General Committee Meeting, 17 April 2023
Date: Monday, 17 April 2023 at 12:30PM
Location: Noosa Shire Council Chambers, 9 Pelican Street, Tewantin, QLD 4565, Australia
Organiser: Noosa Shire Council
Duration: 03:46:23
Synopsis: Short-term accommodation approved with conditions, Tourist Accommodation Zone Review advanced to State review, Tourism Noosa deed strengthened with reporting and alignment, Budget surplus improved.
Meeting Attendees
Committee Members
Frank Wilkie Karen Finzel Joe Jurisevic Amelia Lorentson Clare Stewart Brian Stockwell Tom Wegener Executive Officers
Larry Sengstock, Acting Ceo & Director Infrastructure Services Trent Grauf, Acting Director Corporate Services Kim Rawlings, Director Environment &Sustainable Development Meeting Transcript
Frank Wilkie 00:00.120
Welcome everybody to the General Committee Meeting for April 2023. We have all Councillors in attendance, though we have someone to confirm the Minutes of the last General Committee Meeting. Please that's Councillor Stewart, seconded by Councillor Finzel. All in favour? That's carried. Wait a minute, do we have to vote online? Yeah, we just did. Joe Jurisevic 00:21.809
You don't have to vote online. Unidentified Speaker 00:23.088
On this, no, no, okay, we're not, loading voting online, Garrett. Yet. No. Don't have to make look, it online. Frank Wilkie 00:29.723
I'd also like to begin by acknowledging the Traditional Custodians of the land which we've gathered, which is the Kabi Kabi or Gubbi Gubbi people. I respect the elders past, present, and emerging. We have no presentations. Have no presentations. We have no deputations. There has been a change to the agenda. The confidential sessions are now up first. We now ask. Have someone moved to go to move. The confidential you. Session confidential to handle the. Session to handle the centralised legal and services trial with move from Councillor Stewart, seconded by Councillor Amelia Lorentson. All in favour? It's carried. Frank Wilkie 01:38:24.534
You ready to-- us? If you've recorded that motion you go back out. Okay, we're ready to go. Okay. Welcome everybody. We're back in an open session. The reason for going to confidential session was consideration of centralised legal services trial. The information there contains some confidential private details. And also tourist accommodations are in review for proposed amendments which go into the State for a state interest check and remain confidential if they come back for public consultation. So we go to the motion for the centralised legal services trial which is before it's moved. Councillor Lorentson seconded by Councillor Wegener gerritsen by seconded by Councillor Wilson. Um, you do you wish to speak to the motion? Amelia Lorentson 01:39:21.139
No, I'm very excited to see this report in front of us. Can't really say much about it, but look forward to the oncoming report coming back to Council. Thank you. Frank Wilkie 01:39:36.508
Anybody else put no. the motion in favour. That's carried. Next item, Tourism Accommodation Zone review proposal. Proposed amendment 2A to the Noosa Plan 2020. Happy to move it. It's moved by. That's moved by Councillor Lorentson, seconded by Councillor Finzel. Any Councillors wish to speak to the motion? I'll put the motion to those in favour. Let's carry unanimously. You. Joe Jurisevic 01:40:19.225
Yeah, Amelia. Frank Wilkie 01:40:22.283
Okay, now we go back to the agenda and we're now up to items referred from the committee. Counsel, did you have to push on? Yes. So, the next item is the MCU22/0209 application for Material Change of Use for short-term accommodation of 515 Cooroy Noosa Road, Tinbeerwah, the third from the Planning & Environment Committee Meeting. Amelia Lorentson 01:40:52.647
Kim, would you come up? Kim Rawlings 01:40:54.634
I asked Patrick, didn't I? Well, Patrick— yeah. Frank Wilkie 01:41:04.841
OK, from there we go. Oh, that'd be great. Thank you. Thanks, Joe. You're welcome. Thank you. So campaign so, Ken, the application for us is consistent with the current Planning Scheme? Kim Rawlings 01:41:37.082
Yes, that's correct, Councillor Wilkie. Frank Wilkie 01:41:40.423
And its current use, its former use was as a restaurant? It has plenty of setbacks from adjacent problems? Yes. There was some concern around last week about the dam in the backyard, in the back paddock. Does that need to be fenced off to make it safe? STA. Kim Rawlings 01:42:07.475
No, there isn't. A requirement for the dam to be fenced. It's not treated the same as a swimming pool, even though it is a body of water. Under the legislation, the building act, it's not required to be fenced. So no, requirement. It's not a legal requirement it's obviously up to Council whether that's something they want to be considered. Frank Wilkie 01:42:31.119
And it is in the rural residential zone, correct? Yes. Rural zone. The rural zone. And under the current Planning Scheme, STAs are consistent with using the rural zone. Yes. And they have no conflict with higher orders elements of the Noosa whistler planescape in terms of ensuring that it's not in conflict with. That's right. At the time of the drafting of the Noosa Plan, short-term accommodation was anticipated as a consistent use in the rural zone. There were some recommendations from staff about approvals for STAs in the medium and high density zone. They were also recommended for refusal even though it was a consistent use because of conflict with high orders in the Planning Scheme. Situation doesn't apply to in us. This instance. That's correct. Joe Jurisevic 01:43:21.508
I'll just clarify a comment made there by Councillor Wilkie. I believe I understand that the property has had a number of commercial activities there in the past, not just a restaurant. Sure, yes. Thank you. Patrick Murphy 01:43:30.606
Hello, Patrick. Could you give us a bit of an update? I can, sorry. Things move pretty quick. Joe Jurisevic 01:43:35.868
Okay, so, um. Patrick Murphy 01:43:37.187
Okay, so the site of 515 Cooroy Noosa Road is on a rural zone property. The site is 2.9.93 hectares in area. Because it doesn't meet the 4 hectare size requirement, it becomes an impact-assessable application as opposed to being code-assessable. There's also a provision in the Visitor Accommodation Code regarding it's an acceptable outcome around the lot size being 4 hectares. It obviously doesn't meet corresponding performance outcome is around the character of the area and the amenity of the area. We consider that this proposal would not detrimentally impact upon those. It's noted that the nearest property is 160 metres away on the other side of Cooroy Noosa Road. So the eastern side of the site is a Council reserve, so there's a significant buffer between the site and the adjoining dwellings to the east. And again, it's recommended for approval, subject to conditions, five bedrooms, limited to eight people, and with a 9pm curfew on outside areas being used. Frank Wilkie 01:44:42.622
Councillors? Anyone care to remove the recommendation? Move Councillor Jurisevic, seconded by Councillor Finzel. Chair, do you wish for to take the motion? Joe Jurisevic 01:44:57.804
All the reasons outlined in the report, acknowledging it's also on a very busy major thoroughfare into and out of the region, I'm happy to support staff recommendations. Tom Wegener 01:45:13.500
As you know, I have a very hard time getting past the assessment tables, so the first you look at when looking at these things in an application is you go to the assessment tables, and the assessment table says straight away, located on a site with an area of at least four hectares. And so it says if there's a problem from the assessment tables, you look at the first rural residential code, and the Visitor Accommodation Code, and the works codes. And then, I went back to look at the, well, Pat Patrick, by the way, it's a great report, and Patrick is very, very very helpful for me, in learning more about the Planning Scheme, but it says, "Where there's inconsistency between provisions of the Planning Scheme, the following rules apply: B, relevant codes are specified in schedule 6 and 10 of the regulation. Then, we go to the rural zone code, which is 6, which is part 6, and this is where we look at what's acceptable on a higher level, and it says that you could use visitor accommodation when it complements rural uses and promotes sustainable use of rural land. Houses or outbuildings may be available-term guests where there is no resultant change to the rural amenity. Nature-based- tourism is exemplary is okay. Home-based businesses, which added the economic sustainability of the hinterland are established where nature, scale, and intensity of the activity is compatible with the character and amenity of the surrounding locality. And again later down it says a PO does not detract from rural amenity and adjoining properties. And looking at what we've learned from the Planning Scheme we know that short-term accommodation affects amenity. That's the one thing we have learned in our experiences with short-term accommodation that learning was not around when the Planning Scheme was actually written. And so the question is do you look at the intent of the Planning Scheme when it was written, or can you look at it with learnings that you that have become very blatantly obvious to us now and to me it just seems very very clear that if amenity is if you're circling on amenity and the rule of the rule residential code and the other code um. The assessment tables they all say four hectares that's it well and then if the other axis is amenity but I don't believe that the amenity will not be impacted and I think that this would have been very very hopeful under you know applicable under that the nature code underneath the nature-based tourism code because that would be spectacular because we received a very nice letter from the owner and I thought gosh you know it pains me because he wants to do a nature based bicycle that uses for bicyclers and the place for bicyclers to stay as they go go through the trails which is fantastic and that is exactly what we would like but that could be conditioned if you applied for a nature based tourism business rather than the very wide open STA in the hinterland turning basically a rural property into a potential drag a on amenity or affect the amenity of the area so I can't get past I just get it says four hectares minimum I can't get past that so I will be supporting this. Frank Wilkie 01:49:21.552
Thank you, Councillor Wegener. Any other questions? Joe Jurisevic 01:49:23.577
It raises a question for me and thank you Councillor Wegener. Given that it has that property has had commercial use in the past and something like nature-based tourism is a commercial operation would they have pre-existing use rights of commercial activities in the past to continue in that vein? Patrick Murphy 01:49:44.915
They would have existing use rights if they hadn't abandoned the use but it would also be existing use rights for the activity that was being undertaken so just by virtue of the fact that it's a doesn't mean that you can do any commercial activity. Frank Wilkie 01:49:59.155
It would have to be the same type of activity. That's right. Joe Jurisevic 01:50:02.780
Would, on that property, seeing as it's been some time since commercial activities have been undertaken, has that commercial use been abandoned? It's my understanding that yes it has. I was just trying to clarify that. Frank Wilkie 01:50:14.132
Thank you. Councillor Stockwell? Brian Stockwell 01:50:15.915
It's just a question of clarification, so I think Councillor Wegener suggested it has to be four hectares and that's it. My understanding, please correct me if I'm wrong, is true that four hectares is an acceptable solution, so that's just one example of how to achieve a performance outcome, is that right? Not the only example? Frank Wilkie 01:50:35.705
That's correct, Councillor. Amelia Lorentson 01:50:38.924
Can I ask a question? Patrick, the condition of the approval is that the total number of guests accommodated at any one time must not exceed eight. One of the submitters noted that it was advertised for 15 people in six bedrooms. My question is how do we manage that in fact only eight people occupy the property, and what is the penalty for non-compliance? Patrick Murphy 01:51:06.718
We would need to monitor the property and that would include if we were to issue an approval on this site to look at the advertising platforms to ensure that it wasn't being advertised for more than the eight people. If being utilised or advertised for more than eight people then we would seek to have a conversation with the owner at First Point to bring them into compliance. A local law approval would also be required that would also identify the number of people that the site would be limited to there's an opportunity to you know seek to amend suspend or cancel a local law approval so there's that Avenue under the local law approval but also under the planning approval. There would be a mechanism to take enforcement proceedings should that be required. Amelia Lorentson 01:51:57.918
And in terms of submitters, so it went to public notifications, impact assessable because it didn't hit the four hectares and over. How many submissions were there? Patrick Murphy 01:52:09.010
There was one submission. Amelia Lorentson 01:52:10.227
Properly made one properly made submission. Informal submissions or not properly made submissions, how many were there? Patrick Murphy 01:52:19.507
I believe it was only the one, but I could clarify that. I would need to clarify that for you. Thank you. Joe Jurisevic 01:52:26.767
Sorry, just to clarify, that was one of the neighbours? Patrick Murphy 01:52:30.092
Uh it wasn't directly a abutting direct neighbour, it was further east, so you have the reserve, and it was beyond that. Alright, thank you. Okay, Council's received permission to close? No, I think it's all been said. Okay, I hope the motion goes in favour. Frank Wilkie 01:52:50.134
That's Councillor Jurisevic, Finzel, Stewart, Stockwell, Lorentson, and Wilkie. Against? Councillor Wegener, and that is carried. Thank you Patrick. Thanks Patrick, thank you. We now come to the next item, which is another item referred from the committee, which is the Tourism Noosa funding agreement. Stewart. I have a comment. Thank you. Councillor. Clare Stewart 01:53:26.306
In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009, I. Councillor Stewart informed the meeting that I have declared a conflict of interest to this matter as Leigh McCready, a Director of Tourism Noosa is a friend. As a result of my conflict of interest, I will now leave the meeting room while this matter is considered and voted on. Thank you. Ms Stewart. Won't and I'm leaving the meeting right away I won't. Thank you I'm leaving much the meeting. Frank Wilkie 01:54:00.927
Thank you very much. Karen Finzel 01:54:13.765
Yes, I Councillor Finzel inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter. Okay. Joe Jurisevic 01:54:21.865
Thank you. Very much. As I have no that's the wrong oh oh, yeah. Just talking about yourselves? You know. Frank Wilkie 01:54:42.200
Just despise yourself. Why don't you get out. Thank you. Karen Finzel 01:55:49.108
Thanks, Mr Chair. I, Councillor Finzel, inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter as Leigh McCready, the Director of Tourism Noosa, was involved with my 2020 election campaign with Future Noosa which is no longer an entity. As a result of my conflict of interest I will now leave the meeting room while the matter is considered and voted on. Frank Wilkie 01:56:07.613
Thank you Councillor Finzel. Brian Stockwell 01:56:19.601
I too wish to inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter as on the 24th February 2020 I saw a review by the Independent Council Election Observer as to the public claims of the Future Noosa Team of which Leigh McCready was publicly identified as a campaign manager. Leigh McCready is a Director of Tourism Noosa. Although I have a declarable conflict of interest, I do not believe a reasonable person could have a perception of bias because the ICEO review was an advisory service, not a statutory process, and my queries at the time were in the public and neither I nor Ms. McCready stood to personally gain or lose from that advice. Therefore I will choose to remain in the meeting room however I will respect the decision of the meeting on whether I can remain and participate in the decision. Joe Jurisevic 01:57:02.144
I move that Council note the declarable conflict of interest by Councillor Stockwell and determine it's in the public interest that Councillor Stockwell participates and votes on this matter because Council believes that a reasonable person could not have a perception of bias because the ICEO review was an advisory service not a statutory service and Councillor Stockwell's queries at the time were in the public interest and neither he nor Ms McCready stood to personally gain or lose from the advice and therefore a reasonable person would trust that the final decision is made in the public interest no. Think we've gone through this several times in regard to this matter and I think it's all been discussed before. Frank Wilkie 01:57:48.070
Now we come to substance of the report. Hello, Kim. For the benefit of those who may be listening, could you report us through the report we have before us for the funding agreement? Kim Rawlings 01:58:04.127
Just noting this is a report by our CEO, and in his absence I'm stepping in. Yes so the report to Council today is to recommend a funding and performance deed with Tourism Noosa. Our current funding arrangements with Tourism Noosa is due to expire mid this year, so we've been for the last number of months in negotiations with Tourism Noosa about the next funding arrangement. The current funding deed is, the current funding arrangement is done by an MOU. What's on the table today for Council consideration is a change in the approach from an MOU to a funding and performance deed. It's been through a legal review and been negotiated with Tourism Noosa over the last couple of months. The deed outlines very clearly obligations and performance measures. For Tourism Noosa as Council is the primary funder of Tourism Noosa. There are very specific requirements for Tourism Noosa and both parties in this arrangement to meet over the proposed timeframe. The recommendation is for a 2 +2 arrangement, but there are some milestones and gateways in that need to be met before Council would commit to annual funding. The agreement very clearly recognises that Council is in the process of developing a Destination Management Plan, and that Destination Management Plan, once complete, will inform the future direction. Our partnership with our main tourism body, Tourism Noosa, and that would inform future negotiations and funding arrangements. Tom Wegener 02:00:07.256
So, in the 4.2 operations plan, by December 31st, 2023, tourism to Noosa will implement-year four strategic plan, which incorporates the priorities and obligations and performance measures set out as scheduled. One of the needs, considering that there's a Destination Management Plan, will there be time for them to actually fulfil this requirement while waiting for a Destination Management Plan? Kim Rawlings 02:00:45.326
So, the 4.2 specifies that Tourism Noosa need to have their strategic plan in place by that time that incorporates the performance outcomes and objectives in schedule 1. So they've got all the information they need to be able to do that and my understanding is they've already started their strategic planning process well into it. You will note that in the schedule though at priority 1 it then subsequently says that Council is preparing a Destination Management Plan and at the point that's that complete that we would get back around the table and consider what that means and if that means any change or any further incorporation into Tourism Noosa's strategic plan or direction that would also happen at that time. Frank Wilkie 02:01:34.240
Could you give us some idea of the timing for the Destination Management Plan please? Kim Rawlings 02:01:38.918
We are in we of are in the process of preparing a Discussion Paper at the moment that will come to Council and to the Project Control Group in the next month. Discussion Paper is on the issues around the Destination Management Plan. It will go out for broad community consultation. Following that process that all of that information will then inform the development of the Destination Management Plan. Our hope is that we have the Destination Management Plan complete by later this year. Councillor Wilkie. Frank Wilkie 02:02:10.590
So that's when the talks with Tourism Noosa will take place? That's right. In order to give Tourism Noosa some certainty, long this a is this agreement? 2 +2? That's right. So regardless of what comes out of the Destination Management Plan? That this agreement is locked in for two years? That's right. There's no capacity to change anything before the end of that two year period? Well, there is capacity to change direction and arrangements, but this does provide funding for two years. That's right. Yeah. Kim Rawlings 02:02:47.190
There are some clauses in it that relate to where the funding may change, but that's based on default and things like that. Frank Wilkie 02:02:54.221
Okay. Well, for the sake of getting things moving, I'll move the motion. I'll second the motion. Seconded by Councillor Lorentson. I support this recommendation. This will give tourism Noosa's some funding certainty. For at least two years. They've performed their role very, very well in the last 20 years in marketing Noosa and positioning it as a destination choice for the high-deal travel. The strategy is has always been to target interstate and overseas tourists who tend to spend more and don't drive. The Destination Management Plan is the opportunity to fine-tune the role of tourism in Noosa and redefine it. But tourism in Noosa still has a brief to execute over the next two years and certainly in the short-term to keep promoting Noosa as we recover from COVID to let the world know that the borders are open and Noosa is here for them to enjoy. I am informed by the case study of Colorado for those who might be questioning whether Tourism Noosa ought to be continued to be funded because Noosa seems to be going so well it's a story of complacency Colorado decided at the height of its success as a destination to discontinue funding its market tourism marketing body and within three years it had lost 30% of market share worth $1.3 billion. They decided to re reinvestigate funding again in the year 2000 but it wasn't until 2015 that they recovered their market share. So it's a lesson of yes, Noosa, the visited dependent sector economy, seems to be doing well, better than pre-COVID levels. It's not an invitation to be complacent at this time. The community will decide the sort of destination that we'd like Noosa to become in the future, what sort of visitor experience we'd what like to offer. The experience of the residents could be, and Tourism Noosa. Will have a role to play in that. But in the meantime, this gives Tourism Noosa funding. Certainty for at least another two years. They are a professional partners and we owe them, we owe them that. So I support this recommendation. Tom. Tom Wegener 02:05:45.804
There's a brand management. Tourism Noosa, rather than number one, is brand management of what they do. Focus. The And they've done an incredibly good job with that. And now we're talking destination management as the superseding plan. But does destination management take into account the very different concept of brand management? Kim Rawlings 02:06:16.932
The issue of brand Noosa is absolutely central to destination management and what the community and all stakeholders want the destination to continue to be. In the future and how that then informs the brand so yes I do think it's quite central. Councillor? Wegener. I was just going to say Councillor. Tom, Councillor Wegener. Is going say councillor Councillor Tom, Councillor Wegener Wegener. Tom Wegener 02:06:44.751
Yes, I'll speak to it then. But brand management I think is something that Tourism Noosa has done extremely well and for all the hype that's come about in Tourism Noosa week 2 that are bringing visitors in, that's just visitors and I think a much bigger part or equally big part of Tourism Noosa's remit is brand management. And that brand management is very, very wide in its scope. And as I've spoke about, several businesses that have come here through the digital hub and, you know, surfers coming here, like, who could contribute to that brand, become a part of the tourism thing, but also set down their ribs here and create a Noosa lucid brand that it's not only tourism but it brings businesses in. Like, as we say in a place that is great to live, that's a place that people want to visit. Well, the brand management, I think, is really key in maintaining, in bringing businesses in as well. Just for example, Land & Sea Brewery, they made their Noosa gin, and just by the brand name Noosa gin, all of a sudden it was, it's been on, what's it, Branson's airline. Yeah, yeah, all of he a sudden it goes, it has that straight into virgin, and all these other businesses that have come, like the server named yon who came here, who started out as a pastry chef, and now he has a business as a filmer and ad maker, and all these come. I mean really, people come here for the Noosa brand. Is an incredibly integral part of Noosa, and that's why people come here. And so I see that Tourism Noosa has done extremely well at brand management, and it's something that I feel is different. From destination management. It's a bit different, and that's what Tourism Noosa does extremely well. So I'm very, very pleased that Tourism Noosa will be has the funding for the next two years to continue this brand management. Frank Wilkie 02:08:50.815
Excuse me, Kim. The new funding agreement that replaces the old, the former, the current funding agreement, requires a lot of more reporting. Can you just talk us through some of the more robust reporting requirements under the new funding agreement, please. Kim Rawlings 02:09:07.969
Yeah, definitely the new funding agreement has a very strong focus on governance and reporting. So you know there's a number of documents, plans, strategic and reporting. Plans, strategic plans, events, strategy, marketing plans that the deed captures. And requires them to be reported to Council. There's regular reporting, quarterly reporting required under this. As opposed to twice yearly reporting under the former funding agreement. That's right. There's also a clause in here that says at any point if Council would like reporting on any particular aspect that within, I think it's 10 days, can request that information from Tourism Noosa. That, yes, it's definitely an increased level of governance and reporting under this, deed, absolutely. Frank Wilkie 02:10:02.298
Can the Council speak to motion? Brian Stockwell 02:10:06.416
I'm going to move a couple of amendments one at a time so we can deal with the issues individually, and they're suggesting tweaks. So the first amendment that I'm moving is shown up there on the screen, and it's to amend item B to read, authorise the Chief Executive Officer to make changes to the funding performance deed prior to executing the deed as required, including. Adding I, a new adding a new clause, schedule 1.2.1d stating that TN understands and acknowledges that any future funding will be reliant on TN responding to the outcomes of the DMP to Council satisfaction. Can we have someone second that for the purpose of the debate? I can't. I'll second it for the purpose of the debate. Thank you Joe. As I think mentioned by the Director in the introduction, within the agreement at the moment it's implied that is the case, but it's not explicit in my reading of the document. And I think it's much better to tie it down to make it really clear. It's purely just tying the loose ends up saying, yep, once we have a DMP, we would like this funding to go towards TN helping us achieve the aspirations and the actions within that Destination Management Plan. Frank Wilkie 02:11:25.765
Yeah, Councillor, questions? If you'll speak to that. Joe Jurisevic 02:11:27.067
I've got a question, and I'm not sure who it would be related to. Possibly Councillor Stockwell. In adding that clause, does that clarify that there are elements of funding to attain different elements of the agreement with Tourism Noosa? Brian Stockwell 02:11:53.811
No, the agreement doesn't separate the different roles of and functions of Tourism Noosa at any point, we do know it mentions things like marketing as a marketing plan and sustainability is another initiative and a whole range of initiatives but this is purely saying that clause talks about the Destination Management Plan being a requirement to respond and this just clarifies that is sort of key to ongoing funding. Joe Jurisevic 02:12:23.751
I guess the second part of that question then goes to you Kim. With the Destination Management Plan coming in are there elements within the funding agreement that we could have that this is for marketing this is for DMP delivery and different KPIs associated with the ongoing funding within those different streams of would there be funding streams within the agreement. Kim Rawlings 02:12:47.946
What the current deed does is suggesting the same section of a section of the schedule 1 2.1 C says that TN will upon request agree to a variation of this date to incorporate agreed obligations arising from in relation to the DMP. Joe Jurisevic 02:13:07.779
It could be specific stream funding streams based on different elements of the agreement that's all I'm trying to clarify is that precluded by what's added here or is that reinforcing it or really not acknowledging it. Kim Rawlings 02:13:22.467
Yeah I don't think that precludes anything this would be point D to that to following that so I think it just is a clarifying thank you. Joe Jurisevic 02:13:35.665
But that satisfies my question. Amelia Lorentson 02:13:37.368
Thank you I have a question Kim this is a legally binding contract and it's been going to and fro to our legal our solicitors does inclusion of this course need to run past our legals and if so is there going to be a potential that it may not come back to Council by this Thursday's definitely Ordinary Meeting by I. Kim Rawlings 02:14:07.880
I our think we could definitely run it by our legals I think that could be done by Thursday so they've been very responsive and been able to turn around any changes that we've made very quickly. Amelia Lorentson 02:14:19.990
In the spirit of collaboration and given that this is a partnership can I also request between now and then Thursday that Tourism Noosa have an opportunity to also be consulted on this if they haven't I don't I'm not sure if they have or haven't but this has come as a surprise to me I also would like again just for consideration for Thursday that if this does come up and it's all okay but with Tourism Noosa have no problem our lawyers have no problem can we change the word Council satisfaction again to mutual satisfaction that there's again got to be consideration and respect and again in the spirit of collaboration it should be mutual satisfaction that's a question for Councillor Stockwell and that's a question for you if you can give that some thought between now and Thursday but I would love I think as frankly oh no no okay well there. Joe Jurisevic 02:15:17.665
Should be an apostrophe O in councils. Amelia Lorentson 02:15:20.215
Think the opportunity to that. I will speak to the amendment and I might actually defer the item 5.2 to the Ordinary Meeting dated 20th of April 2023 to allow consultation with legal counsel and Tourism Noosa on the proposed amendments. Frank Wilkie 02:15:42.522
Do we have a seconder for a procedural motion? Brian Stockwell 02:15:45.417
Just a question. I did circulate another part of the amendment. Was it your intention that be part of that request? Because it might be better to have it on the table, rather than to arrange it on Thursday night. Amelia Lorentson 02:16:01.605
Can I go backwards? You can. Frank Wilkie 02:16:03.507
This hasn't been seconded. Amelia Lorentson 02:16:05.200
Fantastic. I might withdraw until the second amendment gets discussed. I have a lot of questions as well. Frank Wilkie 02:16:11.241
So, yeah. Sure. So I'm going to use the amendment. Amelia Lorentson 02:16:17.108
Look, as it stands, I don't think I have any problems. With it. I think my concern is really about getting this across the line this month. I think there's a lot of staff that have been living with uncertainty for some time and. Think it's actually, I don't think, I know it's taking its toll on the organisation. So, you know, if this can get across the line and there's no issues between now and Thursday, I actually can't see any problems with this. I do think that it is explicit in. Agreement. Clause 4.3 makes reference to the agreed priorities. Schedule 1 stipulates very clearly these outcomes, but if it's just a, you know, to have it up front and for purposes of clarity, for community, I have no objection to that. Joe Jurisevic 02:17:09.619
Just on a grammatical point, can I just add that Council should have an apostrophe? Because to Council's satisfaction, there's no objection to making that correction? Frank Wilkie 02:17:20.967
And, Kim, my question will be, what is your wording on that amendment? It doesn't-- does it capture the intent of the funding being given away in relation to the DMP? Paper? Kim Rawlings 02:17:34.328
Yes, uh, I believe that's the intention. Like I said, clause schedule 1, clause 2.1 very much puts right up front as priority one the Destination Management Plan. It that TN acknowledge that Council is developing the TN, the DMP, and that will inform TN's strategy in relation to management of the visitor economy and tourism. It requires. Frank Wilkie 02:18:02.066
Yes, just help me find that. Kim Rawlings 02:18:03.629
Page 13 of the. 13 of the deed. Amelia Lorentson 02:18:08.424
And page 6 of the deed, clause 4.3, Frank, references during the term TN will report on expenditure of the funding by TN with reference to the agreed priorities, activities being undertaken. And return okay, so $406 million-ish? Clause 4.3 and schedule 1 is on page 13 and is included as part of the contract. Kim Rawlings 02:18:39.929
And then priority 1 on page 13 under point 2 of the schedule. Frank Wilkie 02:18:49.982
Which will inform TN's strategy in relation to the management of the business of our economy in terms of the community service. TN will implement aspects of DMP, those aspects to be identified by Council from time to after collaborative consultation between Council and TN. Do you believe you can have this run by the lawyers and TN before now? Yes. I'm happy to support it. Tom? Tom Wegener 02:19:16.692
You know, I, don't know what I'm voting for with this. I have a vague understanding of the Destination Management Plan, but what when I think of the things that I think TN used to do extremely well, say, Federal IT program, what would that fit under the DMP? Yes. How do we know? I haven't seen the D.O.P. Yet. It's not done. Can we do, can we do things in order? I think one of our problems as of lately, you know, is I think this goes with our Walking and Cycling Strategy. We said, you know, we have the Walking and Cycling Strategy. Going one direction, perhaps the DMP going this way, and it might actually change the, you know, maybe multi-million dollar Walking and Cycling Strategy, and this, I think that we need to get our ducks in a row, and before I tie and cycling strategy going one direction, Tourism Noosa so tightly to the DMP, maybe I can see a draft of it somewhere, or I want to, I don't know what it is, I don't, and I'm the Councillor, and it's not in a form where I could agree to something like this, where I don't know what I'm voting for, and what I'm tying Tourism Noosa to, and I think Tourism Noosa doesn't know either, I don't see why. They would be excited about this, or why they would agree to this. I couldn't imagine them agreeing to this. So I can't support it. Frank Wilkie 02:20:46.286
Excuse me, Kim. Tourism, under the proposed funding agreement, Tourism Noosa is already tied to the outcomes of the DMP. Is that not correct? Kim Rawlings 02:20:55.990
That's correct, Councillor Wilkie. Frank Wilkie 02:20:59.029
So why was this part of that? This is. It's another way of saying the same thing. They'd tell me to do this, no. Okay, anyway, thank you, Councillor Wegener. Joe? Joe Jurisevic 02:21:09.591
Yeah, look, I know that Councillor Stockwell's intent here is to tighten an element of the DMP to the funding. I'm a little bit inclined to agree with Councillor Lorentson's approach that maybe we need a second set of eyes over this. There's an element in this with regard to the words that any future funding will be reliant on TN responding. If there are different streams of funding, does that prohibit marketing funding? The. Here with regard to the way it's worded I think is deserving of a little bit more consideration as to how that impacts on different funding elements if there are different funding streams within the arrangement going forward. Brian Stockwell 02:22:02.526
I accept actually what surprise. Councillor de ruzza just said. When I first put this up it was along the lines of the intent is that the CEO can play with the words, not necessarily the intent. So if after the next amendment there is a motion to defer to allow that sort of thing to happen, I'm quite happy with it. As I said, the aim is to make something that I think is implied, explicit. That's all. Frank Wilkie 02:22:29.750
Put the amendment to vote. Those in favour? Councillor Stockwell, Councillor Wilkie. Those against? Councillor Jurisevic, Lorentson & Wegener. The amendment's lost. I've got another one. Wait yeah. A minute. Brian Stockwell 02:22:55.862
So, this will have to now be clause 1 to item B, to item B, to read, adding to the requirement that prior to the completion and adoption of the DMP TN must consider and respect key aspirations and positions of Council articulated in the Corporate Plan and state development strategies, plans-- there should be a comma, I think, there. Strategies. Joe Jurisevic 02:23:23.164
There should be a comma after as well. Brian Stockwell 02:23:27.015
DMP. And plans as part of the development to 15 plan, marketing plan, and events strategy. Frank Wilkie 02:23:36.474
Adding to the D, a comma. Adding to the D, a comma. Joe Jurisevic 02:23:58.584
I have a question for staff. Is this not already incorporated in the agreement as it stands? Haven't we aligned the agreement to the elements of Council's operations and that would incorporate the proper plan, strategic plan, marketing plan, events strategy, particularly the marketing and events strategy? Kim Rawlings 02:24:22.909
What is in the document is a principle of collaboration and alignment. Between both the organisations. So from that perspective, yes, that does underpin the deed and our partnership. That's what I would have thought. Does it specifically do that? No, it doesn't specifically do that. But there's, like I said, there's a lot in this about working closely together, aligning our work, not duplicating, collaborating. So yes, from that perspective. Is it as specific as this? No. Kim, can I ask. Amelia Lorentson 02:25:03.170
A question? Joe Jurisevic 02:25:03.866
You're I'm still asking questions, if I may. I guess the question is, given that funding is dependent on that alignment, if it wasn't aligned, one would consider that we could have discussions and look at where that alignment doesn't reach and amend any funding arrangements as necessary. Do we need to be as specific as this to relate it to specific elements of the plan, particularly down to strategic? Plan making, plan event strategy? Is Corporate Plan alone sufficient? Is there a risk that if we don't incorporate every element of Council alignment that we want within our plans that we don't cover the elements that we sort of go well but we didn't talk about this in that arrangement and that wasn't brought up so if we're not being specific to every single element that we want them to adhere to tie it all down that we run the risk of but you never said that. You didn't adhere us to that policy, you're adhering us to these three elements. There's that's always a risk. So if you start itemising, then you run the risk. That's what I'm potentially seeing here is that we're being specific to certain elements, but not being specific to all elements. And how do would have said I if just tied to the Corporate Plan, would that be specific? Because that overarches everything. Beneath it. Sorry, yes. Thank you, see you the bottom line is that the officers are comfortable that we've incorporated all of this into the document so far. If there's need for consideration at a mixed level, then that's to be debated. But currently, our position is that we feel that the collaboration is spelled out well enough in the document. Thank you. That's what I was trying to allude to. That's to be debated, but that's our current intention. Amelia Lorentson 02:27:04.406
Can I just, because I sit on the Destination Management Plan on the PCG group, and again, I get your point, Tom really clearly, I've got more privy to the information, but the Destination Management Plan, the targets and goals of the Destination Management Plan are aligned with Council's Corporate Plan. Strategies, local economic plan, social strategy, Transport Strategy, Environment Strategy, and the Noosa Planning Scheme. So what's captured here is actually captured and part of the purpose of the Destination Management Plan. So I think we've got the DMP, and again, I'm sort of skimming through the actual legal agreement under TN's obligations governance, I reference four 4.1.C. TN will review and make appropriate changes to its strategy and expenditure upon reasonable request by Council. There's enough in the obligations, you know, legally binding obligations. That allow Council with any point. Oh, sorry, no. So, so, Kim, as part of their reporting requirements, does Council have a lever to change strategy, TN strategy, to align it with our strategy if, need, be? Kim Rawlings 02:28:35.229
Yes, it does. There's a, number of clauses in the agreement that allow that. You just cited one. The other is that 4.2, that around that's around the strategic plan, and the TN will deliver the strategic plan and operational plan, and it's to be agreed to by Council. So there is a number of clauses already in the agreement that do allow that collaboration, that feedback, and that agreement by Council. Fantastic. Amelia Lorentson 02:29:07.450
And my understanding with the Destination Management Plan, are you in agreeance with that? Is it intended to align again with all our strategies, our Corporate Plan, and in particular our Noosa Planning Scheme? Is that so what's requested here that's captured in the Destination Management Plan Kim? Kim Rawlings 02:29:29.081
Absolutely the intention is that the Destination Management Plan aligns with those things. It might develop new policy, it probably will develop new policy and positions. I think and Councillor Stockwell might want to explain his amendment but I think this says prior to that so the fact that the DMP is not there and so you're right once the DMP is there it will do all of those things but this because it's not. Brian Stockwell 02:29:54.114
There. Joe Jurisevic 02:29:55.596
I'm just about to go there Brian and given that we've asked questions in that vein and that Councillor Stockwell hasn't had a chance to put his case I'm happy to second this so that we can hear both sides of the discussion. Brian Stockwell 02:30:06.853
A little while ago Councillor Wegener brought up the point that he doesn't know what's in the Destination Management Plan. So if a Councillor doesn't know what's in there, should we leave it to staff to interpret what that's going to be? Or should we give guidance to both TN, ourselves, and to large part of the community who will be interested in this agreement as to how we would like the partnership or the service revision agreement between Council and Tourism Noosa to proceed in the future. Councillor Jurisevic would like to keep it straight to the Corporate Plan, that would be one way to do it, but the Corporate Plan is currently only a draft, it will be adopted in the near future, and it's about how TN, what guidance we're going to give in the interim before the Destination Management Plan, is there some guidance within our, in the Corporate Plan, in the existing strategies that will provide TN with some guidance about what Council will be looking at. In my opinion, there is, and Amelia if you can bring up the word document that I provided earlier. Joe Jurisevic 02:31:11.630
I'm talking about TN, sorry. Brian Stockwell 02:31:12.724
Okay, so if we look at what's in the draft Corporate Plan, we don't know what's going to be in the DMP, but we know that in the Corporate Plan we're given a fair bit of guidance. And the first one there, and this is what's probably the most important issue for our community, that balancing the needs and quality of life of residents while sustaining our tourism sector so that the two can comfortably coexist is critical. To me it's really important that tourism nature understands that once that becomes our Corporate Plan, we would hope that our strategic planning is all based on that understanding that critical. But next, our artisan and niche indices form a small of our visitor economy. Another thing that's identifying that what might be as part of a strategic plan, and certainly as far as international destination stewardship protocols, that's an important part of getting to a Destination Management Plan. Building our emergent. Merging local food and drink industry in our established arts and cultural sector is a key to creating an authentic experience for residents and visitors alike. Once again, in the Corporate Plan, once it's adopted, that will give guidance. The success of our economy is driven by our reputation for ecological sustainability and nature conservation. Once again, Tourism Noosa understands this thing, but we need to make it really clear what we think is important and what's in our policy. We seek to support Kabi Kabi in progressing their priorities for their people, and that's another emerging area in terms of where tourism and indigenous tourism can emerge. We are focused on our economy. Transitioning to a more circular economy, focused on reducing, and recycling. Reusing and recycling. And obviously things like plastic free tourism is there. And we aim to achieve zero net emissions by 2026. So when they become a Corporate Plan, we can clearly say, we want you to come on the journey with us. We want. And this is how intelligent. Use of marketing can build a Noosa brand. It's by building a values-based marketing framework around attracting people who share our values, who share the values of this committee as expressed within documents like the Corporate Plan and other strategies. As Councillor Lorentson mentioned, the DMP will be bringing together a whole lot of strategies. But until it's there, we have. To rely on something else. And to me, I think it's important just to highlight that these are the sort of things that the tourism Noosa's should be considering in the next six months, until the DMP's up and running, hopefully. I've been running back with it. Frank Wilkie 02:33:40.203
Councillor Stockwell. Tom Wegener 02:33:48.954
Duplication between what tourism is doing and what Council is doing is a big issue that we're wanting to address. Speaking of duplication, is this another duplication of what's already in there? Brian Stockwell 02:34:04.032
I don't think so. I think it brings it to a, there's nothing in there that talks about key aspirations. To me it's talking about consider and respect the key aspirations of Council and its policy framework. To me that's really important. We're on the same vision and same journey together. It's bit fairly of in its approach and fairly specific. To me it's just important that in the interim the Destination Management Plan will achieve this. But up until that point I think we just have to say. Let's come on the journey together. Tom Wegener 02:34:39.617
And Kim, is there, you know, is there going to be a more or less, you know, collaboration or, you know, conversation with Tourism Noosa set coming up to make sure that this is, that is being implemented? Kim Rawlings 02:34:54.177
Yeah, absolutely. I mean, the deed just sets the framework. The substance of is our relationship and the partnership and how we collaborate and consult and that absolutely, that will continue to happen. Frank Wilkie 02:35:07.212
Okay. Joe? Joe Jurisevic 02:35:09.915
Yeah, I'll speak to it. Having reread it and having heard Councillor Stockwell's articulation of what I misread and stated in relevant plans, strategy and plans is part of the development of Tourism Noosa's strategic plan, marketing plan, event strategy. So I didn't read that right the first time. Now that I've read it again and I've heard Councillor Stockwell's description of what he's trying to adhere and that it's a prior to the completion and adoption of the TN, it's to give direction to TN that align with our Corporate Plan. Is the type of thing that the DMP will facilitate and that we should be going on that journey. One could argue that TN is in fact ahead of Council's Corporate Plan in delivering Plastic Free Noosa and has eliminated a lot of plastic and created a situation for Council that we're trying to catch up on and that is compostable waste that we don't have a stream for. So in some ways they're ahead of our Corporate Plan and ahead of our Waste Strategy going forward. So I'm quite happy to support this element of it, knowing full well where Tourism Noosa are with elements and I don't think Tourism Noosa are not in alignment with the elements that we exposed to deliver are not in alignment as a destination but that could be good to clearly I'd like to articulate that we're both on the same page. Amelia Lorentson 02:36:37.339
I've got a couple of questions Kim. So referencing the legally binding agreement on page 5. TN's obligation to governance 4.1 point you know ABCDEFGH is all about strategy that there is some serious governance and reporting obligations most of which involve Council review of strategy operational again is this superfluous what's Councillor Stockwell requesting already part of the agreement and are we I don't know to me time is of the essence and if this gets put up again I'm going to move a procedural motion because we need an answer ASAP for the staff and I just I love the intent I don't actually have any issues with what you're putting forward Brian but I do think it's explicit I don't think it's implied I think it's black and white and every four months they've got it by the 30th of September 2023 the TN's going to develop a four-year strategic plan this CEO oh sorry okay I'll talk to the amendment for reasons already sort of raised at the table I what's been requested is already captured in the agreement I also know being the Tourism Noosa board that this CEO the Acting CEO has already commenced aligning TN strategy with the new funding agreement we have had umpteen opportunity September 2023 we've got my gosh December 2023 the strategies could actually come to Council for approval and that's the opportunity where we sit down and just go does it align with our Corporate Plan which is has not been ratified our DMP which has not been ratified but existing tourism Noosa strategies from previous agreements already do that but they're already on the course and as Brian's can't count one of the Councillors of the Councillors mentioned they're actually ahead of the game on sustainability which is again one of the one of our core priorities you know we're about to enter into a global recession we need to be at the forefront of waste and sustainability and that's something that Tourism Noosa is already leading on so again I don't actually have issues with any of the amendments, but I think where I just don't think it's my needed so position. Joe Jurisevic 02:39:47.921
Sorry Councillor Wilkie, it's a minor change but I'm asking of the mover and of course the entire Council around the table. Can we just change the word "it" to "tns" as in Tourism Noosa's strategic plan because that was what I was confused with. I just think it clarifies what, who it's referring to with regard to strategic plan, marketing plan and events strategy. Doesn't change the intent I think it just clarifies who it's is referring to. Tourism Noosa's strategic plan, marketing plan and events strategy. I think that clarifies the nature of what Council Stockwell is don't doing. Typically change these sort of things on the run but there's no change in the intent it's just to clarify who it's referred to if there's no if that's a technical amendment nobody objects to it. Amelia Lorentson 02:40:44.344
What we do. I still want to move a procedural motion again to allow a consultation with our lawyers to see whether the wording is actually correct to be included in the legal document and also to allow TN the opportunity to at least, at the minimum, be consulted on any amendments. Is this the time to be moving a procedural motion or should we wait for a decision first? I think we get the amendment done and then we move the procedural motion, should we not? Frank Wilkie 02:41:10.526
If the policy can allow a minister to consider. Amelia Lorentson 02:41:14.705
And then I'll move it on it to afterwards. It. Thank you. Frank Wilkie 02:41:19.008
I'll speak in favour of the amendment. As Kim said, the funding agreement, of course the broad framework around which we'll move forward together. This talks about prior to the completion of the GMP, consideration must be given to the key aspirations and positions of Council position, Council articulated plan. And I think all in our community would hope that TN would be seen. Would be seeking through their strategic plan to balance the needs and quality of life of residents whilst sustaining our tourism sector so that two can comfortably coexist. There's a lot of other notable noble and inspiring aspirations. In there. And as Councillor Jurisevic said, Tourism Noosa is already on its journey. From what I observed, when I was the observer of the Tourism Noosa pool, they would have no objection to having regard. Doesn't lock them in. It's not saying they must do anything. Sorry, they must consider and respect the key aspirations. My guess. Sorry, my. If you what to don't I understand about tourism is that they're already there. As Joe said, they're already ahead of the Council in terms of implementing the plastic free initiatives. So I have no problem with this amendment. But I do agree that anything should be done. Run by our words by Thursday night and in terms of this before Thursday night. And that can happen even without a secret motion, but. Amelia Lorentson 02:43:01.579
Oh, okay. So we can still vote. Okay. I'm happy with it. Yeah. Tom. Frank Wilkie 02:43:08.474
Tom. Tom Wegener 02:43:09.480
A will question, so is this go into the actual contract or this wording will go into the contract? So it's not like a normal amendment which goes into one of the reports and telling your staff what to do. This actually goes into the contract itself. Kim Rawlings 02:43:26.083
Yeah. So this sits below the previous recommendation, as I understand it, which says authorise the funding and performance agreement as required. And then this amendment specifies that change. So yes, it would go into the deed. Tom Wegener 02:43:45.215
I'm a big fan of occam's razor, and that is, if it doesn't have to be there, it shouldn't be there, and the Corporate Plan, which is a fantastic thing, it's not done yet. And so we haven't actually been ratified it. So again, I would, if the Corporate Plan was ratified and gone through public consultation or so forth I think I'd be 100% behind it but it's just hard for me to agree to something to go into a contract don't actually know what it is yet. Just to clarify the Corporate Plan has gone through consultation. It has but it hasn't come to Council yet. It will come to Council next week. 27 10 days so it's not going to quite make it. Kim Rawlings 02:44:30.485
I just wanted to clarify your statement about consultation. Frank Wilkie 02:44:33.087
To a. Brian Stockwell 02:44:34.188
Certain extent I agree that the framework is in place where these issues could be considered. But I've read this document probably three times now and I'm not satisfied that we've given any guidance. We've picked out some of the issues we want dealt with specifically but it's in an administrative, to me it is about key aspirations and when we say positions of Council and articulated Corporate Plan because the Corporate Plan has been through lots of consultation promise out it's also the community's key aspirations and I think we have to restructure the relationship to a certain extent between the community and Tourism Noosa and articulated Corporate Plan in that we are all working towards similar aspirations and this document is where to start that journey. I don't see anywhere explicitly where that's a requirement and I agree that in many aspects the issues, the aspirations that I identified in the draft plan, which I don't see changing next week, already on that journey. But what if there's proposals come up and we want to go here, we want brand new major events on Noosa Beach? Then the majority. Of Noosa board can say no, that's inconsistent with Council's policy. That's what that does. It actually makes their job of strategic planning more guided. To say, are we at liberty with the funds provided by Noosa Council to go in a different direction to Noosa Council? We'll just say no, we want you to go in our direction on these key aspirations. It's not saying we're going to tell them how to do it, what to do, we're just going to say please respect them. Frank Wilkie 02:46:20.374
Okay, the amendment to the vote, does it fail? That's unanimous. The amendment now becomes part of the original motion. Is there a motion to no, renew the procedure of. Amelia Lorentson 02:46:33.832
I'm happy to just, and if we can just get the information. There. Before the ordinary mention meeting, should that would be mention great. Brian Stockwell 02:46:41.559
That the way that's worded, it doesn't specify what the final words, it just says a requirement, so it doesn't say where to put it, like the last one, or what the specific words are. Frank Wilkie 02:46:50.899
It's a. So. Now back to the original motion, and only Tom and myself have spoken to the original motion. Anybody else wish to speak to it? Brian Stockwell 02:47:05.177
Oh, um. Tourism Noosa has done a for this community that has made the lives of many people in it much better. They have maintained over the decades. Level of visitation that has underpinned a large part of their economy. We know now that we're in a time where we are suffering the effects of being too popular. That we have got to a point where our attraction is a place of for visitors is causing congestion, is causing problems on the Noosa North Shore, is a range of things. Now there is within the community of goose that well you stop marketing and. Councillor Wilkie you did identify one of the reasons why you may not do that in that you might lose your market share and actually particularly at the current time where there is a big degree of uncertainty about the economic outlook globally. I'll be convinced after this national management plan about where we have to head and in the interim I think there's an opportunity to have a with the intelligence and the capacity within Tourism Noosa to use our marketing budget to start heading in the direction to address some of those problems if we for example attract the right sort of people to our short stay accommodation that don't have large parties if we start to attract people from New Zealand who come here because they identify with the values of Noosa if we start to look at where and who we market to so that they're here like the reason tread lightly program to be part of what this community. Aspires to do which is to be an example a global exemplar of sustainability and futures and for that industry to contribute to things like achieving our ambitious target of zero emissions by 2026 that's the challenge tourism is how do they use their smarts how do they use all their data to work with the aspirations of the community I think it's a good agreement in terms of the structure and its administrative function and it's become much more performance based and that should provide those within tourism with some fairly clear targets deadlines, milestones, which will I believe generate more efficiency within their organisation there's one part of the agreement that hasn't got a lot of their players yet but it also encourages them to start looking to their own source of funds to a great extent that is when you look at their budget a real um area where significant increases could be achieved um and I think that's one where you know when we get to the two years will be one of the key performance indicators that councils at the time will be looking at is how much have member fees or joint sponsor joint marketing programs actually match the community dollars that go into Tourism Noosa so on the whole I think it's a good agreement. I'm glad that last amendment will go in so I think that is key to reassuring our community that Tourism Noosa and the money that we provide for the sustainability and marketing of that sector is aligned to the aspirations that they hold. Frank Wilkie 02:50:37.269
I have a question. Part C of the motions has confirmed the release of the funds as stated in the report for 24 and 25 years. That's not saying that money, just to clarify. What is that actually committing this to? Is it 2.52 for both years, pending the signing of this agreement and adherence to conditions? That's right. That's It is. That's signing it for both? That's right, as per the agreement, and paid as per the agreement in two stages. Thank you. Joe Jurisevic 02:51:16.690
Can I just confirm an element of what Councillor Wilkie asked there? Has the amount been determined for 24/25? Yes. It has been? Yes. Within that agreement? Yes. Okay that's all right. Amelia Lorentson 02:51:31.800
And speak I'm going to ask if I can have some leniency. I've got a little bit of a speech that I've written. Joe Jurisevic 02:51:44.146
Start the clock now. That's right. Test the new system. So as everyone knows I'm as everyone. Amelia Lorentson 02:51:54.464
Knows I'm the observer on the Tourism Noosa board and have been for the last three and a half years. Okay. Noosa is world famous for its surfing destination and it's one of Australia's leading holiday destinations. So then why do we need destination marketing of Noosa? Do we need more tourists? And what happens if we decide to stop marketing Noosa? I've sat on the Tourism Noosa board now for the last three years as the elected observer looking for the answers to these questions. And these are my two main observations. One, we live in the best place on earth and with that comes so many different and high expectation challenges and opportunities. And number two, in Noosa is everyone's business. Tourism is the number one economic driver for the region injecting 1.6 billion into our Noosa economy and the flow and effect of tourism affects almost every business in our region. It also affects the health and well-being of our residents and our lifestyle. Positives include living in a vibrant community, having access to beautiful new a beautiful natural environment and world-class dining experiences and the opportunity to be involved in a range of sports, arts and food events as participants and volunteers. Like anywhere there are negatives and they include congestion of traffic and the impact on the quality of our trails, the surfing experience, our national parks, our rivers, our creeks, and the vibrancy of our local art and culture. During my time as an observer on the Tourism Noosa board. I've learned several things from directors, past CEOs, and acting CEOs who are passionate about Noosa, our environment, and our economy. Two things that have stuck with me over the years. One, the importance of data. It's that important for TN to keep investing in, applying and learning from real data. Who are our best markets? What influences the propensity to spend? And how do we as ratepayers get the biggest bang for our rate payer dollar? And number two, the importance of experience protection. Of our environment. Our ocean, national parks, our trails, our rivers and our creeks. And that if we lose that experience, then we lose our edge. And what makes Noosa such an amazing place to live? I think the challenge all is that our experience and our environment is under threat. And once that's gone, it's gone. And our reputation is gone. And that's expensive to get back. Another thing I've learnt is the importance of looking back to look forward. The high spend small footprint is. The right direction for tourism in Noosa, but we need to be presented in a way that looks inclusive, not exclusive. Marketing should be channelled towards certain demographics that benefit us, not just rich people in Melbourne, but what the tourism industry refer to as the high value traveller. Those that spend more in the region, stay longer, and disperse regionally. They enjoy cultural events, food and wine, music, theatre, art, film festivals, surf festivals, sporting events. Many of the things that Noosa is known for. What I've learnt also by sitting at the table is that as an industry and as a community, we need to speak with one voice. And that without this one voice, the destination loses its brand. We need to deliver a coordinated and clear message to visitors about who we are and what we value. To enjoy and respect Noosa, our environment and the people who live here. And that's where Tourism Noosa fits in. It's our one voice. The bill seigel Seibel report. 2006 report that Frank referred to, the rise and fall of Colorado, shows what can happen if we start marketing a region with, if we stop marketing a region with one voice. If we market Noosa with many voices, then it becomes what's in it for me, rather than what's the greater good for the destination. The success of Colorado's tourism communities, just like Noosa, was built over decades and of promotional work. Tourism Noosa had built an amazing brand. And now is not the time to kill the golden goose. Since COVID, Noosa has enjoyed good visitation but 2023 is already showing signs of slowing down and will be challenging for not just the tourism industry but all businesses as the flow on continues into our economy and we cannot just assume visitors will continue to come to Noosa. 3,240 jobs depend directly on our visitor economy. In 2020-21, 3,240 people were employed in accommodation and food services in nusong that's 13.8% of Noosa's total jobs making it Noosa's second biggest single job sector just behind health care and social assistance. That number does not include the many jobs indirectly. Related to tourism. Retail, health, wellness, arts, weddings, events, hire and rental, and real estate which also rely on visitor patronage. Now to the Tourism Noosa funding agreement. What's new? The Tourism Noosa agreement enhanced governance and reporting in relation to expenditure of Council funding whilst respecting that Tourism Noosa is an entity in its own right. Tourism Noosa receives 2.52 million dollars from Noosa Shire Council and it's therefore critical demonstrate that they can administer that those funds with probity with accountability, transparency and effectiveness. Tourism Noosa are obligated to justify and account for their programs and activities. To earn trust and prove reliability with the community by providing insight into their decision-making process. The community expected and so does Council that is why our new agreement with Tourism Noosa has increased governance and reporting. Another significant change to the agreement is the Destination Management Plan provision the DMP when completed will inform Tourism Noosa's future position in relation to the management of the visitor economy and tourism within the Noosa region. Tourism Noosa might also be expected to implement aspects of the DMP which fall within its ambit as agreed between Tourism Noosa and Council. In closing Tourism Noosa exists for three reasons number one to protect and develop the Noosa brand Tourism Noosa two to deliver evidence-based marketing strategies and promotion that attract high-value visitors and achieve increased regional dispersal and number three to provide their 600 plus members with value-added services Tourism Noosa does not exist to bring increased visitors to the region at all costs. Tourism Noosa do not target day-trippers in their marketing who drive to the region, cause traffic and car parking congestion and you spend less in our region. If Tourism Noosa stops marketing the 1 million plus day-trippers who come here will continue to come. However, they the highest spending overnight visitors, particularly those from interstate, many who don't drive here, will go elsewhere, and Noosa will then solely need to rely on second owners and wealthy residents. To compare the average spend per person of day-trippers is $105 which is less than 6% of interstate visitors who spend $1,965 on average per day. Need we a tourism industry that works with our community to manage and protect our destination. And we need to deliver with one voice a clear and coordinated message to our best managed destinations are good for the community, and the best managed destinations are good for business. And there is no team better qualified and more committed to manage and protect our brand and destination than the team at Tourism Noosa and their 65 volunteers. Frank Wilkie 03:00:56.088
Thank you. And Councillor Lorentson, Chair, did you wish to speak before? Joe Jurisevic 03:01:00.710
Yeah, I'm just trying to work out if there's anything left to say. What she said. No, look, there are some elements of that. And look, Councillor Wilkie, you mentioned somewhere said, stop marketing. Look, I don't. And Councillor Lorentson went along those lines too. I don't think anybody's suggesting you stop marketing. It's how you market, what you market, who you market to, and the elements that you market. And Tourism Noosa have done a brilliant job of that over the years. They've done more than just promote Noosa as a place to come to. They introduced a program called Welcome to Noosa to ensure the businesses here in the region and those that were part of the visitor experience knew what their job was and what their element of delivery of service to the tourism industry was. They talked about Refresh Noosa so that ageing properties that thought they could demand top dollar year in out without doing anything about their properties weren't going to get that going forward and that were actually going to diminish the image and the projection of Noosa as a marketable destination. They worked on Plastic Free Noosa as I alluded to before. They're actually ahead of Council in having reduced plastic waste and delivering that waste reduction message to those that come to visit this region. Those that have events and that in the region. And they've looked at other activities and I can't read my own scroll. It's terrible. But some of the things that they can help with are alluded to in destination. Management plan and of course in how we manage our tourism numbers in the future and that some of the elements that have been the challenge that we hear our community cry the about impact of on a regular basis. And that's the elements of congestion, particularly around that Hastings Street precinct. We'd have free buses, you it's those one of the things the Council has delivered, free holiday buses and free. But unless we market that to those that are coming here, they won't know it till they get here, so they'll still bring their cars. But if we know before they get here that there's an alternative, perhaps. They'll reconsider their cars. Perhaps that'll aid and ease the congestion of the region. That's just one example of the sort of things that good marketing and well-marketed product that's delivered here as a whole and part of Council's remit is delivered going forward. So there are solutions there. We talked about looking for other funding opportunities. I mean, that should be the remit of any good business environment. It shouldn't be reliant on one whole income source as the only place to grow and develop into the future. Council's doing that of its own course. We're looking at how we can. Ease the burden on ratepayers. We look at other revenue sources. We have tourism ventures that facilitate that, holiday parks and the like. So that's just good business acumen to look at opportunities within. The operations that you undertake for funding opportunities and revenue sources. Going forward. So I think all of the elements. That we're talking about here are things that Tourism Noosa has embraced and delivered over the years and will continue to deliver over the years. To be a partner with Council. In that going forward is crucial and I think this document and this funding agreement is a key element of that. I welcome it and I hope Tourism Noosa welcome it and I hope we continue to work together hand in for the good sustainable tourism region that we are renowned for being. Cheers. Frank Wilkie 03:04:45.427
I'll wait for my right to close. I think it's all been said. I'll put the motion to the vote. On all in favour? Baila. That is unanimous. And thank you for sitting there and being spoken about in the third person. It's a very odd experience. We'll get Councillor Finzel. Thank you. Frank Wilkie 03:16:24.585
All right, you ready? All right, welcome. Joe Jurisevic 03:16:40.162
Right we're back oh we go again. Where'd you go? There you go. Thank you. Julie 03:16:45.133
To all the contractors participating that this was under the particular grant. Available as part of the reconstruction of essential assets and then it's not a no Council funds will be used for this particular project as part of that we told them that any costs associated this needed to be grant funded and that points back to scope so as long as we have the scope available and which we do in a really strong scope we're unlikely to see any blowouts from that point of view unless we come across known to us now so we dig something up and find something yes that will be a variation but that will be a negotiation we have with QRA as part of fulfilling the scope we also made it really clear to the. Contractors on site that there's no rise or fall negotiation or anything like that but in terms of Council budget there is none here to spend. Frank Wilkie 03:17:47.362
Any blowout the extra funds will be covered by QRA. Julie 03:17:54.352
As long as the blowout is related to a fair and reasonable design change as dictated by the scope in relation to the guidelines which is part of the reason that we have the team that we allocated at the beginning of this project allocated because they were they understand those aspects so intimately. Joe Jurisevic 03:18:13.474
There needs to be a rhyme and reason behind a change in design concept to facilitate any pleased with in this incident, two water crossings are Amber fish passageways, so the sites need to be upgraded to meet the department of agricultural and fisheries design standards. So this looks to me that it's included all the elements that are required to be at today's standard of engineering requirements and environmental requirements. Julie 03:18:48.944
That's correct. So as part of the RECA process that if a particular DAF requirement is required we'll include in there. Is a small portion where we're wanting to make some improvements around some wing walls on there and we're currently in negotiation with QRA to fund that as well. We feel pretty positive about that to date and if not we've mitigated that we've mitigated that risk by being able to pull that out of the scope and not have it as a risk to Council. Joe Jurisevic 03:19:22.140
What are the advantages of the wing walls? What does that deliver in the design? Julie 03:19:27.211
Yeah, that'll just prevent some scale. Scouring on the side of that waterway there to prevent any future impacts in those particular areas if we have a similar overland flooding circumstance like we did in February/March last year. Joe Jurisevic 03:19:38.964
So an element of resilience in the design going forward for that area, for those two targets. Julie 03:19:45.397
Yeah, we probably wouldn't go as far as resilience, because there's some certain classifications around what we call resilience and betterment within the grant guidelines, but it certainly makes the design much more robust. Joe Jurisevic 03:19:56.652
Okay, thank you. Yep. Fish that's passageway, the message, wasn't Brian. It, yeah. And you'd like to move this one, right? Oh, look. Always love a moody fish passageway. And I'll second it. I was going to move it, but I'll let Brian go with the fish passageway. Brian Stockwell 03:20:14.607
I know, I think it's good that we continue to get these projects through and start to get some of that major damage that was done throughout our building assets. And it's just fortunate that we do have the Queensland Reconstruction Authority. Because obviously the impact on this community from last year's flooding would have been totally unreasonable to fund from ratepayer funds. So we do appreciate the role of the State in recover providing the funds. To recover from. The disaster. Joe Jurisevic 03:20:47.737
I'll not only thank the QRA, I'll thank Julie for her tireless efforts in this sphere for the large task ahead of us and being able to one by whittle our way through all of the elements before us to deliver the repair works for Council. Thank you, Julie. Thank I agree. Julie 03:21:07.202
Councillors. Thank you, Larry, but it is the team effort. Frank Wilkie 03:21:10.024
Yep. Any other Councillors wish to speak? Tom Wegener 03:21:14.203
Just like an echo to other Councillors in saying you, Julie, for your hard work over the last. And the team. Thank you. Frank Wilkie 03:21:22.924
Was that a pleasure. Unanimous. Thank you. Julie. Thanks to all of you. I appreciate your time. Thank you. I'll see you in the office. We should also note that Councillor Finzel didn't return from meetings. She had personal matters to attend to. Yes. Okay. Next item is Budget Review 2, the 22-23 financial year. Welcome, Pauline and Trent. Pauline and could you give us an overview of what's happening in Budget Review 2, please? Sure. And for those who might be listening for the first time, what a budget a review. Is and why we do it. Pauline 03:22:17.706
Sure. So under the Local Government Act, Council is required to undertake regular reviews of our adopted budget to ensure it remains reflective of our planned activities that need to be funded through the financial year. This is the second budget review for the 2022-23 financial year and it incorporates any new or emergent issues that we become aware of during the year or any actions that come out of Council resolution so that it reflects an accurate forecast of where we believe we'll end up at the end of financial year. So does that explain what a budget review is? Okay. So in summary the budget review is proposing a net improvement of $880,000 in our operating position. With our current operating deficit of $718,000 this will improve to $162,000 surplus. This results from a range of emergent costs that have been funded from additional revenue and grant. Funds that have been received year to date. Council's operate capital expenditure program has decreased from $57.1 million down to $56.6 million with $6.3 million in emergent works and project variations recognised. Being recognised. This is offset is by this is offset $8 by.7 million. With projects being delayed till the million of the projects being delayed till 2023/24 financial year. Because they're multi-year projects and also. Incorporates the recognition of $2.5 million. Spent in relation to the QRA disaster funded projects that have. Occurred this year. We've also recognised an additional. $14 million revenue predominantly relating to. The QRA disaster funding that have we've on those projects. Received. To date and this offsets obviously the spend that we have on those projects. All forecast financial sustainability ratios continue to be met out of this budget review. So overall it continues to show the Council is a strong financial position. Did you have any questions? Councillors? Joe Jurisevic 03:24:05.355
Yeah the first one if I may. The capital expense program decreased from 57.1 million down to 56.6. What.6 has accounted has for that half million? Pauline 03:24:14.304
Dollar change so there's a net movement so of the, let me just plumb back up here, 6.3 million dollars with emergent works and project variations. So the largest project variations related to the Noosa Parade project, Beckmans Road and also some emergent works relating to David Low Way at Peregian Beach. So that's reduced, that's increased our budget, however we've offset 8.7 million dollars so that's pushed out. The largest of those projects was the Garth Prowd Bridge which has been delayed and deferred to the following year. Joe Jurisevic 03:24:44.540
That's not to say those projects won't be undertaken, they've just been rescheduled to accommodate the other, to work within our financial strategy. Absolutely, correct. Trent Grauf 03:24:55.057
And for those that are looking at this, Pauline is talking through it. Page 48 of the agenda has a summary by program and then page 53 onwards does have a does it have has a does list of our program, actual project. Joe Jurisevic 03:25:10.517
This new system, those page numbers don't align. Pauline 03:25:13.001
That's okay. So Noosa their golf crowd is pushed out, that's 2.9 million dollars. 1.3 million of our fleet program that actually carried over has been pushed out due to supply chain and delivery issues they still will occur they'll just happen in a future year as well as the Lock and Weir which will span by the year so it's 900,000 so they're the major push outs for this program. Joe Jurisevic 03:25:33.380
That's something for the CEO to consider there that's an omission in this new system is that the page numbers don't get referred when you break them down into if you look at the document as a whole but when you break them down into these I'll take. Trent Grauf 03:25:48.722
That on notice I can give you some instruction on how to download the entire packet document can. Joe Jurisevic 03:25:54.780
Do that but if we don't I. Pauline 03:25:56.063
Think it's the way that they need to do it. I. Frank Wilkie 03:25:59.476
Can do that but if we don't I think it's the way that they need to do it. Just a question there was an adjustment of $135,000 down in the development assessment Fees and Charges. What happened there? Because normally conservative budgeting is normally more than budgetable. Pauline 03:26:18.862
Historically. Yes, and historically, based on what we've seen in the last three years, particularly with COVID, there's been an acceleration in development assessment fees and obviously the market has started to slow and we've seen that come through in development assessment fees. We have spoken to the area and they are expecting some larger development applications to come through. However, we aren't sure on the timing of those. So they may occur in the following year as well. Trent Grauf 03:26:40.932
So we've adjusted accordingly to be conservative and just to clarify Councillors what finance and executive team do after the submissions come through from the budget process from management and officers is we identify are risks where there is potential risk of overspend or whether that where there is some downside and revenue and we take that up through the process so that we're recognising that you'll see that the same with the very things as well so that our forecast between now and June is as accurate as it possibly can be for the year in position. Joe Jurisevic 03:27:20.574
I'm happy to move the report. Frank Wilkie 03:27:22.093
I move. Abbott is second. Councillor Joe seconded. Position. Joe Jurisevic 03:27:27.963
I'm but thanks after the time and effort the financial review the budget review too shows that we're in a sound financial position we're managing all of the programs for the year we're doing sound and prudent amendment of our capital works program to stay within our budget and that we're meeting all operational net financial liabilities and asset sustainability ratio as well within the parameters of the State's requirements so I'm happy to move that the budget review be accepted and acknowledged for the work that's been done. Frank Wilkie 03:28:16.886
In the statement state of the financial position there's a jump in provisions from about 16 million to 24 million dollars can you just explain which is a shift of 8.8 million dollars can you just explain sorry quite a significant shift you just explain what that movements what provisions are in under non current liabilities and what that shift represents and why we've done. Pauline 03:28:46.873
That sure so provisions are basically an estimate of councils estimated liability for whether it be employee entitlements restoration of landfill or quarry. So they're the predominant provisions that we take up so in terms of budget review two we when we did budget review one we had a finalised interview financial statements for 2022 and they have now been reflected in the opening balances in vr2 and a part of those adjustments that went through in the 2022 financial statements was a revision of our landfill provision estimate due to the work that was going on at site and the additional costs that were in scoping of what was required that revised that provision quite substantially up by eight million dollars so that's where it's flowing through at the moment in these financial statements because the opening balance has now been reflect what we adopted at that time. So the landfill provision is essentially what we would we need in order to restore that site once the site's completed and finished for use. Frank Wilkie 03:29:43.913
And on the same document, asset re-evaluation surplus went from $144 million up to $343 million. Can you could you just explain? What has actually of our depreciation value of our assets? Pauline 03:30:01.523
Sure. So the asset re-evaluation reserve under each year Council undertakes a re-evaluation of the asset class to represent the actual replacement value of those assets and last year Council undertook the re-evaluation of land. So in the last year's financial statements we increased our asset reserve in relation to land by about $175 million. Land doesn't attract depreciation so there's no actual impact to our depreciation expense relating to land but obviously it inflates our land reserve. But also our value as well, so asset value has increased. Frank Wilkie 03:30:35.169
Was there an increase in the value of our bank equipment? Pauline 03:30:39.569
Yes, so there was also an indexation of our other asset class is based on some methodology. We apply indexes in building construction, those sorts of things to assess whether there's a material movement and where there's a material movement. We will take it up. And therefore there'll be some depreciation impact from that as well. Frank Wilkie 03:30:55.094
So property, land and equipment, if I read it rightly, it's increased by some $200 million? Correct. So does that include buildings? Pauline 03:31:02.992
That includes buildings, roads, stormwater, other infrastructure, land, plant and equipment. Frank Wilkie 03:31:08.732
So net assets for the community is increased by that $200 million as a result of this? Pauline 03:31:14.095
Correct. This year that re-evaluation will be for roads and bridges, so we're in the process of conducting that at the moment. Frank Wilkie 03:31:19.245
Thank you, Pauline. Tom Wegener 03:31:22.489
So, to clarify, I'm on the Audit and Risk Committee, and we've talked about this extensively, and they actually changed the way they value something. For example, we have the Girraween sporting complex. They revalued it one way, and then the auditors decided, no, you've got to value it a different way, which is the land, or what it would cost to go next door and buy all the property and put it there. Is that right, Pauline? Pauline 03:31:46.902
So, with land, there's two different ways. You can do market value or cost value, the independent values that we gauged last year adopted a different approach, which was a cost approach, which would mean instead of just taking the market value of that site, so you can't really buy a sports complex, they don't really go on the market and discounting it, they adopted the approach of if they had to acquire land on that site and develop the site, what that cost would be so yes, there was an inflation in terms of that as well, so the approach increased the value, but we also had substantial land value increases, as most people are aware in Noosa as well, and that's flowed through as. Frank Wilkie 03:32:20.791
Well. The government subsidies and grants for capital works, it's got a figure of $32 million, so $32 million has been received. Pauline 03:32:33.075
So overall we're expecting to receive $32 million, we received $13 million odd from QRA as it is, which is currently not budgeted for in the accounts, so that's where the majority of that adjustment has come from. So we haven't actually received that money? Yes we have received that money. That 13 we've received 13 million of the additional extra, so if we look 20, at. Frank Wilkie 03:32:52.753
20, 20. Trent Grauf 03:32:53.633
23 Million is year-to-date Councillors, so that's correct and that'll be in the next agenda item we're going to, but we are anticipating more grants received between now and June as we get to the end milestones and completion milestones. On some of those projects. Frank Wilkie 03:33:10.766
And just in that figure of 32 million in grants, have we received anything like that in the past? I doubt it. No. That's largely to do with the Queensland Reconstruction Authority, with the disaster projects. Large, funding externally managed projects. Yes. Brian Stockwell 03:33:33.967
Questions or comments? Just for comparison purposes, because it is important to understand the impact of disasters on our community, the fact that the State is paying for it tends to push it a little bit out of the scope of local government. It if the forecast in terms of the frequency of disaster comes forward, it is something we need to think about. So if Council had to pay that $32 million we got in grants, would that be equivalent to roughly in terms of percentage increase in rates? Pauline 03:34:10.353
It would be substantial. Trent Grauf 03:34:13.761
Our annual general rating revenue is $62 million. So if it was an annual event it would be 50%. Brian Stockwell 03:34:26.898
I think you have to really be aware when we talk about the impacts of disasters and the fact that their frequency and magnitude is continued. Continuing to accelerate. The public investment in recovery is substantial. Joe Jurisevic 03:34:44.622
Did you say something that Tom brought up, or was brought up with regard to the land valuations on say a sporting field for example. Is there any consideration in how that's valued with regard to what alternative uses could be on that land, because often sporting fields and the like are on land that cannot be used for other purposes, or it's flood plain and the like, and it doesn't have another use, or an know an environmental use at best. Or used to it so is the capacity for the land to actually deliver alternative uses considered in that land? Yes, so when I was looking at it, depending on the approach they take, they'll look at the highest and best use of that asset. So what would we do for that? Brian Stockwell 03:35:27.788
Regardless of whether a kennel can't be used for that purpose? So like girrawee, that would say the best uses for soccer rather than rugby union. Pauline 03:35:34.636
Correct so for in that so in gear let's for instance for girrawee, because they adopted the cost approach, they looked at whether they had to acquire that land, they also looked at that it would probably to be a development site so they actually applied some discounting and what it would actually be worth being a development site as opposed to just selling it as a land a sports ground so they do take into consideration highest and best use it is very subjective and it depends on the area and what whatever what other constraints sounds there very. Joe Jurisevic 03:36:03.608
Subjective if it can't be actually utilised for that other use how can it be valued for that other. Trent Grauf 03:36:08.978
Use. Pauline 03:36:09.398
So they look at it as to if you had that piece of land what could you do with it in its current form. Trent Grauf 03:36:14.169
Right so so we have to hire some best based use on, based for example, constraints such as flood level. Joe Jurisevic 03:36:21.486
So they do consider. Trent Grauf 03:36:23.167
Constraint its ability to be used for residential or for non-community purposes then it's the highest and best use is not residential but they do need to recognise that in infill areas such as our coastal areas our availability of greenfield land to undertake the construction of community land use is quite restricted for us at Noosa Shire so that does feature in their costing exercise block. Joe Jurisevic 03:36:56.129
Does that impact upon the what value of the land as a result so yes it does because there's less land available it's actually worth more Chris. Frank Wilkie 03:37:02.663
The asset sustainability ratio which is 176.7 percent and as it says to the ratio of the press the extent of which the assets managed by Council are being replaced as they reach the end of the list of lives does that include the work being done being by done QRA funded by Bixby and other works. Funded QRA funded works. Unidentified Speaker 03:37:24.087
Some of it does, yes, correct, where it's an asset that's been renewed rather than a completely new asset, yes. Frank Wilkie 03:37:29.485
And is the numbers out of line because of that? Unidentified Speaker 03:37:32.182
It was already hired prior to the QRA projects, so what we've carried over, yeah, so it's offsetting some of the price. Frank Wilkie 03:37:39.825
Refresh my memory, what was the final assets, the last one actually, what did we end up on? I think I'd have to take that one. I'd have to say because I noticed off the top of my head. Was it more than 100%? I believe it was, yes. I think it was, yeah. Anything above 90% is considered. I think it- I was around 120% off the top of my head, but I'd have to check. Thank you. All right. Just close. Joe Jurisevic 03:38:06.290
No, it does raise another question. With regard to all. I said probably not the relevant part of discussion the. As to maybe in the next. Maybe it belongs in the next section with regard to all those QRA projects that are being undertaken. That has to be reassessed and revalued and put on the books for depreciation once they've been delivered. Think. Aren't okay, so they'll have an impact on your bottom line in the long run, particularly with the. No, I'm fine. Frank Wilkie 03:38:34.028
Okay, I'll put it back on favour. That is carried unanimously. Yeah, I know we discussed that before. Ringing in my head. That is the last. Joe Jurisevic 03:38:45.889
Financial Performance Report. No, it's not. We've got one more. 6.3. I'm still getting used to this system. It's evolved. It is. It's pretty wild, right? You're going backwards and forwards. Frank Wilkie 03:38:57.114
It's not as quick as flipping papers. It's cumbersome. Pauline again, please. Pauline 03:39:05.224
Okay, so we're going to cover off on the financial report for March for 2023. So operating revenues continue to out-forecast, and operating expenditures are slightly under-forecast year-to-date to the end of March. Operating revenue is $5.8 million above budget, which is being driven by rates and utility charges, interest revenue. And income, as well as sales of goods and services, which is predominantly holiday parks, waste disposal and community facilities. Our Fees and Charges have actually dropped, and they predominantly relate to building fees and development assessment fees under budget year-to-date, which we mentioned previously. Due to the slowing in the market at the moment, we have seen a decrease in what they have done in the past, especially in the last three years. Operating expenditures is slightly under budget, with materials and services $830,000 over budget, with the majority of that relating to civil operations for gravel roads, parks, roads landscaping, and work operations, as well holiday parks, which relates to commission, which is offset by their revenue. So, year-to-date variances have been addressed as part of budget review too, so in the previous item, many of those variances have already been addressed, so will not appear in future months. Tourism and economic development expenditure remains on track year-to-date with the renewal of Tourism Noosa being considered today at meeting, so that has been finalised. And overall, also as normally as we do in each quarter we've included a legal expenditure summary which shows we've spent a million dollars of our 1.5 million dollar legal budget and we don't anticipate that we will able to spend that budget this year. Overall corporate Council's operating position at March is 5.8 million dollars above budget. Capital revenue is above budget by 14.7 million and as I mentioned is largely due to the QRA grant funding that we have received here-to-date. And year-to-date excluding disaster projects Council has expended 64% of its four-year capital program which equates to 36.7 million dollars with a further 10 million dollars committed Council's current cash holding at the end of March was 116 million dollars with 50 million dollars of these funds invested in higher yielding term deposits so we maximise the returns to our ratepayers and that's illustrated by the interest revenue that's currently two million dollars over budget. As requested we've in also included a quarterly update on the breakdown of Council's cash holdings and you'll note the major movement in the graph compared to the previous quarter is in relation to working capital and that's in relation to the receipt of the rates run in February so we receive our biannual rates run and this will fund the operation through till June so that's why that's increased to 27 million dollars. Overall, Council's position financial petition continues to be on track and it's meeting its financial sustainability targets. Any questions? Amelia Lorentson 03:42:01.393
I'll start. This is a question I've been dying to ask I think every month so I'm going to take the opportunity now. I always notice you know when we go through the categories on the operating revenue we're always above our budget in terms of you know our camping grounds our waste property facilities plumbing etc how often do we review the budget? Is the budget set too low and what are the implications if we raise the budget and have less surplus what does that mean in terms of rates and in terms of cash reserve and this is me with my thinking cap thinking how can we work hard review the at reducing our ratepayers rates and we're in budget deliberations at the moment is this an opportunity. Trent Grauf 03:42:59.965
Through the Chair the first part of your question how often we reviewed the budget we do at least two budget reviews a year we've obviously got the one that just came through at the last agenda item one of the processes we do and one of their what we do we differently to a lot of other councils we build from base with our budget so when it comes to expenditure we expect our officers and our managers to budget from each individual widget ton of gravel pack of batteries number of consultancies all the way up we do the same with our ask our officers to budget for what they expect of a number of entrances to an aquatic centre the number of applications that come through the door etc across all those business activities now what we don't do is in one of the important things we don't do with our revenue is we don't stretch target our revenue targets too fast so we use a conservative cost our estimates and a good example of why is you look at BR2 which we just adopted where we've had to bring down our very revenue forecast by 15% because it was too ambitious this financial year because we had a quieter peak season with the number of crossings on the ferry. Town planning fees, our development application fees, our Short Stay Local Law application fees, our building and plumbing revenue fees, they are all down. So the risk is if we stretch our revenue targets for Fees and Charges, goods and service sales too far, we will be in a position at the end of the financial year where we could be running at a loss. So we need to find the right balance what is realistic and conservative with our revenue targets. The other consideration is a lot of those revenues are offset with direct variable costs. So a good example of that is the holiday park fees. So we can see obviously one of the upsides that is remaining for the rest of the financial year is holiday parks. Now the two key risks for holiday parks for example is one is for that we pay on operating fee or commission to the operators the holiday parks so the more revenue we earn the more costs are equivalent to that and it's the same with our facilities the more visitors we have to one of our community facilities such as the NAC the more casuals we need to support the operations of it and the other consideration for fees like holiday parks is it is also subject to seasonality and demand where we're walking into what could be the risk of a recession we've got a drop in consumer confidence that may in turn impact our occupancy rates on our facilities in the coming year so we always consider those factors when we budget for our revenue and you'll see year on if you compare this year's budget fees are all increased and as we work through this year's budget to next you'll see that we've reassessed that they do increase significantly year on the goal is that the more we diversify our revenue base the less reliance we have on our rates. Unidentified Speaker 03:46:14.799
This year we've had a significant increase in interest rate which has driven two and a half million dollars of that upside that was something that none of us actually forecast would happen this money. Related Noosa Council Meetings
← Browse all Noosa Shire Council meeting transcripts
