 23,688 198 207 405 17 32.3%
Lockyer Valley RC 4-URM 36,404 167 265 432 1.2 22.9%
Mt Isa RC 4-URS 22,793 108 88 196 0.9 31.1%
Scenic Rim RC 4-URM 37,781 172 193 365 1 47.8%
South Burnett RC 4-URM 33,227 148 164 312 1 39.3%
Southern Downs RC 4-URM 34,972 228 152 380 1.1 36.1%
Western Downs RC 5- URS 32,872 327 374 701 2.1 35.8%
Whitsunday RC 4-URM 33,295 160 214 374 1.1 16.8%
Notes in relation to benchmarking exercise:-
¢ — information has been sourced from the Department of Local Government Annual Comparative Data Returns. The most recent year of data sets available was 2011/12;
e — information for the new Noosa Council was sourced from the interim structure and 2014 6 month budget adopted in January 2014;
¢ — information from the previous Noosa Council was adopted from the 2007 Department of Local Government Annual Comparative Data Return;
e In 2007, the previous Noosa Council provided a range of services using staff but these services are either no longer provided or are provided by other organisations. This
includes Water and Sewerage, Tewantin Child Care Centre, Lifeguards and Building Certification;
« When looking at comparisons, it should be noted that all other Councils provide Water and Sewerage services except for Somerset and Lockyer Valley Regional Councils;
« Some Council have special issues which impact on their operations and hence staff or expenditure levels. These include Lockyer Valley (disaster recovery) Cassowary Coast
(disaster recovery) and Western Downs (CSG mining boom).
Page 20 of 42Section 21
ATTACHMENT 2
Page 21 of 42
Functi ATTACHMENT 2
unctions
27 March, 2014
TOTAL EFT - 348.3
Chief Executive * Governance
. : Executive Office * HR (incl. Payroll)
Internal Audit Officer Don ey
1 EFT * Community Engagement (incl. Biosphere)
Planning & Community .
Infrastructure Services Corporate Service
152.7 EFT 126.4 EFT 39 EFT
« Land Use Assessment * Community Facilities « Finance
* Land Use Planning * Cultural Facilities * Rates
¢ Asset Planning * Waste Management « ICT (Records)
* Asset Design and Investigations * Environmental Health (incl. Pest Control) * Procurement (Fleet)
« Operational Works « Regulatory Services « Property & Facilities
e Environment « Disaster Management
Page 21 of 42Section 22
Page 22 of 42
Executive Office
27 March, 2014
EXECUTIVE MANAGER
EXECUTIVE OFFICE
1 EFT
Human Resources Governance Executive Support Customer Service
9.6 EFT 2 EFT 3.6 EFT 5.6 EFT
[mss
Page 22 of 42Section 23
Page 23 of 42
Community Services
27 March, 2014
DIRECTOR Administrative
COMMUNITY SERVICES Support
_— 1 EFT
Waste & | Disaster Management Marketing & Business) {/community Facilities Cultural Facilities
Environmental Health |—) & Public Order en oace | 1 EFT 1 EFT
14.1 EFT Shared 9 EFT :
Admin
o0sa Aquatic Centre & The J & :
Noosa Leisure Centre | | Bicentennial Hail | | Respite Centre
27.9 EFT 4.6 EFT .
HH”
29.8 EFT
Page 23 of 42Section 24
Page 24 of 42
Corporate Services
27 March, 2014
DIRECTOR
CORPORATE SERVICES
1 EFT
6 EFT 8 EFT 6.5 EFT 12.5 EFT 5 EFT
Page 24 of 42Section 25
Page 25 of 42
Planning & Infrastructure
27 March, 2014
DIRECTOR PLANNING
& INFRASTRUCTURE
1 EFT
- 4 Building & trategic Land Use - Asset Design & - .
DA Planning 5) Plumbing Services Planning Asset Pianning ( S| Investigations Civil Operations
. Shared 9.5 EFT 2.5 EFT Liaison 15 EFT
Admin
Superintendent
Civil Works & Parks & Natural
Maintenance Areas
60 EFT 33.2 EFT
Page 25 of 42Section 26
Page 26 of 42
LIST OF POSITION CHANGES
(Branch ———SSS=«* Position ——SSS*~*~*~«~dCLvedSS«d Salary ———=SS« EFT [VacanlOccupant
Executive Support Administration Officer $23,288 Vacant — not required
Customer Service Customer Service Officer TBC New position to assist with frontline customer
service
Corporate Services Admin Support & Grants Research | 3 $58,221 Vacant — not required
(Grants Officer already in Community Services)
Finance Finance Manager $91,776 + contract Vacant — not required
loading 10%
Corporate Services Manager Property & Contracts Bo $91,776 Vacant — not required
Plant Branch Heavy Diesel Fitter LGEA7 | $53,461 fo Vacant — not required
Manager Development $91,776 + contract Vacant - not required and can access consulting
loading 10% expertise as required
Community Services — | Cultural Development Co-ordinator $91,776 + contract Vacant (Replaced with lower level Project Officer that
loading 10% goes from 0.6 — 1 EFT)
Parks & Landscape __| Natural Areas Officer LGEA4 | $50,008 fo Vacant — not required
ICT IT Operations Coordinator Not funded in Vacant - not required (to be filled from existing staff
budget and no backfilling required)
Organisation Services | HR Consultant 5 $70,181 Current position is funded for 1 EFT and is not
required if existing HR staff role goes from 0.8 to
1 EFT
Infrastructure Construction Superintendent fo $84,793 Vacant — not required
Infrastructure Parks Coordinator (Vacant) $0 net saving Replace with two Parks Workers to improve
maintenance of public areas.
Note: Focus for vacant positions has been on back office positions and management positions. The latter is the result of a flatter structure.
Page 26 of 42Section 27
GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING REPORT 31 MARCH 2014
STRATEGIC STAFF WORKING TEAMS
Noosa Planning Design Team
Chair: Ross Sanderson
Goal:
To enshrine the “Noosa Look & Feel” and good design solutions across Council practices.
Community Engagement Team
Chair: Debra Iezzi
Goal:
To develop community engagement capacity across the Council and to ensure consistency of
approach.
Asset Management Team
Chair: Martin Drydale
Goal:
To develop Asset Management Plans for all Council asset classes and link to financial
sustainability.
Sustainability Team
Chair: TBC
Goal:
Ensure that Council’s work practices reduce our Council’s environmental footprint.
Note: Community Facilities Manager is to have a Council wide role in developing
Business Plans and entrepreneurship across the Council.
Page 27 of 42
Section 28
GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING REPORT 31 MARCH 2014
3. NOOSA BIOSPHERE RESERVE – REVIEW OF MANAGEMENT MODEL
Author Noosa Biosphere Reserve Working Group
Councillors Playford, Abbot, Pardon and Wellington
Index ECM/ Subject/ Noosa Biosphere Reserve-Management Model Review
Attachments 1. Schematic outline of Biosphere Reserve Management Model
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Noosa Biosphere Reserve Working Group established by the Council has received over 65
submissions and conducted a number of workshops to seek feedback on the future Management
Model for the Noosa Biosphere Reserve. This report provides the Council with a suggested
Management Model for the future of the Noosa Biosphere Reserve for the purpose of further
community consultation.
The focus of the Working Group has been on identifying a proposed vision, the different roles
required and a structure that assists in working towards that proposed vision. The report from the
Working Group sets out details that, if considered appropriate by the Council, can be used as the
basis for further community consultation prior to a final report to Council from the Working Group.
RECOMMENDATION
That Council note the report by the Noosa Biosphere Reserve Working Group to the General
Committee Meeting dated 31 March 2014 in relation to the review of the Noosa Biosphere
Reserve Management Model and:
A. Note the community consultation that has been undertaken to date and the key issues that
arose as part of that community consultation;
B. Adopt the proposed Noosa Biosphere Reserve Management Model as set out in the report
by the Noosa Biosphere Reserve Working Group for the purpose of further consultation;
C. Seek further input from the community via a community consultation session to be held on
15 April 2014 and also seek further feedback from the Sector Board members about their
preferred roles within the new arrangement; and
D. Request the Noosa Biosphere Reserve Working Group to report back to the Council once
that further community consultation has been undertaken.
REPORT
The purpose of this report is to recommend a revised Management Model for the Noosa
Biosphere Reserve for the purposes of further public consultation prior to formal adoption of a
preferred Noosa Biosphere Reserve Management Model by the Council.
1. Background
The Noosa local government area was designated with Man in the Biosphere (MAB) Reserve
status by the United Nations Educational, Scientific & Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) in 2007.
Biosphere Reserves are considered to be sites of excellence, where new and optimal practices
Page 28 of 42
Section 29
GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING REPORT 31 MARCH 2014
to manage nature and human activities are tested and demonstrated. It is intended to be an
inclusive process where a community works together to achieve the ultimate environment in
which they wish to live and work.
Prior to amalgamation into the Sunshine Coast Regional Council (SCRC) in March 2008, the
former Noosa Council designed their preferred management arrangements for the Noosa
Biosphere Reserve. SCRC implemented the model which incorporated the previous Noosa
Council Community Sector Boards, under a Council owned company called Noosa Biosphere
Limited (NBL). The Sector Boards had originally been established by the former Noosa Council
prior to any consideration of a Biosphere Reserve application.
Considerable progress has been made in advancing the objectives of the Noosa Biosphere
Reserve over the past 6 years. The volunteers on the NBL Board and various Sector Boards
have done a considerable amount of work to get to where we are today.
The return of the Noosa Council as a result of a community driven de-amalgamation campaign,
sees the Noosa community interested in how it can have greater involvement in a range of issues
including the Noosa Biosphere Reserve. With the re-establishment of the Noosa Council from 1
January 2014 it is seen to be opportune to embark on the next phase of realising the benefits of
the Man in the Biosphere Reserve designation.
The Third Phase
First Phase The new Noosa Council is
Second Phase
Original establishment of the created and new Biosphere
The Sunshine Coast Regional Reserve Management
Noosa Biosphere Reserve
Council Years arrangements are established
management arrangements
The Council has expressed a desire to review the current Management Model with the objective
of more clearly defining and clarifying the vision, objectives and preferred outcomes for the
Noosa Biosphere Reserve. The review aims to broaden the level of community involvement and
provide an enhanced focus on the community’s aspirations for a sustainable future.
To facilitate the review, Council established a Working Group with membership comprising Cr
Noel Playford (Mayor), Cr Bob Abbot (Deputy Mayor), and Crs Frank Pardon and Tony
Wellington. The role of the Working Group is to report to the Council on the best approach for
the future management of the Noosa Biosphere Reserve. The purpose of this report is to provide
Council with the views of the Working Group on the best future approach and to seek approval to
undertake further community consultation. The Working Group intends to undertake a further
public meeting on the proposed approach and provide a final report to the Council.
Page 29 of 42
Section 30
GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING REPORT 31 MARCH 2014
2. Outcomes from initial consultation phase
Details of the consultation process undertaken to date can be found in the External Consultation
section at the end of this report.
Some common themes raised during the review process included:
The vision needs to align with the UNESCO principles for the Man in the Biosphere
Reserves, essentially around environment , sustainable development and learning;
The desired outcomes need to be driven by the community;
More on the ground results are needed to show that community aspirations are being
achieved and to increase community awareness;
The brand needs to be powerful, to be grown and managed;
The focus should be on a smart economy in a great environment;
While a “centralised governance” type approach is not supported, there is a need for some
co-ordinating entity and dedicated resources and funding to support community driven
projects/initiatives; and
While the desire is that the management not be Council “controlled”, there is a need for some
reserve powers to ensure the intended direction is not lost in the future;
Whether there should be a “Friends of the Biosphere” Program and if so, how could that be
best advanced? This is a matter that the Working Group would like to seek further feedback
on as part of the second round of consultation; and
It has been suggested that this ongoing initiative to progress the vision for Noosa be called
the Noosa Biosphere Reserve Project.
3. Proposed Vision
A number of consistent messages emerged through the consultation process in relation to a
vision for the future of the Noosa Biosphere Reserve. The most common revolved around
improving conservation outcomes and developing wealth through a smarter local economy.
This type of approach is consistent with UNESCO’s statement that “Biosphere Reserves are
sites….to promote biodiversity, conservation and sustainable development based on local
community efforts and sound science”.
As such, the Working Group has identified that one possible vision for the Noosa Biosphere
Reserve could be:
“Delivering one of the smartest economies in one of the best environments in the world”
The Working Group recognises that many people are passionate about what specific words
should be in a vision statement. As such, it is proposed that feedback be sought at the next
community engagement meeting on 15 April as to whether there is a better way of expressing the
vision statement.
Page 30 of 42
Section 31
GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING REPORT 31 MARCH 2014
4. Proposed Model
The Working Group proposes the use of the descriptor “Noosa Biosphere Reserve Project” to
apply to the ongoing community initiative to work towards the proposed vision.
When looking at the options for the future delivery of the Noosa Biosphere Reserve Project, the
Working Group decided to focus on identifying specific roles that were required and how those
roles can be delivered.
The Working Group has identified the need for three distinct roles covering strategy, operations &
co-ordination and delivery (i.e. the doing.
The overarching roles and responsibilities of each area will generally include:
Strategy role
Strategic direction
Management of brand & intellectual property
Facilitating research
Establishing an assessment and reporting regime
Oversight of operational co-ordination
Operations & Coordination role
Day to day operations and support to strategy and delivery areas
Communications
Linkage between strategy & delivery areas
Evaluation of potential projects identified by the delivery/doing groups for funding purposes
Delivery/Doing role
Providing advice on strategy
Identifying and recommending appropriate projects or initiatives
Delivering initiatives/projects in a practical way
Providing for wider input through community forums or similar activities
Creating networks
5. Delivery / Doing Role
Each of the roles set out in paragraph 4 will be examined in further detail with an initial focus on
the delivery/doing role. This is one of the most critical roles as it is community based and
focuses on delivering tangible outcomes that advance the purpose of the Noosa Biosphere
Reserve Project.
The primary focus of this role is to deliver projects or initiatives that will assist in delivering the
proposed vision for the Noosa Biosphere Reserve Project. It is the practical delivery of “on the
ground” projects that will advance the Noosa community to the proposed vision.
There are a number of components to this role.
Page 31 of 42
Section 32
GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING REPORT 31 MARCH 2014
NFPs
Like individuals, Not for Profit (NFP) organisations can play an important role in delivering “on the
ground projects” which assist in achieving the long-term goal of the Noosa Biosphere Reserve
Project. Many existing NFPs are already delivering projects which add to the long term goals of
the Noosa Biosphere Reserve Project. They are not all currently doing this within the current
Biosphere Reserve framework and this is not a problem. If NFPs do wish to work within the
future Noosa Biosphere Reserve Project framework, they should be able to do so working with
other organisations, individuals, Sector Boards etc within the project delivery area.
Sector Boards
From the Working Group’s perspective, there is little doubt the Sector Boards can play a
significant part in the success of the Noosa Biosphere Reserve Project. There is strong support
from within the Working Group for an important ongoing role for the Sector Boards. The Working
Group also wishes to consult further with the Sector Boards for more detailed advice about how
they think they can operate more effectively in the future.
The Working Group notes the following:
The former Noosa Council originally established four Sector Boards prior to any consideration
of the Noosa Biosphere Reserve application. The purpose of those Sector Boards was
originally to provide the then Noosa Council with advice on strategy/direction across a range
of issues;
The four Sector Boards provided excellent advice and strategic direction to the former Noosa
Council. The Sector Boards continued after that time undertaking a range of activities and
projects that contributed greatly to the Noosa community; and
Over the years, the Sector Boards have been able to attract outstanding volunteers who have
dedicated significant time and effort to advancing issues in the Noosa community. The
current Sector Boards are populated by passionate, dedicated and focused individuals.
In relation to the future of the Sector Boards, the Working Group suggests:
The Sector Boards could have more autonomy to undertake their own activities. For example,
there should be no reason why the Sector Boards cannot undertake their own community
forums to gather ideas for advancing the Noosa Biosphere Reserve Project vision;
The Sector Boards could deliver “on the ground” projects either on their own accord or
working in partnership with others;
The Sector Boards could seek their own funding to deliver their own projects where those
projects align with the Noosa Biosphere Reserve Project vision;
The Sector Boards could be supported with ongoing administrative resources that can assist
with co-ordination of projects and linking the Sector Boards to both the Strategy role and
other community based organisations and partners who can work together to deliver real
outcomes that advance the vision of the Noosa Biosphere Reserve Project; and
The Sector Boards could continue to provide long term strategy advice to Noosa Council.
Further, the Working Group wishes to seek further input from the Sector Boards about the
following issues:
Is the current number and mix of Sector Boards the best approach to achieve the objectives
of the Noosa Biosphere Reserve? Could some of the existing Boards be combined to create
better synergies?
Do the current Boards align with the vision for the Noosa Biosphere Reserve Project? Can
there be a better alignment?
Is the name “Sector Board” still the best name or should it be changed to something else?
What do the Sector Board members think these groups should be called?
Page 32 of 42
Section 33
GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING REPORT 31 MARCH 2014
Noosa Council
Noosa Council also clearly has a role in delivering projects and undertaking activities in its own
right which will assist in achieving the Noosa Biosphere Reserve Project vision. Some of these
projects and activities may be undertaken by the Council on its own and some of them may be
undertaken in partnership with other individuals, partners, NFPs, Sector Boards etc.
Educational Institutions
The Working Group believes there is an ongoing role for educational institutions in the future
Noosa Biosphere Reserve Project model. They can assist with research and projects at a
practical level.
Foundations and Trusts
There is no reason why separate foundations/trusts could not be established to attract funding to
support the Noosa Biosphere Reserve Project. These types of foundations/trusts could act as tax
effective mechanisms for potential donors to support the ongoing development of the Noosa
Biosphere Reserve.
Individuals
Many Noosa individuals are working on issues that either directly or indirectly advance the
purpose of the Biosphere Reserve Project. That should be encouraged. Where relevant,
individuals can use the co-ordination/linking role and resource to link up with others (e.g. NFPs,
partners, other individuals etc) to work on projects and activities.
Partners
It is envisaged that there will be significant interaction at this delivery and doing level with groups
forming partnerships to work on specific projects. As such, the concept of Noosa Biosphere
Reserve Project partners is a critical one for the ongoing success of the future model.
In Practice
At the delivery and doing level, it is envisaged that there will be mainly self-organised individuals,
groups, Sector Boards, organisations (NFPs) groups and partners etc working together to deliver
tangible on the ground projects that advance the Noosa Biosphere Reserve Project vision.
However, this work will be supported by staff resources and co-ordination from the Operations
and Co-ordination role. (Details in section 6 below)
6. Operations and Co-ordination Role
There are a number of roles which are required in relation to this element namely:
Day to day operations and support to strategy and delivery areas;
Communications;
Linkage between strategy & delivery areas; and
Evaluation of potential projects identified by the delivery/doing groups for funding purposes
Effectively, this role is about providing practical day to day support to the people who are
implementing projects to advance the Noosa Biosphere Reserve Project. It is envisaged that this
support will take the form of a Senior Project Officer who will be able to support and advise any
parties who are undertaking Noosa Biosphere Reserve projects including the Sector Boards.
Page 33 of 42
Section 34
GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING REPORT 31 MARCH 2014
The Senior Project Officer can also :
(i) assist in identifying potential funding for projects;
(ii) act as a co-ordinator to bring together different groups or individuals in the community to
work on Noosa Biosphere Reserve projects;
(iii) provide the link between the doing role and the strategy role; and
(iv) assist different groups and individuals in the delivery/doing area to come together to work
on projects.
The Senior Project Officer will also be responsible for communication. There are two elements to
this. Firstly, communication between the strategy level and the delivery/doing level. This needs
to be two way i.e. both ensuring that people who are doing projects are aware of the overall
strategy and working towards the vision and also ensuring that ideas and potential projects from
groups such as the Sector Boards are identified for consideration and potential funding.
Secondly, the Senior Project Officer needs to be responsible for ensuring that there is effective
communication about the Noosa Biosphere Reserve Project with the Noosa community – what is
happening, how to get involved etc.
The Senior Project Officer will be supported by an Administrative Officer who will provide
practical support to the Noosa Biosphere Reserve Project.
In Practice
At the Operations and Co-ordination level, it is envisaged that there will shortly be two personnel
provided by Council. These staff will not work in the Council precinct but work within a
community Hub acting as the practical operational co-ordination for the delivery and doing. The
Council will fund these roles in addition to providing office accommodation and any related
resources needed in the community based Hub.
7. Strategy Role
There are a number of roles which are required in relation to this element namely:
Strategic direction;
Management of brand & intellectual property;
Facilitating Research;
Assessing and reporting on progress; and
Oversight of the operational co-ordination role.
The Working Group identified the strategy setting role as a key component of any future success
for the Noosa Biosphere Reserve Project.
There was also significant consideration of the importance of brand development and protection.
The Working Group believes that this is an important issue that needs to be addressed.
Proposed Structure Arrangements for the Strategy Role
In order to achieve the objectives of wider community involvement and community driven
outcomes the proposed structure for the strategy role is:
A new company to replace the existing NBL. The new company to be called the Noosa
Biosphere Reserve Project Limited (subject to legal advice);
Page 34 of 42
Section 35
GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING REPORT 31 MARCH 2014
The objects of the new company will be
(i) to set the strategic direction for the Noosa Biosphere Reserve Project;
(ii) manage the brand and intellectual property;
(iii) facilitate research that supports the strategy and vision;
(iv) prepare reports on progress with the Noosa Biosphere Reserve Project; and
(v) oversight of the operational co-ordination role.
These objects are to be much more focused than the current objectives for NBL with the new
company having a significant emphasis on strategy and brand;
The new company is to have Directors with a desired mix of skills rather than appointment
based on membership of other bodies (e.g. Sector Boards);
There should be no less than 7 and no more than 9 Directors with 2 Councillor Directors
appointed by Council (Mayor + 1 Councillor);
Non-Councillor Directors will be appointed by Council in the first instance and future
appointments will subsequently be made by the company Board;
The skills mix that would be required should match with the proposed vision of the Noosa
Biosphere Reserve Project and the specific roles for the Board. As such, the skills mix would
include:
o High level experience in brand development and / or intellectual property;
o Proven relevant experience and successful track record in business;
o Specialist knowledge of environmental issues;
o Involvement and knowledge of Noosa’s local history and community; and
o Experience in research (particularly from an academic/education perspective).
Only Noosa local government area residents would be eligible for appointment as a Director;
Approximately one-third of non-Councillor Directors to be rotated every three years, with
Directors eligible for re-appointment;
Directors would not be paid for undertaking the role (but may receive reimbursement of any
meeting expenses at the discretion of the Board);
The Board would need to report on at least an annual basis on progress towards achieving
the Noosa Biosphere Reserve vision; and
The Noosa Biosphere Reserve Project company would have significant flexibility to operate.
For example, it could establish tax effective foundations or trusts to attract funding. It could
develop appropriate marketing strategies to further develop and protect the intellectual
property associated with the brand. It would develop appropriate strategies to advance the
vision of the Noosa Biosphere Reserve Project.
Transition
This report by the Working Group does not address any potential transition issues. The reason
for this is that the ideas being put forward by the Working Group in this report are for the purpose
of undertaking further community consultation. It is only upon the completion of the next round of
community consultation that the final Management Model will be known. When the Working
Group reports to the Council at the next stage, any implementation or transition issues will be
addressed.
Attachment 1 sets out a schematic diagram of the model showing how the different roles fit
together.
Page 35 of 42
Section 36
GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING REPORT 31 MARCH 2014
Previous Council Consideration
Ordinary Meeting, 20 January 2014:
“That Council agree to the process steps 1 to 3 outlined in the report to the Ordinary Meeting
dated 20 January 2014 to review the Noosa Biosphere Reserve management arrangements
to maximise the potential for community involvement in Noosa Biosphere Reserve projects,
activities and initiatives and further, Council appoint Cr Pardon and Cr Wellington as
Directors to the Noosa Biosphere Limited Board.”
Finance & Risk
The level of ongoing financial commitment by the Council to support the Noosa Biosphere
Reserve will be determined during the 2014/15 Budget Process.
CONSULTATION
External Consultation - Community & Stakeholder
To date, the review process has included:
1. Public invitation through paid advertising, media releases, and web together with a
personal invitation to the NBL for submission of ideas on the vision, and preferred
Management Model (closed on 28 th February, 2014).
2. Review of the sixty-seven (67) responses received to the invitation to submit ideas on the
vision and Management Model. Of these, five (5) were short-listed to make a presentation
to the Working Group.
Most of the remaining submissions suggested excellent ideas for projects or initiatives seen
to be in line with the Noosa Biosphere Reserve status, rather than the vision or
Management Model. Council will separately consider if any of these ideas can inform
future priorities for Council and the Noosa Biosphere Reserve.
3. Two facilitated open meetings were held on 4 th & 11th March 2014 where the five (5) short-
listed submitters presented their ideas to the Working Group.
4. A facilitated workshop held on 13 th March with existing NBL Board members and Sector
Board members.
5. Numerous meetings of the Working Group to consider submissions and the outcomes of
the meetings and workshop. These meetings of the Working Groups were facilitated by the
CEO.
It is intended to undertake further consultation on the proposed vision and Management Model
with a public meeting currently scheduled for 15 th April 2014.
Page 36 of 42
Section 37
GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING REPORT 31 MARCH 2014
Internal Consultation
Nil.
Departments/Sections Consulted:
Community Infrastructure Community & Development
Asset Planning & Delivery Community Services
Civil Operations Planning & Development
Environmental Services Health & Regulatory Services
Waste Management Business Facilitation
Community Resilience & Disaster Management
X Executive Office Organisational Services
Communications & Governance Financial Services
Human Resources ICT
De-amalgamation Coordination Property & Contracts
Page 37 of 42
Section 38
ATTACHMENT 1
DELIVERY/DOING
SECTOR BOARDS
- Forums
- Advice to strategy group
- Advice to council
- Projects or initiatives
INDIVIDUALS COMMUNITY GROUPS
(Networks) (Not for profits)
OPERATIONS COORDINATION
OVERSIGHT OF
COORDINATION REPORTING
FOUNDATIONS/TRUSTS STRATEGY PARTNERSHIPS
- Private Sector
BRAND/IP RESEARCH - Between
organisation and/or
COMMUNICATIONS Council
LINKING
G
EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS NOOSA COUNCIL
Page 38 of 42