General Committee Meeting, 16 March 2026
Date: Monday, 16 March 2026 at 12:30PM
Location: Noosa Shire Council Chambers, 9 Pelican Street, Tewantin, QLD 4565, Australia
Organiser: Noosa Shire Council
Duration: 03:21:00
Synopsis: Appointments overhauled and CEO to review groups, Meeting structure from May 2026, Councillors on committees and 12‑month review, Wilkie COI deferred item, Orders tightened, Finances favourable.
Meeting Attendees
Committee Members
Brian Stockwell Karen Finzel Amelia Lorentson Jessica Phillips Tom Wegener Frank Wilkie Nicola Wilson Executive Officers
Chief Executive Officer Larry Sengstock Director Community Services Kerri Contini Acting Director Corporate Services Margaret Gatt Director Development & Regulation Richard MacGillivray Director Strategy And Environment Kim Rawlings Acting Director Infrastructure Services Craig Young Meeting Transcript
Brian Stockwell 00:00.100
Orders in community of Noosa and pass on our respects for their culture, heritage and ongoing custodianship and for their elders past, present and emerging. We going then move on to attendance and I note that all Councillors are in attendance. We have the confirmation of minutes. Would someone like to move. Frank Wilkie 00:24.346
The Minutes of the last General Committee Meeting? I move it. Mr chairman, the General Committee Meeting date is 16 February. Brian Stockwell 00:28.475
Yes, Councillor Wilkie seconded, Councillor Lorentson resuming there's no discussion. I'll put the vote and that's carried unanimously. We have no presentations nor do we have any deputations. Moves on to item 7 which is the update to Council's representation on various groups, boards and external groups 2026 mid-term review and been referred to in the Services & Organisation Committee meeting. So Mr CEO, thank you very much. CEO are you or is one of the directors doing the overview on that one? Larry Sengstock 01:05.666
I'm happy to do the overview. So this is, thank you Mr Chair. At the middle of each cycle we, sorry, me take it back, the Councillors are appointed to various committees, external and internal committees, across the period of the four year cycle. At the mid term of that cycle we have on previous occasions. Looked to review that and look to provide opportunities for Councillors to move across into different committees, if they so wish, to get either further experience or to provide further opportunities for other Councillors. We've gone through that brought process. To the subcommittee last week but there was a request for some more information which we've provided. That information really is to give a sense of the work because each committee is different. Some committees meet regularly, some committees don't. Some committees require quite a lot of reading and preparation, some committees require simply to be part of and observe. So what we've done is provided an attachment or a further report which essentially outlines to the best of our knowledge some of the committees are a little bit scant so to the best of our knowledge we've provided that information so just to give everybody a sense of the so we can try to get some equity but also give a sense of the workload that each of those committees requires from Council. Councillors laws being either part of it or chairing it or as I say as an observer. So that information is there for and I'll take that as read but that's the information that was requested and we've provided. Frank Wilkie 02:53.960
Can I move an updated motion please Mr Chair. As on the screen currently it's different I'll move it. I'll say happy news. Okay. So move, Council. Brian Stockwell 03:09.634
Seconded. Frank Wilkie 03:09.736
Looking at I think Councillor Wilson got in second. Thank you. Mr Chair. This updated motion shows changes to the one that was presented to the Services & Organisation Committee Meeting on the 10th of March. It represents the results of discussions that need to be, the changes need to be acknowledged in the public open session and ratified in the public open session. I refer to item H which is appoint Councillor Stockwell as Chair, Councillor Finzel and I had Councillor Wegener, that's been crossed out because Councillor Wegener has graciously stepped aside to allow Councillor Lorentson to take his place on the Noosa Biosphere Trails Reference Group. I refer also to item K, the change there is appoint Councillor Wilson to the management committee and Councillor Finzel it was incorrectly listed as Councillor Phillips in the Services & Organisation Committee Meeting agenda to the as an observer to the MOU Regional Partnership Agreement with the Sunshine Coast University and Councillor Finzel has graciously stepped aside to let Councillor Lorentson take the observer position on there. MOU Regional Partnership Agreement with the observer so and also another change down the bottom queue Councillor Phillips that was not an error that Councillor Phillips has decided to step aside to allow Councillor Lorentson to sit on the Environment Levy working group so the purpose of bringing that here and showing those in an open session is to ratify them in an open session and that is the final appointment list as it stands at this present time awaiting. Oh sorry and there's also a addition of C that the Tourism Noosa observer role be reviewed at the time of the establishment of the Destination Stewardship Council because we may want to review who sits on the tourism Noosa aboard at the same time as the establishment of the Destination Stewardship Council so for consideration of the meeting. Nicola Wilson 05:22.614
Can I ask a question please? You may. For item K have we established yet whether the university will allow an observer role? We didn't previously have that. Larry Sengstock 05:35.542
No we haven't had a chance to do that. I don't see it being a problem but I just haven't had the opportunity, I haven't got a response back from the university at this point. Amelia Lorentson 05:46.316
Question to the Chair, how many times has the university that group actually convened in the last say two years? Larry Sengstock 05:58.049
Through the Chair, it's not been a regular thing, it's something that there's been a lot of changes within the university and it's had a bit of a stop-start. I've met I think twice. Probably we've had representations from the university maybe twice in my time that I've been here. Amelia Lorentson 06:14.028
So that's over a period of three, four years, two times. Larry Sengstock 06:18.655
Yes, so we are looking to reactivate that speak with the university see if it's still where it was. Lois. Thank you. Brian Stockwell 06:30.076
So would anyone else? Nicola Wilson 06:31.648
So question on that with the further information that we requested. At the moment that says that the university meets four times per year and it hasn't met at all in the two years that I've been. Larry Sengstock 06:45.322
That's the response that I got back from my staff and I'll be looking to work through that. But I think it is an important piece. It was the. MOU that was set up I think is very important for us to activate. It's just that it hasn't really been activated. Really been activated I guess is the best way to say it. But I think we need to put some attention to that because there is opportunities in terms of we do already have students that come here. From university and various relationships that happen but they don't happen necessarily as formally as they potentially could so I think this needs to be activated further. Tom Wegener 07:27.791
Any other questions? I'd like to make an amendment. Sure. Okay I'd like to make an amendment that D request the CEO to begin a review of the status of existing working groups and the potential need for the establishment of any new groups including consideration of an external Hastings Street precinct working groups so I'm happy to second that one thank you we our jobs is really to be visionaries to vision that the future of Noosa and then to work to create that vision but in order to do that I believe where we need to talk to experts in the field experts around all the people in the different group people on the ground and that's in order to get the best information we could possibly have in order to find this vision find the strategic vision for Noosa into the future and these groups are a really a great way to do that the best way to do that and the best way is to actually have an organised group with minutes being taken so that we can know what this group has found who it's spoken to have a bit of a trail of where we've been so that when it comes to debating amongst Councillors, the vision, the strategic intent, where we're going with Noosa, we have that information. And so I believe that it's really important to do this. I think our groups that we have, some of them have become stagnant, some of them are very useful. But I think we can actually do better. I think we can be better strategic thinkers by talking more intently with the different areas, whether it be the hinterland or the Hastings Street precinct. I bring the Hastings Street precinct up because I think that there's just so much going on down there. The lighting in the Woods and cameras on Hastings Street. There's the new sub transit substation, the surf club redevelopment, Lions Club parking, the rock wall renewal, which is a colossal project. There's paid parking, the Surf Management Plan, and many other things that are just all happening around the precinct. And I would love to see a group. And if I could be on the group or just be an observer, but to get the experts in to talk, roundtable it, and create this vision so that we're in charge of this, of moving forward with that precinct, with the hinterland, whatever. But I think that we really should do our jobs better if we were better informed through talking to experts, and these groups are a wonderful way to do that. Nicola Wilson 10:23.060
I'll speak partly from my own I'll speak partly in support and partly against. I'm in support of the first half of the sentence. I request the CEO to begin a review of the status of existing working groups and the potential need for the establishment of any new groups. I believe we do need a review of the purpose of some of these groups and definitely need to identify new groups that we might need to deliver strategies in the future. And I believe at that point we should all be encouraged to make suggestions and so I don't think there's a reason to single out any one particular project or precinct at the moment. It should be part of the process so I think already identifying the need for the establishment of any new groups would include considering Hastings Street therefore the rest of the sentence is redundant. I do believe we really need to have clear purpose for Councillors to be involved in these groups and staff as well not to be just duplicating effort and making sure that if Councillors are appointed to particular groups that they have a role whether they're influencing or advocating or observing, we need to be clear what that role is and what Councillors can actually achieve by being on these groups. Amelia Lorentson 11:37.489
I'm aligned with Councillor Wilson I support need for a review of the status of the existing working groups and we heard that in the previous conversations in terms of the university. There are a lot of groups there to meet rarely if at all. And it'd be really interesting to understand which ones should remain fit for purpose, which ones are aligned with our current priorities and where there may be gaps in terms of, you know, whether it's, whether it is a Hastings Street Association group, whether it is an integrated Burgess Creek management group, whatever the case may be. But again, in terms of the amendment in front of us I can't support the second part, including consideration of external Hastings Street precinct working group. I think that should be considered and is considered and captured under a review of the status of the existing working groups. There'll be opportunities there to again identify any gaps and make suggestions. But I think what we need to first do is better understand what's already been managed operationally. There's a lot of the groups that Councillor Wegener mentioned are being managed operationally. Councillors are involved in processes in some of those groups. So I'd just really like to unpack that before we single out any potential. Group but I do think it can be captured just as part of the first part of that amendment. So the amendment as it sits I won't support but I will support a broken down version of that. Brian Stockwell 13:29.994
Councillor Finzel. Karen Finzel 13:31.200
Yeah thank you, thank you Councillor Tom for bringing this to the table. I think it's great as Councillors if we're always thinking forward, visioning how can we do better for our communities if we sit in this role a to serve them. We currently sit in a time where we have changes pretty much a constant. It's how as leaders we facilitate change. I love the idea that we're going to outreach into our community, you know, raise awareness and start new narratives around what the future could look like and who are those key people that would like to engage in that conversation now and into the future. So yeah, I'm always open to change, new ideas, let's be creative in that space and be strong leaders and be continually checking out the landscape what's happening out there, what's new, where are the new ideas in the community, what new groups are coming up with, you know, ideas or potential growth within our hinterland. Every voice matters so I will support this addition but I I'm with the other conversation around the table it to the Hastings streets precinct I think is very not broad enough I think we I'm happy to support it so that we can look at the establishing new groups without limiting it especially for the hinterland you know all our strategies everything. And like diversification to the hinterland I really want to see like what's happening out there and can we attract new voices to the table so I think it needs to be broader for equity across the Shire and reaching out to new voices at the table so thank you Councillor Tom for bringing it forward I think it's great debate around the table and a positive step forward at this point of reviewing the groups so thank you. Jessica Phillips 15:26.041
I guess I'll just. Like the first part when I think of including consideration of the external Hastings Street precinct working group I start getting worried about the lanes being blurred like if I think of the street lighting and safety then that would be TMR, QPS, if rockwall design would be other stakeholders, Surf Life Saving, surf management like they're all very unique in their lanes and so I I'm just not sure of how it would work having them all together in one if they're all their needs and they're you know their lanes are so separate so I'm just not sure at this point if I could support it because it's too broad but I really like the first part so unfortunately I can't support the entirety. Brian Stockwell 16:21.331
Now that wait white till to you Klaus. Close yeah, right. Nicola Wilson 16:25.315
Yes. Can I ask a question please Richard? You may. How soon could this review take place? Larry Sengstock 16:34.809
Personally I think it's a very good idea. I think it's well required. Um each of those groups we could we need to bring we need to review the existing ones but new ones is where I'm really looking at the option opportunity but with that would have to come back to Council to decide whether we do that in workshops and then bring it forward so everything takes a bit of time it's not something that we can do in a week or two weeks. Well but it is something that and understanding who would be on those because even with Councillor Wegener's idea of a Hastings Street precinct working group everybody immediately goes to who's on it as opposed to what is it what are we really trying to get from it and then how do we how do we give the membership right. So there's a lot of consideration it's really you know it's a really good opportunity for us I think we should take the time to actually get it do it properly and look at where the real needs are immediately and then we'll get out from there but at times of a timeline it's something again I wouldn't want to rush in it I think we need to we can review the existing ones but the new ones I think we should consider well because you once you start these they require terms of reference they require a whole lot of work that goes behind the scenes that takes time and if you know you do all that work and then it doesn't work we're wasting time so let's not rush it would be my advice. Amelia Lorentson 17:57.350
So question to the CEO as part of a review will we have the opportunity to identify these gaps and opportunity to establish potentially new groups. Larry Sengstock 18:09.700
That's exactly so that's what I mean the Council is I'm sure all of you sitting around here have got your own ideas of where the gaps are yep so we need to provide the opportunity to bring that back and then work out how we best deliver it because if the risk again is we've got if there's a number of gaps we create a number of bodies and then it requires a number of resources a number of whereas if we can look to consolidate maybe in different areas but then creates it the helps us but creates the right model going forward so I think it just takes a bit of time we shouldn't take the time to consider a problem. Frank Wilkie 18:42.652
The question for Councillor Wegener. Taking on board the around the table, would you be prepared to change the amendment to strike out the last clause or if it fails move another amendment just including the first clause? Um. Tom Wegener 19:04.407
No, I'll close on this. We can vote on this and if it disappears then it disappears. It's no biggie. No, so I don't want to change it. Okay. And I'm not prepared for it to fall but I do want to close. Frank Wilkie 19:17.259
Yeah, okay. Okay I've uh taken we've taken on board the feedback from around the table. I respect the intent, Councillor Wegener, which is by saying that reviewing the groups includes consideration of an external Hastings Street policing working group. That's perfectly legitimate as we've just heard we've all got ideas about what other groups ought to be formed but I'll vote against this one and I hope that Councillor Wegener will consider if it fails moving the first part of this amendment because it's we certainly do need to review the existing working groups and the potential need for the establishment of any new groups. Brian Stockwell 20:04.508
I actually like it as it is worded and that's because of the rationale that need for Councillor Wegener explained in his opening address. The rationale for giving an example and it's just really an example saying including consideration of it doesn't exclude anything not being considered is that we have multiple projects in a local area. We haven't other than the business association got a combined group of stakeholders who can review that. Now in my working history I always came back to one thing the place is the best integrator. If we're going to get a combined understood view you do it around place. So implicit within that is an indication that part of that review is there actually places like hinterland that we do a similar thing. We've got a range of projects where for Councillors and staff to hear from a range of different perspectives. So to me it just gives an indication of a new element of these working groups that may be in the in that review. So I'm happy to support it as is. Amelia Lorentson 21:22.512
Sure. Or to the CEO actually. Just a question. There's, Councillor Wegener mentioned a couple of the groups including the Surf Management Plan, the redevelopment. My understanding and can you confirm question to you, is each of these groups have stakeholder groups which involved seawall Noosa Council staff, key stakeholders, Hastings Street Association, local residents. Surf club, etc. There are within each project proper reference groups and stakeholder groups, is that correct? Larry Sengstock 22:04.379
I think it's a bit of a mix and match. There's some that are internal, there's some that are external and exclusively external, but we then have so many observers on them that they're really observers. I think this is just looking as an example. For Hastings Street, again, we could do it for other places, so don't sort of hold me to that, but I think it's just a way of bringing all of them around the table, it's almost like a round table so everybody understands exactly what's happening, but do it on a regular basis and provide that opportunity for feedback and direction. Probably the I think, but that led by Council would be my, in terms of the meeting or being nourished by that, so I think that's where my head would be at, but again, it's up to us to then sit down and work out the terms of reference. It's a bit of a horse's course as well. Create something that's suitable for the particular project or this particular area, so I just think the idea is bringing everybody together so that they understand what's going on in a particular precinct because they all interact and they all have influence on each other in terms of the outcomes. Jessica Phillips 23:12.085
Good question then, because I haven't been part of the establishment of a group, I think when we were elected the were so maybe just to help. Coming to how will it work behind the scenes establishing it. Do we get the same issues or what? Absolutely. Larry Sengstock 23:31.589
That's the idea is to say we think we need a group for this particular reason. Then it's a matter this sort is just. Of off the top of my head I guess but we need a group for a particular reason. Who should be on that group? Who needs to be part of that group? Again the risk is you go so broad that you don't get anything. It's like who are the key stakeholders? Potentially for that particular group to make sure that we do get the right feedback but we also provide that cross flow of information so they understand why something's happening and that's a big part of it. People understand why they're more willing to accept it. So it's really just getting that. Cross flow is the way I see it right now. Councillor Tom might have a different slightly different view but that's the way I see it is that as we would set the terms of reference we would set who's on it and then what the expected outcomes are of that group. Jessica Phillips 24:24.573
Okay so so we would set it but in relation to the staff that would be responsible or the department if all of them are slightly different in departments how will that work. Larry Sengstock 24:38.013
Well they're already doing that work okay so it's a matter of then how do we integrate that and make sure that it's not an overburden on them you know another layer if you like but I think some respects that other layer might be more important more useful anyway to make sure that we are totally integrated we're already doing it for a number of their internal and their staff driven for various projects that we know are happening so this is just broadening it out. Karen Finzel 25:08.659
Question through the Chair to the CEO I note you've said in terms of reference with the Council land in terms of our recent expenditure that went into community engagement around town planning you know there was a recommendation that you know teams could come together town through town teams. And then it was going to be community-led in terms of reference back to Council do you see there will be opportunity for you know community groups to actually reach into Council and have you know recommend their group somehow gets reviewed. Larry Sengstock 25:48.412
Potentially absolutely that's and you know that's for you as a Councillor with your connections to those groups to bring that to the table and then decide whether they should be or should not be on that group thank you just seeking clarification sure that's what that's how I see it Councillor but again when we get around the table it could all change not but you have your influence and you have your and we set the direction in and again that's what terms of reference is all about is to understand what we're trying to achieve rather than just have a meeting for a meeting's sake it's what we're trying to achieve from that group. Amelia Lorentson 26:18.664
So part of the review through the would be to actually just gain some clarity as to the purpose of establishing groups and we need to do that part first before proceeding to establishing new groups thank you. Larry Sengstock 26:33.375
So just I guess one example we did was that it's waned a bit, but we got the funding. We needed to progress it but the Noosa Drive the walkway over the hill was really led by Council it was our funding we got the what we thought were the appropriate stakeholders together so that we can help to drive the planning and the design of that project that's a small example of it but really just saying here's the project who do we need to have involved how do we drive that from a Council point of view and led by Councillors so that we get the outcome that we're looking for that was one that was already put in place. There's a question? Karen Finzel 27:09.499
Yes thank you through the Chair to Mr. to CEO. Mr. Mayor. Before my time like these groups were all already in place. This was normally just an internal review of like who's in which group. How did these groups arise? Was that like did Council staff invite this? I mean what was the process? I mean to me it should be like an internal review with a bit of rigour around where we're at. So just trying to understand the background. Larry Sengstock 27:38.389
Right, I agree. Councillor. That's Councillor, that's really, now's the time to review them and that's what this is all about. What we did is this is a rollover remember these are already in place before my time as well. They've evolved from different whether we've put them in place or somebody else has put them in place but they have evolved and we've said we need to be part of that or that's something we're driving as you can see by the mix and matching there. So now's the time to review and look at them but this is what we did do. I know that our administrators here they looked at us and said which ones are still happening and that's what this list is. To the best of our knowledge these are the ones that operating. There's been some that we took off that list if you remember. So that's really where we're at. So now's the time to say what we're doing is just changing the membership of it. Now's the time to actually look at it and say are these actually relevant. So that will become feedback from yourselves as well because you go to those meetings, tell us whether we need to be there or not. Amelia Lorentson 28:38.893
In terms of the Hastings Street Association, how often does Council meet with the association and what information is fed to the group in terms of what's happening around the precinct. Brian Stockwell 28:50.565
So I won't allow that question that's going off into a specific that's not part of a Council appointment or working group or review in terms of the amendment before us. So, Councillor Wegener, would you like to close? On your amendment? Tom Wegener 29:07.036
Yeah, I see this as, well I see the first half as being, you know, a whole lot important, but a whole lot of nothing. It actually doesn't say anything and nothing's going to change probably. So that's why I wanted to include the Hastings Street as a consideration, as an actual, we need to get this done, maybe Hastings Street will be off the table, maybe we'll be talking about the arts and the hinterland, maybe organic farming, these different groups, but I know that we are, I believe. Lacking strategy, I think some of us around the table have noted that us Councillors are lacking strategy, and this is a way of bringing good information, and I think that Hastings Street, by putting there, it actually gives some meaning to the first sentence. So what I found going around Hastings Street talking to different people is that there's still silos, that our groups don't talk to each other nearly as much as they should be. Lighting, you know, all of a sudden when I talk to the Hastings association, they have a plan for lighting that is spectacular, I feel, very different from big lights going down, but rather lights, small lights on the red ground going up, so it kind of mirrors the pathway, the national park. I want to tell a story. Brian Stockwell 30:28.520
You're closing, so you can only address the matters that have been raised by other Councillors. Tom Wegener 30:34.638
The okay, during COVID, whether these things work, the roundtable was amazing. That group was very good, the Business Round Table during COVID, that was fantastic. The housing group did its job. It's gone now, we need to be have that same sort of forward thinking as the housing. In my opinion, the DMP would have been better served with a DMP working group looking lot of different groups and looking at it from a much more strategic level shared by the Councillors. Amelia Lorentson 31:08.767
Through the Chair, all these matters have not been raised before. Tom Wegener 31:12.434
Right. So I think that there'd be a smoother transition from our thinking through making the plans, through a strategy arising from us, plans, public consultation, to voting on it. I think there'd be a smoother transition if we had a better strategic. Mindset around the table. And that's what the goal of adding to Hastings Street. Whether that becomes one or not, it doesn't matter, but I think it actually defines more what the first sentence is about. Brian Stockwell 31:44.988
Thank you. I put the amendment. Those in favour? That's Councillor Wegener and Councillor Stockwell. Those opposed? That's Wilson, Councillor Wilkie, Councillor Phillips, Councillor Lorentson and Councillor Finzel. Do we have another amendment? Councillor Wilson? Nicola Wilson 32:02.758
I'd like to put the same amendment but without the second part of it. Amelia Lorentson 32:08.284
I'm happy to second. Thank you. Brian Stockwell 32:23.881
It's coming. And just turn the final comma into a full stop and we'll be fine. And that was moved by Councillor Wilson and seconded by Councillor Lorentson. Councillor Wilson. Nicola Wilson 32:35.603
I don't think we need to say too much more on this one. I think we were all in consensus that we need to have a review and we want to identify the potential need for the establishment of any new groups but we need to do that through the proper process of identifying groups and having equity around all of the different groups and discussing terms of reference before singling out any particular area. Jessica Phillips 32:58.632
Others wish to discuss the matter? Councillor Phillips. I'll speak really quickly in support of it and hope that it happens fairly soon just even a workshop to start the conversation because I agree with the fact that it's where we're all sitting and I agree with you that we have to be sitting strategically and this is a good start so. Frank Wilkie 33:17.390
I'd like to commend Councillor Wegener for bringing the amendment in the first place it's a good idea and I look forward to discussing the need for any sort of Hastings Street wording group as well. The Council is quite right there is a lot happening down there. Brian Stockwell 33:31.579
Councillor Wegener. Tom Wegener 33:33.519
Councillor Wilson thank you for this amendment. Thank you. Brian Stockwell 33:42.782
I support this I think what Councillor Wegener has done and I know he's talking to Councillor Finzel as part of the conversation leading to this amendment is it's made us think about do we organise ourselves to get the best information we can to make decisions and what's been triggered rather than just an appointment of a carryover is a bit of thinking around an engagement framework and I think yeah there have been different models over time before amalgamation we had the sector before we boards was actually recommended by staff to have place-based boards and I know when I first came in I did a lot of thinking about whether we do the similar sort of thing and one of the key things we have to think about is what the CEO has been saying over and there a purpose for the group in the first place and being really clear on we don't just do it just to have a group we do it because there's a specific purpose that we need that sort of engagement so hopefully the amendment if agreed to will lead to that sort of a thinking and process anyone else Councillor Wilson. Amelia Lorentson 34:51.532
Just, yeah, just to support Tom but support you with this amendment, Tom, in terms of strategic thinking, everything we do should be aligned with our aligned with our strategic vision. And I think the review will allow us to work out, you know, do these groups align with current and future strategic priorities. Very important base, what's happening now and with that future lens, I think we need to be forward thinking. So thank you for bringing the amendment. And again, Hastings I think the review will allow us to work out, you know, do these groups align with current it's and Peregian future strategic beach, and precinct, Cooroy, Kin Kin, I. Brian Stockwell 35:44.333
Councillor Wilson, would you like to pose? Nicola Wilson 35:45.775
Yeah, again, Councillor Wegener, thank you for bringing this forward. And thanks for the discussion around the table. I think we can all go away and think about this now and really have some good ideas about new groups that we'd like to see established and really really think about the groups that we're on and that we're having on those groups or the need for them in the future. You. Brian Stockwell 36:06.759
Okay, I put the amendment. That's unanimous, so it becomes part of the original motion. Thank you very I believe much. Only Councillor Wilkie has talked to you. Nicola Wilson 36:28.443
I'll ask it too quickly. Even though I've made comments about we need to review these groups, I do want to that we have all these groups and I'm really pleased to be appointed to them. I've had a few changes in my portfolio and also just to say thank you to the Councillors for their respectful conversations we've had in recent weeks to sort of negotiate between us all of who should be in which group. So that's really positive process. Brian Stockwell 36:59.940
Any minutes? I'll speak. I'd just like to put on the record it's going to be a historic moment. Quick calculation, 13 years as a Councillor. It'll be the first time I've been on any committee with the word works in it. Capital works. You'll love it. Don't take offence engineers, I'm a planner. Amelia Lorentson 37:26.681
My favourite committees boys, love it. Brian Stockwell 37:31.005
Looking forward to it. Anyone else? Councillor Wilkie, would you like to close? No thank you Mr Chair. I put the motion, those in favour? That's unanimous. Okay, we move then on to reports direct to General Committee and the first one is Peregian Beach active streets stage 1 progress update and next steps. Frank Wilkie 37:57.846
Mr Chair, I need to declare a conflict of interest. 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 Peregian Beach active streets stage 1 progress and next steps which is not ordinary Council business. As it proposes to bring benefit from the form of improved safety and amenity to a specific geographical area. Following public consultation the project now also includes consideration of traffic calming in my street. I live near the project site and stand to benefit if the project proceeds and my mother who also lives nearby attended the public information sessions, made comment and donated above the prescribed threshold amount of two thousand dollars to my election campaign as a result of my conflict of now leave the meeting room while the matter is considered and voted on. Brian Stockwell 38:48.251
Thank you. Can we just get started? Amelia Lorentson 38:53.377
Sorry, I'm just reading this for the first time. Can you just give me a couple of seconds? I'm just wondering whether we should be moving a procedural motion. For what reason it's never been raised I just want to ask whether a material conflict of interest, why this has been raised now and not previously given the number of workshops pop-ups, public engagements. I think I want to move a procedural motion to just get some more information from governance before we proceed with this. My understanding-- is procedural no valid motion there Councillor? Can I adjourn the meeting to get some more information in terms of governance at what stage does the material conflict of interest need to be raised and given that we've done so much workshops- community engagements, and it's been declared now, is there a risk that the integrity of the process might be undermined by this late declaration? Like I said, I'm just reading this for the first time. Brian Stockwell 40:04.779
And it's-- you're either going to move the procedural motion or you're not. Amelia Lorentson 40:07.611
I am moving a procedural motion. I will be moving it. So what's the motion? Move a procedural motion to request information or advice from governance. Brian Stockwell 40:17.331
That's the third procedural motion. That's too late on the table. Amelia Lorentson 40:19.931
So-- I would like to move a procedural-- motion to get some more information. No, not a procedural motion, Councillor. Brian Stockwell 40:28.463
So we'll move on. So staff, if we can have you to. Amelia Lorentson 40:31.303
The-- through the Chair. Can I please ask the CEO for some advice in terms of what process is available to me given that this is potentially a material conflict of interest and the Local Government Act actually stipulates that you have to declare at the time that you become aware of the conflict living next to I said this has just taken me a little bit by surprise so advice question to the Chair what processes are available to me to adjourn the meeting to allow us to get some advice from governments in terms of whether we should this report at all. Jessica Phillips 41:13.175
So I'm also not comfortable proceeding because that's the first time I was aware of that I so I'd like some advice think. Brian Stockwell 41:20.071
We think we can say that the procedural motion would be that the meeting be adjourned. Amelia Lorentson 41:27.432
That's what I actually see I said. Brian Stockwell 41:28.539
Have to wait for the motion. Amelia Lorentson 41:32.224
I actually that was the first words that I used through the Chair to adjourn the meeting so that we can seek advice from governments in terms of the integrity whether the integrity of the process is going to be compromised given that this is a material conflict of interest that's been just declared for the first time. Brian Stockwell 41:57.015
So Councillor, a procedural motion has to be short of and as outlined in the Standing Orders? Can we have a seconder? Yes, thank you. Councillor Wilson. All those in favour? That's Councillor Wilson, Phillips, Wegener, Lorentson, lonergan. Amelia Lorentson 42:18.527
Excuse me, I moved the procedural motion, thank you. Brian Stockwell 42:23.692
No, Councillor Phillips moved the motion. Jessica Phillips 42:28.916
And who's second? It's for the length, can I explain it? Brian Stockwell 42:34.482
I'll explain it. You talked about you wanting to adjourn, you didn't move the specific procedural motion on the Standing Orders is a set format very precise. Amelia Lorentson 42:43.290
Sorry I sought advice from the CEO to help me with the wording I don't understand why it's not being moved by me I've moved a procedural motion. Councillor Phillips just said I've moved. Through the CEO can you please provide advice thank you. Jessica Phillips 43:02.190
Sorry, after it fell and the Chair can move it. I've just made it simple to adjourn the meeting procedural motion because the Chair has explained that the Standing Orders have to be succinct around just simple work. Amelia Lorentson 43:16.580
But I sought advice from the CEO in terms of how to move the process. That hadn't been sorted out. I would like to move the procedural motion, thank you, through the Chair. Brian Stockwell 43:35.566
So Councillor, under the Standing Orders. There's a process. Yes. The 31-1, the procedural motion that you would have need to move had these words that the meeting stand adjourned. Councillor Phillips said that we adjourned the meeting. Yes. Same thing. When a Councillor moves a motion, they have to use a specific wording. You asked. Amelia Lorentson 44:00.461
So why wasn't this advice given to me when I asked through the Chair and through the CEO? Brian Stockwell 44:05.626
I explained it twice, I thought. I asked. And I can't take back a motion that's been moved by another Councillor. So the first Councillor to move a motion in the format required by the Standing Orders was Councillor Phillips. When. Amelia Lorentson 44:28.821
When I moved a procedural motion and asked for advice from the CEO and the Chair in terms of wording and what process I need to put forward, no one responded. No one responded and, Chair, you just explained to me what had to be done. You know, I just. I'm disappointed, to say the least. Brian Stockwell 44:53.476
So, my understanding was the CEO did explain the situation. Councillor Councillor Phillips. Considered. Considering the strengths of Councillor Lorentson's views, are you happy to let yours lapse? Jessica Phillips 45:09.772
I'm happy for just the wording to be succinct, so then it meets the standing order requirements. It doesn't matter to me who moves or seconds it. Brian Stockwell 45:19.145
So the seconder, are you happy? So Councillor Lorentson, the wording would be that the meeting stand adjourned. Amelia Lorentson 45:25.653
Thank you. The question that I asked some time ago, thank you. Brian Stockwell 45:29.838
And do we have a seconder? Karen Finzel 45:30.561
I just need a question to clarify. Under the Standing Orders, I thought for it to fall, you have to ask for a show of hands of all Councillors. Brian Stockwell 45:38.469
Oh, you're true, correct, yes. Thank you. So is everyone else happy that we led that one, Paul, to allow Councillor Lorentson to move the motion? Karen Finzel 45:47.771
And don't we have to be in group? Brian Stockwell 45:49.092
Yeah, we have to be in group. Is anyone. Jessica Phillips 45:51.876
Is everyone clear what we're going to vote for? Yep. We're letting that lap so Councillor Lorentson can move a simple wording with the word adjourn for the standing order of requirements. Brian Stockwell 46:05.182
We can do it by show of hands if it's not a vote. Is everyone happy with it? Yep. Okay. Thank you Councillor Finzel. Thank you. And now we're looking for a seconder to that. The mover of the meeting stands adjourned is Councillor Lorentson and we're looking for a seconder. So the word is the meeting stands adjourned. Okay. I'm just bringing that up. I'm sorry, that was Councillor Lorentson. Lorentson and seconded, Councillor Wilson. I just think it might be a good time that we ask the staff to leave. Brian Stockwell 01:04:03.781
Okay, we're back on. Okay, welcome back. Councillors, would someone like to move a procedural motion? Amelia Lorentson 01:04:10.646
I'd like to move a procedural motion that now before the meeting item 8.1, Peregian Beach Active Street stage one progress update and next steps be deferred to the Ordinary Meeting at 10am. Dated 19th of March 2026. Do we have a seconder? Brian Stockwell 01:04:27.079
I second. I'll second. By Councillor Wilson. I put the motion. Those in favour? That's unanimous. We move on to the review of Noosa Council meeting structure. I invite Councillor Wilkie back into the meeting please. Brian Stockwell 01:05:43.181
There it is, you're up Johnston, you're up OG, you're up, that so we've just got Jonci Wolff, who is the author of the report, going to do an executive summary of this matter. Jonci Wolff 01:06:04.925
This report presents the findings of the Council meeting structure review that has occurred over the past four months. The review was encouraged because the current meeting structure can place significant meeting demands on Councillors and staff, provide limited time for report reading, and create duplication between small and General Committee meetings, and it can also contribute to community uncertainty when decisions are made. The review considered four meeting structures as outlined the report in an attempt to address, ideally, all these issues just listed and after the workshop it was identified that option two reducing meetings to one General Committee or committee meeting and one Ordinary Meeting per month has been identified the to best balance because it significantly reduces the number of formal meetings I think they're sitting at the moment roughly around 50 per year to pretty much 25 26 maybe it overlap and duplication between the small and General Committee meetings it also eliminates overlap and duplication between the small and General Committee meetings it provides longer reporting time for Councillors in the provided draft would be seven full days and I made I tried it in the table in the report they are full days regardless whether they are weekdays or weekend days but they are full days they're not the day of a gender release or the day of when the meeting occurs they are full days between those dates it also I think improves clarity for the community about when decisions are being made and it's still a good format for robust debate and good decision making. It is therefore recommended that Council a note the report, b adopt option 2 as detailed in the report as the new Council meeting structure with implementation to commence 1 July 26, c appoint all Councillors as committee members and appoint the Deputy Mayor as the Chair of the General Committee Meeting from 1 July 26, and d approve the Council meeting schedule for July to December as provided in attachment 1 to this report. Frank Wilkie 01:08:23.634
Thank you for the report and the work that's gone into this, Jonci. I note in the recommendation that this new meeting structure is to take place from 1 July of 2026. Unless I missed it in the report could you explain the reasons why for the selection of that date for the commencement of that new structure? Jonci Wolff 01:08:45.494
It was considered to provide appropriate time for us to, in the background, to amend quite a few documents, the governing documents that govern the meeting. There's obviously public participation documents, there are sustaining as the Standing Orders and I think it's this the change should also be communicated appropriately to the community that will require also some time. Any change to the Standing Orders for example would then also because it's obviously Council adopted a procedure or document it will obviously you know it will provide opportunity for further review there will be a Councillor workshop and then it needs to be adopted so there's quite a few items that are required to be actioned and done prior to the implementation. And what's the one of the implications for the Resolve system? I'm not a specialist in the scheduling and programming that has to be taken so look, there is quite a few things to be organised in them I think with in collaboration with Vicky Cathy obviously we have discussed time frames and what because there is and Cathy obviously we have discussed time frames and what because there is quite a few things that need to be organised in the background it was quite a few considered an appropriate time frame without all the technicalities that are required because I don't work that intensely with determined that intensely with the determined result thank you. Brian Stockwell 01:10:03.101
Any other questions? Councillor Lorentson. Amelia Lorentson 01:10:05.408
The report highlights improved reading time is the benefit of option two the report should the motion also amend the Standing Orders to require the minimum seven day agenda release period at the moment I think it says reasonable time should we in alignment with the report in front of us look at amending our Standing Orders just to ensure that time for seven days is actually guaranteed for councils and the public. Jonci Wolff 01:10:36.064
I don't think that is necessary considering that this report provides a draft schedule for 2026 and it different. Is it defines their gender release dates as well and the meeting dates and it and that would be if adopted this schedule would be adopted as well and it clearly defines seven days reading time between a general release and the meeting so that's already covered through that so. Amelia Lorentson 01:11:05.997
Your answer is no that's correct okay thank you through. Larry Sengstock 01:11:11.481
As well so in the option it says seven days before and that's the intention and that's the reason why we need to go back and do the Standing Orders to make sure that reflected in the standing order so we can and that's for us to then agree to Standing Orders and we know that when change some of the things in the Standing Orders a year ago it took quite a bit of debate and to get things through so that's why we're looking to have enough time to do that and that's why July 1 was the date that we put forward to do some of those things because we know that there is a quite a bit of work that has to happen but in terms of the seven days it's already in the option and that's the best that would be then reflected into the process and the end of the ongoing process in Standing Orders. Nicola Wilson 01:11:56.991
A question of clarification please so Council will get seven days reading time and that's also those reports will be available to the public at the same time that will continue. Larry Sengstock 01:12:09.638
That's the thing if we that's the rules and regulations we run with the State government is that when the report goes to you it has to go to the as a final report and that's an important point as the final report goes to the Councillors it needs to go to public at the same time so they would have seven days as well. Nicola Wilson 01:12:27.908
I'd like to try them an amendment please. Brian Stockwell 01:12:35.057
Thank you very much. Certainly. Okay so it was moved cancelled. Councillor Finzel, seconded Councillor Phillips. Karen Finzel 01:12:42.606
Oh yeah, can I withdraw it? Tom Wegener 01:12:47.062
I'll move it. Jessica Phillips 01:12:48.322
I'll second. Okay. Brian Stockwell 01:12:54.767
Because the Council pulled me up just before. Is everyone in agreement to Councillor Finzel withdrawing her moving of the motions? Yes. Show of hands. Very good. And Councillor Wegener, you've indicated. I'm going out of work so I need to move things on the back. Councillor Wegener, you would like to move the motion? Yes. Councillor Phillips is seconding. Councillor Wegener, you have the floor. Tom Wegener 01:13:22.273
Oh, we've gone round and on this. I don't think I need to say anything. Okay. Brian Stockwell 01:13:29.094
Councillor Wilson, would you like to move an amendment? Yes, please. Nicola Wilson 01:13:38.281
The first part, please, about the timing. Brian Stockwell 01:14:12.081
So the wording in D there should, rather than having those read, you shouldn't it just say May 2026? No, because it's not the not in the attach road currently. Oh, okay. Yes. I did think that. That's what I agreed to do from July 1. I'm going to read a second. By Councillor Phillips. Councillor Wilson, you have the floor. Thank you. Councillor Phillips seconding original motion. Oh, yes, you can. Can't do that, Councillor. Kerri Contini 01:14:41.629
That's right, I was just going to say. Councillor Finzel. You can't. Brian Stockwell 01:14:45.072
Oh, I can't. Yes, you can. Yes, I can. Councillor Finzel seconded. Nicola Wilson 01:14:50.577
Yes, I can. Thank you, Mr Chair. Thank you, just want to test this motion. We've been talking about potential change for a long time now. I think I've been requesting it for a year already and I wasn't happy with approving the current timetable for the year 2026 to just keep rolling on as we had been. At the time I questioned well the time I was told that even if we approve of the calendar for the rest of the year we can change it at any time and we weren't given an indication of how long that needed to be. I can see that it's completely impossible for people because people are already working to existing deadlines but I don't believe that's as much of an issue for me. Basically we're pretty much in agreement that the current structure isn't working therefore I don't want to continue doing it for another three months if there's an opportunity to change soon. Brian Stockwell 01:15:47.809
Anyone else wish to talk to the amendment? Councillor Wilkie. 'Connor. Frank Wilkie 01:15:54.870
Look, there was some discussion at the workshops about the reason why July 1st was chosen as the date. There was a lot of back of house rearranging that has to be done to make sure that we can bed down this new meeting structure very smoothly. I understand reprogramming of the Resolve meeting schedule needs to be done a long way in advance. And there is the work to be done the Standing Orders as well. And there may be other things that may be changed in the Standing Orders that need to be worked through. So it is a big change to the way the Council has done it. It's not just since 2014 that this meeting structure has been in place. It goes back at least another 30 years. I remember being a journalist reporting on Noosa Council back in 1996/97 and they had the committee general and the ordinary then if I remember correctly. It has served as well to date. The only shortcoming of the current structure in my view, if I heard the Councillors correct, is a short lead time to the General Committee Meeting with reports going direct to the general. So, I'm in support of the change, but I'm also in support of and respect the staff advice that they need the time to July 1st to get the bed in the changes so that they can be done correctly and with as a few skewer. Glitches as possible. Amelia Lorentson 01:17:32.402
Can I ask a question through the Chair to the CEO? In terms of resourcing, what Mayor Wilkie just said, is the date, 1st of July, was that because of resourcing implications, I'm not sure. Larry Sengstock 01:17:48.953
One of the considerations, absolutely. We have people on leave over this next couple of months as well, so trying to match all of that up. That's not the absolute, but it's certainly a consideration that we needed to put into this. Also, I think just with the Standing Orders, there are some, there are changes that need to be made. If we went with May 1, I couldn't guarantee that we have agreed Standing Orders. We can certainly make the changes, but you need to go through a process to get them agreed at a meeting as well. So all of those I haven't really considered, to be honest, Councillor, in terms of, you know, stepping it through in a timeline because we, I just assumed July 1 was the correct time to give everybody a time to do it properly and get it and running, but also certainly understand the frustration in wanting to flip the switch as quickly as we possibly can. So it's amazing how quickly the months roll around May, you know, in terms of meeting, you know, we're in the March one now, the April meetings are already planned, reports are being written, so it just, you know, we're on this rolling schedule that makes it difficult for us, and that's one of the reasons why we wanted to change the structure, to be honest. But I worry, the first of May is a very is a very tight timeline for us. We may miss something, we may not have the proper procedures in place. We also have, you know, we have other considerations as well with the new bill coming through. What that means in terms of our Standing Orders was conflicts of interest and particularly conflicts of interest that needs to be fit into the Standing Orders as well. So again, that July period just gave us that time to work that through. Nicola Wilson 01:19:38.528
Can I ask a question please? Which, how will this change, the Standing Orders, which parts need to be addressed? Larry Sengstock 01:19:50.236
Yeah, I was just looking through it then, there's not a huge amount, but it still requires us to, if we want to make, this is a good time to actually look at the Standing Orders and change if we wanted to do anything different outside of that as well, while we're reflecting on the Standing Orders, are there other things that we've that we'd like to change now going forward? I know we've still had the debate about the timing of questions and deputations and things like that, so whether we want to look at those things or not. But that was going to give us, that was my thinking as well, give us a chance to really review the Standing Orders in more detail. But most of it is about the timing of the meetings, when we'd like to have them, that all needs to that then all needs to then come to a Council meeting, so that would need to come to April before we could implement it in May. So that's the thing, it's sort of all, everything comes forward as an extra step. Brian Stockwell 01:20:53.500
Mr Chair. Yes, sorry I'm just looking at the certificate thing. Do we have, I was just trying to work it out myself. Councillor Finzel. Karen Finzel 01:21:01.146
Just a question, you mentioned this bill through the Chair and Mr CEO. Can you just clarify when we expect that and is that about governance looking through that to have time to, I don't know, absorb that and then apply that or give advice as to how yeah, we make adjustments. Larry Sengstock 01:21:21.091
In terms of the bill, the empowering Council bill, it's been ratified by the State government, but there are some things that are now immediate, but then there's the conflict of interest. We're going back to a different process with conflict of interest. That is, from their perspective, not being rolled out or not being implemented until July 1. There's a number of education processes that are coming to talk to us about what it means. So that's not the expectation is that we don't actually utilise that new process until July 1. So there's a few things in there that we just will then have to be fed back into the terms of reference. So again, just in our thinking, this is the process we thought it all sort of matches up in terms of timing for July 1. But I also understand that the frustration or the desire to once you make the decision to exit a point as quickly as possible. Jessica Phillips 01:22:15.095
Can I just speak to it please. With consideration to the conversation around the table. I think for me, I see them separately. Even though they feed into our reports and our meetings. To me it's like what we're adopting now is our meeting structures, but regardless of if it never changed. We'd still hold out general and ordinary with the Standing Orders anyway till they change. Like, I don't know if I'm explaining it properly. I don't. Brian Stockwell 01:22:53.003
Can I answer your question? Because that's what I was just looking for. The Standing Orders only require the dates to be published and for enough time for councils, as much time as practical. So on the standing order issue, while, you know, we've mentioned the potential desirability to have seven days notice, et cetera, there would be no, just my quick review, there'd be no specific requirement to amend them before it's started in terms of a meeting be able to. Because all it says is the dates. Jessica Phillips 01:23:31.704
So that's why I'm supporting this because. If that will come regardless of whether this would happen. Brian Stockwell 01:23:40.578
So can I ask the mover something? Sure May is tight and if we have staff away, is there any, if we move to middle ground of June? So staff moving one month, you moving one month. Is that likely to be off? Larry Sengstock 01:24:07.181
It would be better than May. June is better than May. I thought it was. Amelia Lorentson 01:24:17.688
So question to the CEO, will that give staff enough time? Larry Sengstock 01:24:27.931
Well that's the, it's still going to put everybody under pressure, there's no question about that, but we operate under pressure. On a daily basis, so if that's the request of the Council to do that, then we'll make every effort to meet the June deadline. Frank Wilkie 01:24:43.378
Question, if there's new conflict of interest? Rules that need to be recognised in the Standing Orders by July 1. But we need to amend the Standing Orders to accommodate them if we go. With an earlier date? Brian Stockwell 01:25:04.770
So I think they can be dealt separately. There may be some benefits of amending Standing Orders but there's no requirement of amending Standing Orders. Frank Wilkie 01:25:14.059
Was it a matter of alignment that conflict of interest Standing Orders changes to accommodate, conflict of interest changes to be accommodated in the Standing Orders to be done by July 1 as per when the laws become enacted? And you wanted to align that with any of the changes that come with that? Unknown 01:25:32.890
It was really just an opportunity to do it all in one go, that's right. Larry Sengstock 01:25:37.289
That was all our thinking is in how we do it, based on resourcing as well and time and everything else that we've got going on. Frank Wilkie 01:25:44.087
So it's not just Standing Orders, it's resourcing and restructuring of the Resolve System that you want the time for? Yeah. Okay. Brian Stockwell 01:25:58.281
So does anyone else wish to talk to this amendment? Amelia Lorentson 01:26:01.226
I'll talk to the amendment. I'm hoping Councillor Wilson will change the date to June and I think that's a really good middle ground in respects. The resourcing implications. Potential resourcing implications but I totally support the intent and the amendment in front of us. Nicola Wilson 01:26:29.865
Can I talk to it before so my mind I up? Brian Stockwell 01:26:37.311
Accept the staff advice that May is probably pushing too hard for the benefit of one or I don't think I could support this. I do probably could support the middle ground of June and then just treat the Standing Orders as a separate process. For. Karen Finzel 01:27:18.108
Yeah look I think in terms of the CEO's of the CEO's response around the table, you know, I do have concerns around, we always talk about, you know, productivity, we talk about, you know, psychosocial hazard in the workplace, you know, we want to protect a workforce that, you know, is already, we're extended. Know, we've got new things that have come up even this week around, you know, extra training around different things that's been mandatory for Councillors as well. I'm just very mindful to make sure that we're not putting extra pressure on staff. And given, you know, I think it's really important that we get these meetings right, yeah, so perhaps maybe I could support a middle ground, but I think it to May and putting it, you know, I don't deal with the staff, but given the response from the CEO, you know, I think it's worth consideration to make sure that if there's, you know, pressures on the workforce that is a very, should be prioritised, so I can't support this in full for May. Brian Stockwell 01:28:32.115
Okay, anyone else wish to talk? You wish to close? Nicola Wilson 01:28:36.121
Yes, I'm going to continue to talk about May, but we'll still consider. There's no need to change that. Standing Orders for this to be implemented. We already have a schedule made up for July to December that can be replicated for May and June. I don't believe that to be a significant workload. We haven't been given really a clear view on Resolve, but I can't see that a system like Resolve would be too difficult to change in a period of six weeks. And we could certainly get assistance from them to do that. Councils are put under time pressure all the time with. Reports coming two days before a meeting, and that's what I'm actually trying to address here. That we stop that. We stop having things skip the S&O and the P&E and we do what we've agreed to do and have everything come with a week's notice to the General Committee meetings. So just taking a couple of meetings out of a schedule, moving the general that's already there. I really don't see why it's that big in any cost. We're already planning ahead to do it for July anyway. I just don't see this as such an interesting task. Have you ever seen corporate environments online where these things happen? Unknown 01:30:00.346
A question through the Chair. We can't have questions between the close and the vote. And I haven't finished. Amelia Lorentson 01:30:07.023
Yeah. Oh excuse me, sorry. Nicola Wilson 01:30:12.702
So, I don't want the current situation to keep continuing and just pushing this forward all the time. We really need to change and I think we need to get on with it as soon as possible and not have this. But there's absolutely no reason for Standing Orders to change, I would like to review some things in the standing order such as special meetings because that doesn't help. I'm not having special meetings with you guys, so I'd like to look at some other things, but that can be done later. And if we have to adopt more changes because I of it. Feel like some of them would do it, but we have to do this doesn't actually trigger any changes to staff rules. Brian Stockwell 01:30:51.728
Okay, I'll put the motion. It's an amendment. No, I can't take it until the amendment's been voted on. So, I so, I'll put the amendment. Those in favour? That's Councillor Wilson, Phillips, Wegener and Lorentson. The amendment is carried. It becomes part of the motion. And against? Oh yes, that's important to act ask for that. Councillor Wilkie, Finzel and Stockwell. Okay. So we only have had Councillor Wegener speak to his motion which has now been amended. Does anyone else wish to speak to the motion? Amelia Lorentson 01:31:45.063
I have a question through the thanks. My question in terms of a General Committee, the agenda is going to become significantly larger. So my question is how are we going to ensure that the complex planning or environmental matters. That we actually deal with that properly. Is there a view to streamline or make the agendas more efficient in terms of noting reports, strategic, complex matters etc because I think long days may compromise but we need to be all over the reports that come to us. Larry Sengstock 01:32:32.714
The intention is to streamline and get the reports out there. The reports that we know will require discussion or debate further as opposed to those that were earlier for as a status update report for noting. We need to be more, disciplined in terms of our reporting, in terms of our requesting. Brian Stockwell 01:33:01.307
Okay, Councillor Finzel. Karen Finzel 01:33:01.307
Can I test a change to item C? Brian Stockwell 01:33:08.576
You move the amendment. Karen Finzel 01:33:11.445
Thank you, Mr Chair. So basically, I just want to. Larry Sengstock 01:33:22.990
This is not the native version sorry. Of Councillor. Karen Finzel 01:33:32.593
I'd like to test some different wording for item C. One, two, three. Alright, so that. So, are you ready? Unknown 01:33:52.871
Item C, A and 2 and 3. Brian Stockwell 01:34:05.644
It'll take a little while to come up. Karen Finzel 01:34:11.100
Well, can you just cut and paste item C and the changes, because there's only a few changes, a couple of words. Just while we're waiting, one of the reasons I'd like to test this around debate is I saw real value in the committee meetings and the value that I saw in that was in the role of Chair, because it provides us lots more opportunities as Councillors to be a Chair. I think the gap in the current meeting process was the fact that and I've raised it. Brian Stockwell 01:34:53.874
So Councillor you can't really do your debate. We're just going to use the chance to come up with a comment. Jessica Phillips 01:35:18.167
I think that'll have a lot. Karen Finzel 01:35:25.484
Okay, appoint all Councillors as committee members and appoint the Deputy Chair, oh no, and appoint Councillors via. Any schedule? Brian Stockwell 01:35:53.841
No, no. It's regarding the Chair. Karen Finzel 01:35:56.504
Yeah, what I'm trying to achieve is I would like to debate that we provide opportunity for all Councillors via a schedule that has equity and fairness. To allow a rotation of the Chair. Brian Stockwell 01:36:12.451
So appoint and for the Chair, I'm just flexing across this out here. Appoint David in here. I'll look it out. Yep. Yeah. Karen Finzel 01:36:26.588
So after appoint the Chair, Councillors and appoint Councillors no, sorry. After appoint. Yeah, that's right. We can work at word because I'm just trying to get the point across. Brian Stockwell 01:36:52.022
On a rotating schedule. Yes, something like that. Yeah, yeah. On a rotating schedule to be care of. Yes, thank you. Amelia Lorentson 01:37:07.820
Chee two Chair. Yeah, two Chair. And two Chair the General Committee from 1st of May 2026. Karen Finzel 01:37:17.675
Thank you Vicky. Schedule one, by the amara or it could even be faces, rotating faces. No, I don't have a schedule. Brian Stockwell 01:37:29.305
Happy schedule. Frank Wilkie 01:37:33.648
I'll second it for the purpose of time. Karen Finzel 01:37:36.415
Thank you. Brian Stockwell 01:37:39.807
Yeah, we don't know why you're doing this because you haven't talked to the motion yet. Karen Finzel 01:37:46.695
The reason why I would really like to bring this to debate and hopefully we get some robust debate around the table is I see the value in opportunity to Chair meetings at all levels, like in the chamber and in the community. I think it provides also diversity and develop skills and education for Councillors. The reason I personally think that we've had challenges around the committee meeting and deferring is because the gap opinion existed because it wasn't mandatory for all Councillors to be at in my opinion existed because it I'm trying to address that of opportunities also for Chair through that gap of opportunities also for Chair through this amendment. So I'm putting it to the table to see what people think about equity and shared opportunity to Chair the meetings aside from just the Deputy Mayor. Via a rotating schedule. Tom Wegener 01:39:03.747
I'll speak to It is that ok? Yeah. Sorry, I'm not the Chair. I think it's a good idea, being the Chair of the meetings. Absolutely puts an extra responsibility on the person that takes the Chair. And you've got to read the notes. You've got to be so much more astute as a Chair. It kind of brings an extra level of engagement as the Chair in appreciating. So I think this is a great idea. Thank you. Frank Wilkie 01:39:37.892
I would like to put it in a different perspective. I applaud the principle behind this, Councillor Finzel. I would recommend that we at least see how the all-day new General Committee meetings flow and go for a period of time before we move to a rotating schedule. Because one, that General Committee Meeting will be all items coming with the capacity to all those items in that forum. It's an extra workload on all councils. It will involve more reading for all Councillors as a start and more preparation for all Councillors as a start and more pressure on all Councillors as a starting point. My feeling is, as you've probably seen over the last two years, the Chair of the general or the ordinary, wherever any robust debate takes place, you need experienced counts for a lot and you really need to be across the Standing Orders and have had experience in managing robust debate. There is an opportunity for Councillors, while we bed down this General Committee, to get experienced as chairs of the external and internal working groups. Part of the changes make there is for Councillors to Chair them more frequently, rather than be committee members. I applaud the idea, the principle behind it. But there is a big, you should probably notice, big difference between the informality of a portfolio committee meeting, where only half the Councillors sit, and also the General Committee, like today, and also the formality of the Ordinary Meeting. So I'd recommend we hold off. My suggestion, and I'm happy to be guided by the group, would be to hold off, see how we all go when we move to an all-day General Committee Meeting with all Councillors having to be prepared and make final, almost final decisions on every item that comes across their desk at the General Committee Meeting, which is likely to run, if not half the day, possibly full days. Jessica Phillips 01:42:11.732
I'll speak to it. To support I the amendment? Yes, Councillor Finzel. I think that opportunity to learn comes through doing, not necessarily through watching for some. Actually didn't really mind whether or not I do or don't Chair general meetings so this isn't about me it's about giving opportunity to those that would want to sit and learn the skills. I think another way to make sure that we are across Standing Orders is to put us in a position where we have to step up and lead and some may or not want to do that again but it certainly gives the opportunity for those that want to a great place and I think it also encourages respect. Conversation and debate at this very table when there is someone that is in the Chair if they haven't got any experience then I would hope that we can all assist in developing those skills. If they're what they hand up to it or through a rotating schedule, whichever way, I think it's great. Brian Stockwell 01:43:33.817
Thanks Wilson. Nicola Wilson 01:43:34.718
Thank you. I'm a bit in two minds on this one so I'll listen to the rest of the debate but I have enjoyed having the odd experience to Chair the S&O meeting and I agree that we need experienced people in these roles but you don't gain experience without having to go at the same time I think continuity is important knowing who Chair is and all the different things that have to be resolved potentially with the Chair before the meeting that's going to get quite confusing if it changes everyone potentially and I also learned a lot from Brian sorry Councillor Stockwell as the Chair so yeah I'm still not quite sure I can see the reason for doing it and in fact I considered putting this amendment forward myself but then when I really thought about it I think I was keener on having continuity of everyone knowing who the Chair is so I'm still not quite decided but that's at the at moment. Amelia Lorentson 01:44:36.624
Can I ask a question to the Chair to Councillor Finzel so the wording as it stated implies mandatory that we're all on a rotating schedule would you consider maybe opting optional allow Councillors to what's the intent behind your wording is it to mandate that we all check or does it give us opportunity to say yes or no. Karen Finzel 01:45:06.672
Well, I've only thought about it at this meeting so I take your point yeah yeah I see what you're heading so that people could choose to opt on or off if they don't want a Chair well, I've perhaps we could appoint the Councillors with an opportunity to opt off. Amelia Lorentson 01:45:31.645
Councillors as committee members. Brian Stockwell 01:45:41.381
So can I, I'll speak to it because I was going to wait for everyone. Amelia Lorentson 01:45:46.186
I hadn't spoken yet. Brian Stockwell 01:45:47.788
It was going to be difficult but it was 3-3 and then I'd be mating on myself. I'll start with by saying that when my key thing I want out of this particular item is for Council and Councillors to be far more efficient and effective and to stop what has been a significant loss of productivity in this organisation. So then looking at the amendment I actually went to the Mayor and said I think you could do both. That's an alternative. Is that we're having two meetings is it really appropriate for the Mayor? I accept the notion that learning how to Chair the meeting is important and to because it is silent on the terms of the schedule I would when I saw this I would think that you know that we the schedule wasn't every rotating every month it might be a six monthly so in this term there might only be three more or four more people to do it and I also agree, but. That when you do get with controversial matters can be it an interesting task but I'm yeah personally I'm not going to say I should be prepared because I think I can see the arguments around the table. Councillor Lorentson. Amelia Lorentson 01:47:16.749
I'll speak to it. I like the idea of it and I like the idea you know gosh use these phrases quite a lot that leaders should allow others to lead so I love the idea of allowing Councillors on a rotating schedule to Chair the General Committee and I think that you know if wait till we're ready and again I think I spoke to Councillor Tom Wegener I spoke to a school just recently about this if we wait till we're ready we miss opportunities so the best way for is maybe get thrown in at the deep end and I think also never underestimate one two three four women around a table and Tom the Councillors because we actually thrive under pressure and it allows us to home our skills it allows us to really get all over the Standing Orders rather than being you know quiet participants so I am going to support this I would like if we all agreed to considering the wording just those Councillors who agreed to be on the rotating schedule some councils may not I don't know how we're going to do that but I am totally supportive I just think on a personal level I would love the opportunity that's this is how I best learn. Brian Stockwell 01:48:57.701
So we had a question here. Nicola Wilson 01:48:59.085
Question please if this was to be carried would we be able to have some I training think for Councillors. Larry Sengstock 01:49:10.680
If that's required if that's something that the Councillors request that absolutely. Brian Stockwell 01:49:16.848
Councillor Phillips. Jessica Phillips 01:49:17.570
I was just going to say is there possible to make one wording change on an opt-in rotating schedule? Yes. If it's up to the Councillor themselves. Karen Finzel 01:49:33.726
Yeah I'm happy to consider it I from where I've worked before terms it's the opt-off of works administration better. Because it's just the process moves forward and then you can just send an email and say I opt off that but I'm open to what we think also a question through the Chair to the CEO you know we talked about not being too prescriptive in these amendments do you think that's sufficient for us to with the intent to proceed forward it's not we need more. Larry Sengstock 01:50:06.903
Detail I think the point that the Chair made is it six monthly is it three monthly? That to debate and that will come into the Standing Orders as well is you know whether that I think that needs to be discussed or agreed now otherwise we'll get to a point of further debate monthly? Nicola Wilson 01:50:29.656
Is it monthly? Because it would be effective from May. Brian Stockwell 01:50:33.646
Yes and we'd have to have a schedule coming to April, so you might want to think that you might want to think that Council Stockwell stays until the schedule has been adopted might be a good addition. Karen Finzel 01:50:43.036
This or even the first few months what could we added to have the wording. Brian Stockwell 01:50:55.591
So it is to 20 so we're nearly at the two hour mark when we normally have a break I will adjourn the meeting for all the things we normally adjourn for and we can have private conversations during that break we'll make it a 15 minute adjournment good idea which is 2:36. Amelia Lorentson 01:51:19.911
Okay, thank you Mr Chair I've got opt-in-out and appoint Councillors councils and. Brian Stockwell 02:06:44.693
Okay welcome back Councillor Finzel you have the floor. Karen Finzel 02:06:49.644
Yes thank you Mr Chair I'm prepared to let this drop it basically and around the table for the Standing Orders and then I've got some wording prepared to bring another to the table for debate. Brian Stockwell 02:07:05.790
Everyone happy for this one to be withdrawn okay so the amendment was withdrawn if you can just note that with the agreement of Councillors and then table for second this one so might because it's new Councillor Finzel would you like to read it out. Karen Finzel 02:07:26.089
Certainly thank you Mr Chair item C amended to read appoint all Councillors as committee members and appoint Councillors a four monthly rotating schedule on agreement with Councillor Stockwell retaining the Chair for the first period on the schedule. Brian Stockwell 02:07:43.115
And seconded by Councillor Wilkie would you like to go further. Karen Finzel 02:07:46.599
Sorry. Amelia Lorentson 02:07:48.040
Just through the Chair does that make sense on a green with Councillor Stockwell are we missing a couple of should be a. Brian Stockwell 02:07:57.026
Comma after or a colon net yeah after agreement I'm just saying thank you for that what agreement with me everything should be. Karen Finzel 02:08:09.360
Good pick up picked. Amelia Lorentson 02:08:15.920
It up straight away that's alright. Karen Finzel 02:08:17.540
I think the retaining of Council Stockwell it comes back to the Mayor's comment that we are you know changing so I think you know to be prudent and give us that opportunity to test out the meeting schedules what's that going to look like I think that gives us the confidence with an experienced Chair person there as we make that transition the four monthly rotating schedule is in response to the CEO's request for further detailed information as opposed to as it's set so hopefully that makes that requirement and I think for equity around the table we counted out the number of months until the next election and four months gives us equity around the table but also the assurance to other Councillors that if they don't wish to participate in that role that then they can opt off so I think the new wording makes meets all that were raised at the table. Brian Stockwell 02:09:27.862
Thank you Mr. Nicola Wilson 02:09:28.485
Chair I'm just wondering if our Standing Orders actually allow for this to happen so 36.1 Council will choose the Chairperson for a standing committee meeting this Chairperson will preside over meetings of the standing committee so that suggests one person provides overall meetings would suggest would we have to keep having a new motion would motion we have to keep having a new motion every four months to change the Chairperson? Brian Stockwell 02:09:57.121
My view was that if you adopted a schedule that would meet that requirement. Larry Sengstock 02:10:01.327
That was my take on it as well. I'm reading it at the same time. The more I read it, the more it says Council will choose and that's the, that would be the, if you adopt the schedule then Council will be choosing. So, and that person will then preside over the meetings of the standing committee and consider it just a standard document, standard statement. Thank you. Karen Finzel 02:10:24.214
Can I just get a clarification which number that was on the Standing Orders? Larry Sengstock 02:10:28.112
36.1 Or 36 presiding officer for, it's for a standing committee. Yep. Not for ordinary it's 36.1 and 36.2. Thank you. Brian Stockwell 02:10:40.265
Does anyone else wish to talk to the amendment? Excuse me Chair, just as per Councillor Wilson's original amendment which we are changing. Did you want the 1st of May as of the 1st of May? Yes. At the end? Yes. So that's just to align it. That's what was there before. As of or as? Commencing. Karen Finzel 02:11:16.323
Commencing? Yes. Or from. I don't know if we should put a date in because we debated that. Brian Stockwell 02:11:24.830
Yes? So that's now part of the motion. Oh okay, yes. Sorry, I lost track of that. Okay. Thank you for picking that up. Anyone else wish to. Council Lorentson? Amelia Lorentson 02:11:39.303
I please seek clarity? Section 36.1. My understanding, as I read it, is that there's one Chair and doesn't mention anything about taking turns or rotation. I would like clarity before we Resolve this. My gut, and I have a legal background, is that it's maybe a breach of Standing Orders. So can we seek clarity? Is there something we can clarify by the Ordinary Meeting? Yes, can we just move a procedural motion just to get some governance or legal advice with our in-house lawyers in terms of whether we're breaching section 36.1. Introducing by rotating Councillors. As it reads it's one, Chair per committee, one Chair per General Committee. Larry Sengstock 02:12:33.386
Can I also say that as part of our other discussions because we're looking to start this on May 1, we need to actually review the Standing Orders prior to May 1. So this could be incorporated into the new Standing Orders prior to our starting anyway. Amelia Lorentson 02:12:48.315
We shouldn't be ratifying something until that process is done. Can we just seek advice before the Ordinary Meeting please. Jessica Phillips 02:13:01.317
Question, in the interim would it just be a motion to put the Chair in until the Standing Orders? Is that how that would work? Yeah. So we just have to change the wording? Brian Stockwell 02:13:11.608
Yeah. You could add to this one, and the Standing Orders being amended accordingly. Amelia Lorentson 02:13:17.674
I just think, can we seek advice and then play with the wording at the Ordinary Meeting? Sure. Brian Stockwell 02:13:27.142
So there's no impediment for adopting it as yet, but if it's something we need to change, that's going to clear up what we need. Amelia Lorentson 02:13:39.408
I wouldn't be, I wouldn't feel comfortable on voting on something without the information that I need to make an informed decision. So I would like to move a procedural motion that um, we just seek some advice and move this to the Ordinary Meeting for a decision. Brian Stockwell 02:13:56.447
Okay, so the. Larry Sengstock 02:14:03.058
Can I ask can you a question? I suggest you could let this form and bring it back to the table at the Ordinary Meeting. Amelia Lorentson 02:14:09.368
That's a great idea. Would you be happy with that, Councillor Finzel? Cancel. Karen Finzel 02:14:20.286
Um, given, you know, good governance, I personally was satisfied with the CEO's response. But if we wish to allow fears around the table to make sure that we're fully aligned, I'm happy to do that, we can bring it back to the table after we've sought further advice. Brian Stockwell 02:14:39.671
So that would be a, no, so the. Would be by the agreement of the whole Council or is it a deferral motion? No, I think it would have to be by. Brian Raymond, wouldn't it? Tom Wegener 02:14:53.249
We'll have to, can we vote on the original motion? No, we can't. Brian Stockwell 02:14:59.298
You can vote on the original motion if this one lapses, if this one's withdrawn. I might move another motion. Larry Sengstock 02:15:06.682
Yeah, you can on Thursday. Frank Wilkie 02:15:10.298
You can move another amendment today. I'm not giving up on the chairman. Just a bit of clarification, clarifying question. There is no impediment to us ratifying this amendment. Today, seeking further, um, information before Thursday and making changes if we need to. How can we add that? Larry Sengstock 02:15:28.567
No, what, so Councillor Lorentson is requesting is that we don't ratify this today because we still need to seek legal so what I'm suggesting is we could let this fall, seek legal advice and then if you want to, move it on. Frank Wilkie 02:15:42.567
Thursday. That wasn't my question. Was, there is no impediment, legal impediment to us approving this amendment and approving this motion today and seeking legal advice by Thursday and making any changes that need to be by Thursday as well. Larry Sengstock 02:16:03.037
You can, but you want to make, I think you just need to make sure that it's documented that we are seeking legal advice otherwise we're potentially doing ourselves. If that's the case. If you know what I mean, we're actually adopting it, but then seeking legal advice, if the legal advice comes in as negative, then we put ourselves in a position. That's the only way I'll see it. I see it. Karen Finzel 02:16:26.095
Just there's a question two questions to clarify the point Councillor Frank was saying, can we additionally add the wording legal advice, just add that onto there, and then we can pull it out at the ordinary? We can do that as well. I'm happy to do that, if that's-- Larry Sengstock 02:16:49.239
I don't see the reason, I think. My advice would be to take it out and put it back in to take it out and put it back in on Thursday, if that's what you want to do. Nicola Wilson 02:16:58.359
Do you mean take the whole thing out, or still vote on the substantive version? Larry Sengstock 02:17:02.131
Because you can always remember on at the Ordinary Meeting this is not ratified until the Ordinary Meeting so you're entitled to bring this whole motion back out and make a amendment on Thursday if you want to. It's up to them. Brian Stockwell 02:17:17.713
Well it's up to all of us but if one person does wants to continue then we continue. Karen Finzel 02:17:24.237
So you're asking me then to lay it on the table with the shelf hands with a green? It's up to you. Brian Stockwell 02:17:30.658
And what's the alternative to that? Either an deferral motion either motion or we vote on on the amendment as put. Karen Finzel 02:17:37.865
And you can still bring it to the meeting at the ordinary? Yep, okay. So we could potentially take it to the vote now, we get support around the table, we'll enforce. Also we could then pull it out the ordinary and by put then this back have on for clarity. And by we have clarity. Brian Stockwell 02:17:56.982
Mm-hmm, that's the option, yes. Jessica Phillips 02:18:00.584
I thought there was issues at some point, just re-tracking my memory, that you couldn't put another amendment if it fell today, that was similar wording on Thursday. Yeah, that's true. Yeah, we can change the word. No, but if it's got the same meaning, they can't, because we've tried that before. The same meaning is certainly an issue. Amelia Lorentson 02:18:20.303
Yeah. Larry Sengstock 02:18:21.505
I was thinking you could still-- Amelia Lorentson 02:18:22.490
You're because better to pull it out. Nicola Wilson 02:18:24.737
We weren't allowed to re-prosecute anything on the Planning Scheme amendments when it moved. Frank Wilkie 02:18:28.217
Yeah, the same amendments can't be moved. If an amendment has been lost, it can't be moved again. Brian Stockwell 02:18:35.008
Yeah, in the same meeting. There's a difference between now and. There wasn't. Frank Wilkie 02:18:41.637
Well, with the Planning Scheme, it was an adjournment at the same meeting. Brian Stockwell 02:18:45.542
Yes, that's right. It's only at the same meeting. Certainly things can change. Nothing. You can find something in the Standing Orders to that effect, but. And I know it's a general principle that. It? Okay. It's only a recommendation, basically. The motions today become a recommendation. Frank Wilkie 02:19:09.188
So, the CEO is suggesting it's cleaner if we let that just. If that's withdrawn, and we approve the substantive motion. Brian Stockwell 02:19:24.733
And I suppose looking at the risk of that approach is if there was more than three Councillors who wouldn't support it without this being in there. Karen Finzel 02:19:42.724
Or it may not be. We've had two different views at the table around the interpretation. Amelia Lorentson 02:19:51.577
So we need clarity to make an informed decision. We need actual the facts. Brian Stockwell 02:19:56.042
Okay, so we've had enough of the discussion that we're not supposed to have. See, this is why you need a new chairman. So, Councillor Finzel, I'll put it to you in the first instance. Karen Finzel 02:20:11.060
Yeah, I'll go back to what I said. Given we want to make sure that we're aligned with good governance, happy to lay it on the table if there's agreement around the table today and have a look at it again at the Ordinary Meeting. Brian Stockwell 02:20:25.964
Okay. Thank you. So. Laying on the table is different to withdrawing. Karen Finzel 02:20:31.076
Oh, sorry. Withdrawal. Oh, I could do a procedural motion and I'll lay it on the table. Brian Stockwell 02:20:35.876
If we lay it on the table, then we don't do the rest. Oh, we're finished with that. No, we don't do the rest of the motion. So, withdrawal is the option that allows us to make a substantive decision and then look at this as an amendment on Thursday. Oh, Gee, I'm not a bit of a vote on that one. Yeah, I'm happy to do it. And so is everyone else happy to withdraw for the amendment being withdrawn. Okay. Okay, so we're back to the substantive motion, which is the staff recommendation with the amendment that was moved by Councillor Wilson. And currently only Councillor Wegener has talked to it. Karen Finzel 02:21:24.489
I want to propose an amendment. I'd like to bring to the table a debate around option three. Brian Stockwell 02:21:38.222
I'll tell you what amendment it is, Councillor. Karen Finzel 02:21:40.632
Let me have a look. Yes, so in. Unidentified Speaker 02:21:58.968
Item B, just change it to read adopt option three. Brian Stockwell 02:22:11.088
Yeah. Unknown 02:22:11.905
Okay, that's all right. I'll just do this one. Frank Wilkie 02:22:15.862
I'll second it. Thank you. Before you do. Brian Stockwell 02:22:18.910
I couldn't accept it because it's in conflict with C. Because they oh. Because there would be no General Committee Meeting. Karen Finzel 02:22:28.506
Oh, then we'd have to debate that one as well. Oh, we're going to be here for a while. Frank Wilkie 02:22:33.615
So the amendment would need to encompass. Karen Finzel 02:22:38.169
The amendment we'd have to combine B and C. It's going to change the whole system. Brian Stockwell 02:22:50.849
We'd have to read, appoint all Councillors to both committees, as members on both standing committees. Yep. And then leave out the chairing things, and that could be resolved on. Then we'd have to raise it or put it. Well, we're going to raise it on Thursday anyway, so for the purposes of testing it, you would just say, yeah, adopt option three, and then appoint all councillors Councillors as committee members, as of both committees. Yeah, on 1st of May. Yeah, 1st of May. Karen Finzel 02:23:35.192
And everyone would withdraw that based on what went on. Brian Stockwell 02:23:37.911
Based on legal price. It's just silent on it's that. Just silent on the chairing of it. But I don't know. And a would be may too 2, yeah yeah. I'm sorry, so that is actually then C as well. Yeah, that's okay. But yeah, and C. So Councillor Wilkie, are you happy to second with those changes? Are you happy to move like that, Councillor Finzel? Karen Finzel 02:24:06.831
Yeah, I think we can just bring it to a table. Frank Wilkie 02:24:08.834
And then there will need to be a further amendment about the chairs of those committees as well. Which will. Still be rotating yeah yeah. Brian Stockwell 02:24:18.488
Yeah. But we'll have to wait on legal advice for yeah. That. So the move can. So it's been moved, Councillor Finzel, seconded by Councillor Wilkie, and Councillor Finzel, you have the floor. Karen Finzel 02:24:27.699
Yeah, for the same reasons I've raised, I think the committees are a valued contribution how Council conducts itself for the meetings. When you look at the benchmark and you notice, you know, we wouldn't be the only Council, we wouldn't have standing committees. I think that the. Know, the two committees provide that opportunity for the chairs, it still gives us opportunity to be able to have those discussions around the table, provides still the opportunity for staff or Councillors to go away and seek further information. Um if we look at the small committee meetings, like Toowoomba regional Council, they're running six with one Ordinary Meeting. Rockhampton regional Council, they're running two with ordinary meetings. And then I know the majority of them aren't doing that but I just think you know Noosa are Different by Nature and I think that serves us well to have the two committees that's my personal opinion so I'm happy to bring this today to the table time for dubai. Brian Stockwell 02:25:38.976
Thank you. Does anyone else like to talk to this amendment? Nicola Wilson 02:25:42.491
I'll talk to it. I'll speak against it. While a few other councils do have the separate committee meetings, and I think we're the only one that has the General Committee Meeting, I still think that's a more efficient way to go forward, especially with things like finance reports that tend to come to General Committee meetings. They would have to go straight to ordinary, which then takes away that level of transparency and that no period again for a reports. Or would they come to ordinary anyway? Because of the timing, so it wasn't okay to get that part, sorry. But I think if we're looking for efficiencies, we've got an option to drop two meetings, or to drop one, and I prefer that option to-- Frank Wilkie 02:26:32.703
Just a question, Councillor Wilson-Rose is a good point. With the other structure, would the finance reports be going direct to ordinary anyway? Yeah, with the timing. Yes. Yeah. Thank you. Okay. Councillor Wilkie? Yeah, look, I'm going to support this-- option mainly because it halves the workload for Councillors. Rather than Councillors sitting in a full-day meeting where they have to get across the S&O and P&E items in one long-- perhaps a day it breaks it up into potentially two half-days. Half is my reading and preparation for the meeting date. And I think better decision-making can flow from that through less fatigue. It breaks it up, and there's still adequate-- time prior to those meetings to receive the reports and get across the material and get answers you need from staff. Reports and get across the So in terms of breaking up the workload, I think it's well worth considering. Nicola Wilson 02:27:34.611
I ask a question? Just for clarification, the two meetings would be on consecutive days, is that right? Larry Sengstock 02:27:41.711
That's correct. That was the intention, yes. Nicola Wilson 02:27:45.393
It doesn't really change for any time. Larry Sengstock 02:27:56.520
Chair? Brian Stockwell 02:27:56.920
Yes, I'm just looking at the schedule. Yes, you're right. I'm just looking at whether we get our seven days in, probably not. Frank Wilkie 02:28:04.780
Six, and a half. Brian Stockwell 02:28:07.440
Councillor Wegener. Tom Wegener 02:28:09.500
Well, it sounds like we might be more efficient for the staff. They would be, they're even a wider scope if it's just one General Committee for them to kind of be on deck for hours and where perhaps I would think that staff would not be sitting around waiting to be called up. With this method. Does that make sense to you guys? Brian Stockwell 02:28:35.317
So I'll ask the CEO a question. The staff have actually recommended the two meetings. Did you consider the points that Councillor Wegener-Rower raises? That's it. Raises. That's it. Jonci Wolff 02:28:47.476
To for the Chair. My view of that would be is that you know the agenda of each meeting and then prepare accordingly to the time that we are required to be there. That means staff would usually not sit through the whole length of a meeting. Tom Wegener 02:29:06.179
Well, there's a lot of staff sitting around a lot of times. Larry Sengstock 02:29:09.436
Sure. But I think that would be the case for both. Ways. Frank Wilkie 02:29:15.636
You can't Councillor Finzel, was it your intention that this meeting schedule would give more opportunities for more Councillors to Chair, even if it's on a rotational basis, than if it was just the general community? Karen Finzel 02:29:28.567
Yeah, that was part of that. Okay. But I also think when you look at, like, psychosocial hazards, fatigue around big decisions. We already can do, like, big meetings, like, you know, they can go up to five to seven hours. I think that is unreasonable, and I think the committee process allows us that break, and I think that's really important to raise. We only risk, like, it's not much time in terms of the reading time, in terms of that. I think trying to look after Councillors and our mental health and wellbeing, I feel the committee process better serves that opportunity to have that break. I mean, with P&E, I always make a point to get out to the site, do a walkover, like. I don't know, I'm happy to hear everyone's arguments around the table, but for me personally, I like the committee options. That's why I brought it to the debate, to hear what other people think, what they want to consider. Brian Stockwell 02:30:40.632
Oh, you go ahead, for. Jonci Wolff 02:30:41.981
The share, one impact that may have is that public participation. Usually the public participates only through deputation and so forth. Through meetings where all Councillors are present. That means if there would be unlikely to go to the smaller committee meetings. This is for all Councillors? Larry Sengstock 02:31:01.826
All Councillors? Yeah, that's okay. Brian Stockwell 02:31:08.021
So--- Because-- oh, Oh, Councillor Wegener was-- Tom Wegener 02:31:10.881
It seems to me that the concern with Councillors being chairs, this is a lot better way to go because, you know, the S&O and the P&E is still for the Councillors to break up their Chair responsibilities. Responsibility. Karen Finzel 02:31:26.737
And then. Brian Stockwell 02:31:29.423
And then Finzel. Pindle. Yeah, I think the other thing this does is--- Oh, so Councillor, you can't talk to him. You can ask a question if you--- All right. Go ahead. Karen Finzel 02:31:37.597
Okay. I've got a question then. Yes. Okay. Through the CEO, do you think that this addresses the gap that caused the impact on re-prosecuting things that were referred on from the committees through the general? The committees with all Councillors attending as mandatory would actually minimise the risk on the productivity of your staff and re-prosecuting or filing further information, hitting repeat, I feel that, well, I'm asking your opinion. Understanding it. On addressing that gap, which I think is a, has been a risk. Larry Sengstock 02:32:23.148
Well, essentially, I take your point in terms of psychosocial safety for the councillors Councillors and the timing of meetings. Be appropriate. But I also take the point that if we do two meetings, then it's two sets of preparation for meetings and papers and reports and timing and putting things out, so it actually increases or it's a heavier workload on our administrative staff in terms of having three meetings versus two meetings. So that's where I come from in terms of what we looked at. We went through these, remember, in our workshops. And our preferred and I think our staff preferred is the two options but it's for you to debate. Jessica Phillips 02:33:02.827
Thank you. Question to the CEO. Was there consideration with this option? Thursdays is our workshop day. Sometimes that can be a really long day. If we're here Tuesday, Wednesday, then would there be a thought around what our diary would look like on the Thursday after? Or just roll the dice on that one? Larry Sengstock 02:33:19.827
Well, we haven't considered that. The thing is, it's a day. Wherever it is, there's still workshops to be conducted. That timeline or timeframe is still required at this point. Amelia Lorentson 02:33:33.510
I'll speak to the amendment. I won't be supporting. I think that what's been proposed and what's been workshopped now over a period is the way forward. To me, the secret will be in rewriting the agenda items, rewriting the reports and finding efficiencies. I think at the moment, our reporting system can be better in terms of noting reports, importing strategic items. I think we can get some serious gains by just changing the format. So I'm happy to try this. I also have an amendment that I'm going to throw into the mix, which is going to be basically asking for a review of the structure. To that it actually achieves its intended benefit. So I think that may allow us, give us the opportunity to potentially debrief and see if it's working and whether a different option is the way to go forward. But I'm happy with the recommendation that we've come to as a group over some time. Brian Stockwell 02:34:54.114
I will speak against the amendment as well. I've been in favour of two meetings. A month for well over three years and it's clear that we are a month Different by Nature. Less than 10% of councils have Different by Nature. Less than 10% of councils have standing committees and only one of those our is size. The rest are all larger. When we went around the table in the workshop with staff there was unanimous support that the existing structure has significant productivity impacts and this doesn't address them as well as the clear option that's done. Staff have recommended it's clear that we're duplicating organisations and minutes and while it's better than what we're currently doing I think the only difference for councils is instead of having a meeting that may on some occasions go after lunches we'll be sure that we rep two days rather than one each month and that's one of the things with our councils we have far more meeting days per month. Than nearly every Council when you look at informal workshops as well so to me it's really important that we start from here on to be effective and part of being effective as Councillors is. Ensure that we're running and facilitating an efficient organisation I think the most efficient option is what staff have put up I think it's important that we use ratepayers dollars wisely certainly if there is the odd occasion where a General Committee Meeting is getting to the point where we think our decision-making is affected by the length of time there is always the option to adjourn and come back the following day rather than making it the standard a statement. Everyone's talk now. Councillor Finzel you can close. Karen Finzel 02:37:06.389
Thank you everyone for your viewpoints around the table I think it's always good to like tease it out to make sure we're you know heading to the best for the Councillors our community and the staff. I take on the duplication of the Minutes the proof will be in the pudding you know in four months time we can assess it and review it and see where we all sit so yep happy to have a say and bring it to the plate. Thank you. Brian Stockwell 02:37:36.958
I put the amendment those in favour? Those against? Thank you. You're nervously lost. I wasn't expecting that one. Amelia Lorentson 02:37:55.768
I'd like to move an amendment to please. Sure. I always keep it open. That Council review option three, which option? Two. So E, that Council review, I'm just doing this at the moment. Vicki, I haven't sent it to you. I'm just talking. Nicola Wilson 02:38:20.998
So that I don't need the amendment to read. This is a little bit of a work on the one that you previously sent me. Amelia Lorentson 02:38:26.738
No, I have not sent this to you. No, I'm just writing this as we speak. So E, that Council review option two that's not the version. 12 months to ensure it's delivering its intended benefits. Council review option two in 12 months to ensure it's delivering its intended benefits. That. Larry Sengstock 02:39:18.380
We're all watching. Listening. Thank you. Sorry. Brian Stockwell 02:39:23.308
Okay can. Amelia Lorentson 02:39:26.020
We actually can I change actually can I change option two and just because that only we know what option two is so just review the new meeting structure in 12 months to ensure that it's delivering its intended benefits. The new meeting structure. I'll second it. Councillor Wilkie, Councillor Lorentson, you have the floor. I won't speak too much. I think we've talked quite a lot today, the General Committee. This is a significant governance change. So I think it's just really just good governance that in 12 months time. We sit and review how it's working and whether other options are better and just get some feedback, given the conversation and the amendment that was just put forward by Councillor Finzel, this gives us a review, gives us at the moment, the opportunity to pause and reflect. So I just think it's just a good. Something we should do all the time, and particularly when we have significant, like I said, governance changes. Okay, Councillor Finzel. Karen Finzel 02:40:34.947
Question through the Chair to the CEO. What are we going to measure it against and review? Do you think that is sufficient to, is it prescriptive enough to actually state what we're measuring and how that's going to happen? Larry Sengstock 02:40:52.337
Through the Chair, I think it is. Gives, what we do in the ensuring period is develop the criteria on what is efficient and what's not and what we're going to measure it against. We tried to do that now, I think we'd be here for a long time and we still wouldn't probably get it right, so I think it's probably best that we make the commitment to review it, but we also make the commitment to work out what are the intended benefits. Amelia Lorentson 02:41:19.863
And can I also just raise that the report itself actually speaks of the intended benefits, so we don't need to rewrite the rules, so it speaks of that it best balances efficiency, transparency, report review time, and informed decision-making while reducing overall meeting demand. That's our KPI and we've got to then consider Kris, the risk, you know, key risk implications as well as KPIs, but the report speaks of the benefits. Brian Stockwell 02:41:56.505
Okay, anyone else wish to talk? Councillor Wegener. Tom Wegener 02:41:59.611
Are we committing ourselves, like if everything's working, you know, swimming along, are we committing ourselves to, like is it, a report that doesn't need to be done? Are you talking to the motioner or is this a question? Talking to the motioner. Review the new meeting structure in 12 months. If everything's going along, do we really need that? Is that an extensive piece of work for staff if they, feel that the review is not necessary? Amelia Lorentson 02:42:33.070
Can I throw I in, a oh, excuse me. Larry Sengstock 02:42:35.570
Yes, Yeah, so you can. Let's see. I don't think it's a massive piece of work. I think if it is working well, you'd know it and you'd be able to, it's really just to do a sense check of it, I think, is probably more the point. And if it is not working really well, we'd know it, and we'd be wanting to make some change anyway, I think. Brian Stockwell 02:42:55.632
Yeah, so I'll speak to the amendment I actually supported. It is good practice to do monitoring and evaluation, and as Councillor Lorentson highlighted, we have. The reasons why we think it needs to change, and we'd like to see those, so in 12 months, the easiest thing will be the staff saying my time was 30 hours a week doing this stuff, now it's 20. That's what I'd like to see. And then I suppose the informed decision making will be something for us to make a subjective assessment of. Anyone else wish to talk to the amendment? Councillor. Karen Finzel 02:43:36.543
Thank you Councillor Lorentson. I think it is good practice to add a review in, you know, when we're around the table and we're seeking data and, you know, measuring, you know, why we do what are we measuring against, is it efficient, is it helping our staff, is it helping our community so, yeah, I think it's a good idea to have that review. Like the CEO said, we don't have to spend a lot of time on it. Hopefully we can, you know, run that against the KPIs and efficiently determine do we need further changes or we're happy to proceed forward. So, yeah, I think it is good practice and I'm happy to support it. Thank you, Council. Brian Stockwell 02:44:16.996
Okay. Anyone else? Councillor Lorentson wishes to close. I put the amendment. Those in favour? It's unanimous. It becomes part of the motion. And I still think only Councillor Wegener talked to the motion. Don't worry. Would anyone else like to talk to the motion? Councillor Wilson. Nicola Wilson 02:44:49.981
All right. As I mentioned earlier, I've been asking for a review of the current structure for some time as it's currently inefficient. My key concerns have been duplication of debate and deferring items from the P&E and S&O meetings to the General Committee Meeting, rendering the smaller committees somewhat redundant. In addition, and probably more of a concern for me, is that items have been allowed to bypass the smaller committees and go straight to general, meaning Councillors have had one business day and a weekend to review the reports. When items go through the full cycle the information is available to Councillors and the public for over a week as we're now suggesting or proposing. This proposal option two means that the agenda for the General Committee Meeting will be released to Councillors and the public a week before the meeting. There are some potential consequences that the General Committee Meeting may be long but I think this is actually unlikely to be a big risk as the P&E and S&O meetings currently rarely last even an hour so it's half an hour to an hour. Then debate and questions are duplicated in the General Committee meetings anyway. In addition my analysis of the lengthier general meetings showed that this was more often due to having significant items in the agenda that had bypassed the smaller committees. So with only one business day to prepare, Councillors had little time to ask questions of staff or consult affected parties before the meeting. Having the reports for seven days before the meeting gives Councillors more time to Resolve questions. Aids transparency for the public. This should then lead to a more efficient debate on the floor, therefore hopefully shorter meetings with less need to seek clarity on the recommendations in reports. It's also in line with other councils. For a small Council we spend significantly more time in formal meetings and workshops than other councils which largely just have one Ordinary Meeting per month. This proposed change gives staff more time to deliver on projects versus preparing for meetings and Councillors more time to spend in the community versus in chambers. As I mentioned my analysis shows that longer meetings involving multiple questions directed to staff and longer debate were where reports went straight to general or ordinary meetings or special meetings which currently only require two days notice. Examples include Planning Scheme amendments Special Meeting December 24, Lake Macdonald Drive subdivision General Committee Meeting Jan 25, large DAs for Gympie Terrace and royal mail straight to General Committee Meeting March 25, Tourism Noosa one-year funding agreement straight to Special Meeting May 25, Lake Macdonald Drive contract award straight to General Committee Meeting in July 25, adoption of DMP straight to General Committee Meeting December 25, adoption of Tourism Noosa three-year Roadmap straight to Ordinary Meeting December 25, Peregian Beach Active Street straight to General Committee March 26. I do still have a concern that special meetings will continue to take us away from what we're trying to achieve here where we're to read reports and consult with people we've had 11 special meetings in the last two years but we will be able to address that in our upcoming review of Standing Orders but overall I really look forward to having this structure implemented with the two meetings in the future from May. Thank you. Councillor. Amelia Lorentson 02:48:24.509
Thank you. I'm going to speak from a governance perspective. I'm currently studying the AICD course so everything at the moment I'm looking through a governance lens so to me that you know efficient meeting structures gives us the opportunity to focus on the strategic oversights and performance monitoring. When we start changing the structure and making it more efficient and again I'm assuming and hoping that our agenda will be more strategic based noting reports become just that less conversation it allows us to focus on the big picture stuff and scrutinise the big picture stuff so I'm actually quietly confident that this is going to achieve you know efficiencies transparencies and most importantly decision-making I think the structure as the current structure isn't conducive to proper decision-making I just think we can do better have a commitment as a Council for continuous improvement and that means in terms of governance and meeting structures so this is part of that commitment let's see if this is better if it's not let's look at something else but to do nothing changes. Frank Wilkie 02:49:56.852
I think Councillor Wilson has made some excellent points the amount of reports of the go Director-General has forced has changed. The previous structure, the current structure, when it works as intended, that doesn't happen. And the current structure has been in place for not just since 2014 perhaps 30 years and its intention was to ensure that Councillors had the time the opportunity to get across all the reports at three opportunities in sure that the meeting cycle to make sure when it comes to the Ordinary Meeting the decision they make is the best they can make with the all the available information and the best long-term interests of the Shire and I have to say it has served the Shire very very well there is only one decision that I'm aware of that has been legally contested successfully in all that time a one-time Council had of millions of dollars of contingent liabilities against it and they've all melted away because the decision-making was sound but it's a sign of the times that the Council is in increasingly busy there's more work to be done and the amount of major work coming direct to general is a sign that staff are working very very hard to time strict time frames and this new structure will allow them the time to strict time frames and this new structure will allow them the time to get reports to Councillors with adequate reading time and I think this new structure will be more efficient more effective we will be required to work harder as Councillors but I think good decisions in the best long-term interest of the Shire will still be possible under this new structure. Brian Stockwell 02:52:05.222
Can't see it, we haven't, I hope. Karen Finzel 02:52:06.660
Look, I think it's been good debate and welcomed around the table I think you know anytime we'll get opportunity to reflect and review about how we behave in the chambers in the chambers, in our community and in the organisation is welcomed. I think the conversation today about if we get more efficient around the table also in my mind brings to attention work towards attracting good leadership to local Council and that includes trying to work towards bridging the gender gap that currently exists between women at the table that are elected through local government and then how they balance all their priorities around care and other opportunities or things that become available. So I think this is really good in terms of governance and efficiency around the meeting process to hopefully. Get more women interested in a broader view around politics at the local level because we know women play a pivotal role in the leadership of communities but often this work is not formally recognised. So I think for good governance and meeting process hopefully we won't be here all day hopefully we get the outcomes that it's going to be tick we get a good review and it's all really efficient so so um yeah I look forward to moving forward to see how we measure this and provide opportunity for staff Councillors and promote good governance so that people feel that they're getting value for money getting good leadership around the table and efficiencies and productivity from our local Council. Brian Stockwell 02:53:57.464
Thank you. Anyone else? It goes back to Council Wegener to close. Tom Wegener 02:54:06.091
I just would like to thank Nicola Wilson because her speech is really good and I think she was kind of a driver. Brian Stockwell 02:54:13.260
For this and I think it's going to work out well. I'll put the motion. Those in favour? That's unanimous. We then move on to the next item of business, which is. Thank you, yontji. Is the Financial Performance Report for February 2026 and we welcome Acting Director. Margaret Gatt and Acting Manager of Finance, Zach. And you're going to give us a brief overview. Good afternoon, Councillors. Good afternoon. Zach Morton-Adair 02:54:49.888
Thank you, and through the Chair. So we'll take the report as read and I'll provide some just additional commentary and an overview of the report itself. The February report provides us eight months of the current financial year or roughly 67% of the financial year started. As at the 28th of February 2026 and noting the impacts of higher than anticipated operational revenue and the timing of delivery of the capital works program, there are no identified. Financial risks that will impact Council's forecasted financial position at 30th of June 2026. Please note that the February 2026 report reflects our Budget Review 2 position for the. 25-26 financial year which was adopted at Council on the 19th of February 2026. Further to this and following adoption of BR2 at Council's ordinary meeting, Council is required to update its amended. Update an amended debt policy. This is included as attachment six to the report today and reflects total borrowings of 3.1 million for the financial year. The balance of the policy itself remains unchanged. It's simply just the Appendix A and the amount that's referred to as loan borrowings that has been updated, which simply reflects our BR2 position. There are no other substantial changes to the policy. The need to update the policy came from our submission to QTC for our potential loan borrowings to the end of the year, and a debt policy being required as part of the submission process. As noted in the report, Council has recorded a favourable operating $2.9 million, and a net result variance of $4.8 million when you take into account. $1.9 million for funding from capital sources. I would like to draw some. Expressed attention to elements of the report. So on the bottom of page two, there is a table that refers to waste management in holiday parks. In regards to some of. The variances noted in that table, the revenue line item of a negative $111,000 variance is. Driven by materials and services related to general waste and sales of recyclables. Being slightly lower than budget had anticipated, and it is partially offset. By additional rates and annual charges. We are currently doing an exercise. Behind the scenes to bring back a more detailed analysis of that in the next finance report. So I'm just earmarking that as the case and we will expect table a more detailed results to explain those variances in a subsequent report. Expect a table This is also paired with the expenditure line items. Which are currently showing as a $920,000 overspend. We are again currently undertaking an effort. With both the financial business partner and the waste team just to provide further clarification and details on those amounts and intend to provide them in the next subsequent financial report. Regards to the holiday parks, revenue performance is higher than budget. This is primarily. By the Noosa River Holiday Park of $210,000 and the Boreen Point Holiday Park of $82,000. It does also exhibit a $269,000 overspend to budget of the expenses. Again, we will bring in more detailed summary of this back to Council in the next finance report. There's been. Considerable work undertaken behind the scenes to look at. Credits and unearned revenue, so I hope to consolidate this in a simple. Manner in the next finance report. The operating revenue. And operating expenditure variance tables have been modified to assist the community understanding the report. There is some complexity of reporting debits as and credits as in terms of the underlying accounting ledger, but to ensure we can actually illustrate whether is it a positive or a negative variance, there's been green shading or colouring added to those tables, so where a revenue item is higher than budget or expenditure line item is lower than budget, it is demonstrated by effectively a green colour to exhibit that. It's probably an over. Probably an oversimplified way of conveying that because there are explanations possibly if the expenditure is under, but it's true in the simplest way kind of conveyed to the public where we're tracking. To use a specific example to that, there's two I would like to discuss. The rates, levies and charges currently are showing as is a four hundred $14,000 thousand dollar collection over budget. When you look at that against the overall budget, it's actually a 0.4% variance, so well below a benchmark or threshold that you would typically discuss. This leads to the existing questions around whether we are over collecting rates, and that's a primary driver of our operating surplus. So of the $400,000 revenue to date over budget, most of that is actually driven by waste utility charges. Only 0.1 of a million dollars or $100,000 are attributed to rates across our $106 million budget. Employee benefits is another one that regularly comes up in the finance report, which is currently exhibiting a $905,000 underspend today, which in dollar terms is material, but actually represents less than 3% of the overall budget to date of employee benefits. I'd just like to convey that this is a continual rolling program of improvements that we're trying to do. We take feedback on board from Councillors. The community also just alignment with best practice and we should hopefully see minor updates as we move ahead. With the capital revenue and expenditure, these have been updated to obviously reflect our BR2 position. The table on the table on page five an overview of our major capital and grant subsidies. In regards to capital expenditure, when adjusted for asset write-offs, loan redemption payments and contributed assets, $19.6 million has been million has been spent on 25% of the overall capital works budget today. Noting there is the ongoing work program with the infrastructure team is a much more detailed analysis of capital works program is provided to the Capital Works Executive group and we are again working on that behind the scenes. We will have to hope to have an update in due course as we work through that. From cash management and an investment performance position so total cash on hand at February 2026 was 159 million of which 6.7 million dollars is in trust. These are higher than anticipated through a standard budget which is primarily driven by the reprofiling of our capital works program through budget review too. As noted in the report our investments can continue to perform well against benchmarks with a summary of our investment performance provided on the table on page six. I just want to draw attention please not to one topographical area the wording table refers to January 2026 and it is a February 2026 report so my apologies for the typo. In regards to rate arrears, page seven of the report provides additional detail on our rates arrears to February 2026. Our rate arrears have gone up to 12.% from 5.8% in January. This is primarily driven by the fact that January, the 2026 rates period has now, payment has now lapsed if you haven't paid your rates today and so that is now showing up as part of the arrears balances. It's worth noting that it gets raised that a March 2026 report, or next month's report, we will provide a more detailed analysis of rate arrears, which is a regular question, which is part of our quarterly rolling program that will actually look at the ageing and categorisation of those arrears including the January rates levy. The February results are consistent as my normal dialogue in these meetings talk about the semi-annual pattern or six-monthly pattern with rates which fall in the July and January levy we find the arrears balances increase. Is it is worth noting that rights rates issuances or reminder notices will be sent in the mail later this week to ratepayers who are currently in arrears and following the reminder notices going out we actually will begin to operationalize our rates and charges debt management and recovery policy. It is worth noting this question has come up a few times just to provide commentary that while rates arrears are secured over the land and present limited risk of non-collection to Council there's a pragmatic step for Council actually to move through the arrears process and we're actually pragmatically looking to see how we can encourage ratepayers to engage with the revenue services team to actually look at what payment methods or payment profiles might be available to actually start to begin some of those rate balances it may be seen as negative or hard to deal with but we would prefer in the first instance to actually work with ratepayers before we have to go through more the policy itself will escalate through the policy in regards to the measures of financial sustainability there are no significant emerging risks to Council's performance metrics it is worth noting in the report that the asset sustainability ratio is currently below the 80% target this is just as a result of the re-profiling through BR2 we expect by the end of the year and the adoption of the new budget for next year as we re-profile the capital works into the future year this will Resolve itself and we will become come in over the 80% threshold. As part of a continuing process of improvement we will look in the future to provide a recommendation to Council of actually providing the financial sustainability on a quarterly basis. There's some volatility to the ratios being provided in a monthly basis and they can actually provide noise that's actually unhelpful in terms of conveying our financial information. In previous months reports we have included a section on questions taken on notice. There were some questions taken on notice in the previous finance report. I will provide verbal updates to them today. My apologies not standard practice. We were actually just an undertaking further investigation at the time of writing the report. So we'll provide verbal updates to those today. Although I was briefly in the previous financial report, a question from Councillor Wilson was raised around the balance sheet as an attachment to a statement of financial position and just clarifying why some of the line balances have updated while others have remained the same. Again, some of these questions may not be verbatim, but hopefully they capture the intent of the question. So to provide some further commentary, the 2025-26 budget was prepared in June using the balance sheets available at that time. Throughout the year, as you understand, we do a reconciliation terms of our financial statements. We subsequently have BR1 and BR2 movements which capture updated positions and at the end of the year we actually go through a full reconciliation and ensure our balance sheet is ready for audit and our financial statement preparation. So that's why some of the aspects are periodic, I.e. cash updates every month because we take or receive cash, where other aspects are done on a monthly, quarterly or yearly basis in terms of reconciliation. So that's why some of them will exhibit movements while some won't. A question was taken from Mayor Wilkie as to the variance of property, plant and equipment in the statement of financial position. So to provide some context, there was a $3.3 million variance to property, plant and equipment from the 2024-25 financial statements and actuals to January 2026. And I can provide this in writing if that's helpful afterwards as well. The primary driver behind that is our accumulated depreciation, our work in progress movements and asset disposals during the year, as well as commission assets. Effectively, the property plan equipment is kind of a work in progress as we move throughout the year and assets are commissioned. So the biggest driver in that is about $11 million dollars of accumulated depreciation or for the current year and that's why the balance today is actually showing 3.3 million dollar variance. As we move closer to the end of the financial year we will expect to bring more assets online as commissioned. Commissioning offset by disposal. It's effectively a net account so you've got the accumulated depreciation disposals which are tracked and as you can see from our capital project list there's an intention of capital projects to be delivered by the end of the year and they will be then effectively added to that balance. And just one last question which was Councillor Phillips's question around can you provide the three most significant strategic or financial risk to the community just in response to that question we have noted that and put that on our strategic as sorry our action is the word I'm looking for sorry um and we will look to improve and incorporate their future reports the reason we haven't today is there's some broader dependencies with the ongoing work with our budget audit and risk and it's a complex matter to work through so we are hoping to have that as soon as possible in future reports it has been noted in summary Council remains in a strong financial position with variances largely driven by timing differences or approved budget adjustments through budget reviews but performance will continue to be monitored through our established reporting and detailed reviews in the background thank you happy to take questions. Brian Stockwell 03:08:26.349
Do we have questions. Amelia Lorentson 03:08:31.129
I have first a couple my one I'm looking at legal expenses on page four just can you clarify where the legal expenses including the Planning & Environment Court appeal matters whether they're captured within the operating expenditure category categories so I'm referencing just a high-profile one that has been in the paper a landing rise just wondering where do we capture those expenses. Zach Morton-Adair 03:09:07.560
I would be happy to take that on notice just to clarify I don't have the details of the specific one you're referencing so I could take that on notice and report back to Council. That would be great. Brian Stockwell 03:09:15.875
Thank you. Richard MacGillivray 03:09:16.456
With the Director of development controls. Through the Chair yes so we have a list of all of our appeals. That we circulate through the Case Management Working Group every month regarding the costs of each of those so I'm happy to circulate those more broadly to the Council group which itemises particular appeals relating to each matter. That would be great. And it does come through the operational budget. It's handled through the assessment budget. It's an operational expense. Amelia Lorentson 03:09:47.988
Just a further question in terms emerging external risk. Given the current geopolitical environment, and just in terms of emerging risks to Council's operating costs, how are we how are these being monitored, and I'm sort of referencing, I've jotted down here, fuel costs, construction materials, potential interest rates, insurance, supply chain pressures. Are these external cost pressures, where are they sort of captured in our modelling? And if they're not, will they be incorporated? Margaret Gatt 03:10:31.177
Through the Chair, thank you, Councillor Lorentson. They're not reflected in the current report, but they are certainly part of our. Discussions and modelling for the 26-27 year budget. But in addition to that, for the remainder of the financial year, we are very conscious of escalating costs, such as the ones that you were speaking about, in terms of fuel, construction costs, etc. I have mentioned previously that there may be a need for a BR3. I would say, without having confirmed this with the CEO or the ET, it's not May, there will likely definitely be a budget review 3 that will reflect any of those escalating costs that are coming through to Council's businesses. Amelia Lorentson 03:11:23.691
And my last question in terms of our risk register is, does our risk register, and I'll go back to legal costs, does our risk register include exposure to litigation costs and potential adverse planning and environment outcomes? Margaret Gatt 03:11:48.144
Through thank the you, Chair, Councillor Lorentson, I don't have the risk register right in front of me. It is quite a lengthy and it's quite a robust document that's quite detailed in nature. From the top of the top of my head, I'm certain that there would be some reference to exactly that risk that you're describing. I can ensure that we come back to you with some specifics on that. If I could take that question on notice as I don't have a definitive answer. Amelia Lorentson 03:12:21.628
And I'm not sure if this is relevant to the financial report but I'll ask the question. In terms of the deep dive, in terms of legal costs and just again given some high profile appeal cases, is that something that I can ask you to bring forward or is that something separate that I ask through the CEO in terms of maybe getting a workshop together just to understand what are the actual costs and whether we've budgeted it and what risk in terms of adverse Planning & Environment Court appeals. Richard MacGillivray 03:12:55.706
I'm happy to take that question. So our budget has been relatively steady for appeals actually over the past about eight years. It hasn't actually changed in terms of the amount we aside every year for funding appeals. This year's tracking to be around on budget, maybe slightly above. We've obviously, it does vary from year to depending on the cases and those matters that proceed to trial. A lot of our matters are settled outside of court, so don't actually require a full hearing, but sometimes particular matters do proceed to a full hearing and that will impact on the cost. It's also the number of experts appointed, given the complexity of the issues, that can have a big variation on what the cost is as well. And also, yeah, the significance I guess of the breach and also the appellants who are seeking to challenge the decision made by Council. So there's a range of factors to be considered, but in terms of overall budget, we're tracking around about what was planned for our appeals budget. It's slightly above I believe, but less than previous, the last two years at the moment, so but that does change depending on the number of matters that do proceed to trial. So happy to digest that further with you as we do report that through our Case Management Working Group. Amelia Lorentson 03:14:17.173
About that information. Thank you. Tom Wegener 03:14:20.853
To that? Brian Stockwell 03:14:21.899
Because the case management, the other day we didn't. Because so we're is this dealing about with finances because we're dealing with the financial report? Okay proceed with your question or are you going to talk to the financial report? Tom Wegener 03:14:35.651
I'll take this offline. Thank you Councillor. Brian Stockwell 03:14:41.842
Anyone else? Amelia Lorentson 03:14:43.122
Further questions? My last. In terms of the revised debt policy, so we're required to adopt a revised debt policy, can you talk to that and what specific changes have been made compared to the previously adopted version? Brian Stockwell 03:15:00.707
I thought that was contained in your initial discussion and in the report? Richard MacGillivray 03:15:05.891
Yes. Amelia Lorentson 03:15:06.458
It was through the Chair through the Chair. Can I ask for a few more details? Zach Morton-Adair 03:15:11.496
I'm so happy to bring that out. No details were given. The debt policy is adopted annually through our annual budgets. We've adopted it at the start of the year. Part of BR2, we had an updated capital project list and loans which were attached to that. So the only thing that is updated in the policy is appendix A of it. Refers to our borrowings in the current year. That was updated to match BR2. There are no other updates to any of the borrowings and subsequently or anything substantial in the policy. It was actually just the current year borrowings. The reason it became necessary is we provided debt policy to QTC as a part of our submission process for potential borrowings that we will take by the end of the year and the debt policy. Needs to reflect our most recent ledger review position. Brian Stockwell 03:15:56.905
Thank you. Would someone like to move the staff recommendation? Councillor Wegener and the seconder, Councillor Wilson. Councillor Wegener, would you like to talk to you, the motion? No, we're recording. Thank you. Anyone else? Same, we're recording, thank you. Frank Wilkie 03:16:17.816
Question, Mr Chair. The financial ratios would be, I'm often challenged to remember the formula for each of them. Would it be possible to have an appendix with the formula for each of the ratios? That you provide. Sure. Thanks. I do have one question. It looks like everything's going swimmingly, but is there anything that really makes you toss and turn at night about our plans? Jessica Phillips 03:16:48.932
It's not a question. Brian Stockwell 03:16:50.433
A bit difficult. Thank you very much. It's super difficult. Margaret Gatt 03:16:54.053
It's through the Chair at a high level. Yeah. What sort of issues generally? That's a very large question. It's a deep question. Nicola Wilson 03:17:05.533
Point of order. The report is a backward-looking report. It's historical, year-to-date. Frank Wilkie 03:17:11.901
Okay. Is there anything year-to-date? Sorry, I missed you. Brian Stockwell 03:17:19.077
Yes, it is, it isn't relating to the February financial report, so I won't accept the question. Frank Wilkie 03:17:24.163
Can I rephrase the question? Brian Stockwell 03:17:26.807
You can do so if it relates to the February financial report. Frank Wilkie 03:17:30.011
No, what I'm trying to get at, Mr Chair, is, um, no, all right, I'll withdraw the question. But it's. Year-to-date to February, this is the. And it looks like we're well-placed to meet our budget targets. Um, what is the greatest risk to us achieving our budget targets? Margaret Gatt 03:17:59.598
There well, there's two that come to mind. One is the impact of the geopolitical situation that's happening and increasing costs that we all in this country and around the suffered or were impacted by the 30 to 40% increase in cost of living post COVID. Just as recently as the weekend in reading lots of different articles through different media sources, credible ones. On my end is that um there is you know I don't want to be alarmist but that will be at least what the increase will be again maybe not immediately but if things-escalate so that's a concern and the other concern is for me just to add it not me I think on behalf of the organisation is no I'd say it was just that one that one's probably the high level yes the global conflict that's yeah. All. Brian Stockwell 03:19:13.328
Talk to motion um thank you for doing it I like the fact that you're reviewing elements of the report and saying which is rather which is right and I agree that the ratios are better on a quarterly basis um I um look forward to the challenge now we've got the last rates notices and it's gone up to 12 percent and I really look forward to the end of year position there being what you said was a reasonable target and being acting I'm sure you'll be interested in making sure that happens and I do think that you know all organisations will have to consider maybe not this budget but next budget the implications of the way the world is at the moment and what that means and how we go forward and our reliance on it. Fossil fuels anyone else? Councillor Wegener. Tom Wegener 03:20:15.312
Well I'm glad we are talking about global issues and wars and finances and the price of oil going up and of course I think food isn't going to be a we're going to see it in another massive increase in food prices so I'm glad that the DMP is promoting regenerative farming locally. Thank you very much for your report. Are you going in? Go in. I'll put the motion. Those in favour? Adjoin us, yes. Brian Stockwell 03:20:40.162
Those in favour? Frank Wilkie 03:20:41.302
Adjoin us. Brian Stockwell 03:20:41.763
Yes. Put the adjoin us. And that, I believe, is the end of the meeting. Well done, Mr Chair. So, thank you, ladies and gentlemen. I declare the meeting closed at 3:51pm. Thank you. Related Noosa Council Meetings
← Browse all Noosa Shire Council meeting transcripts
