Services & Organisation Committee Meeting, 11 April 2023
Date: Tuesday, 11 April 2023 at 1:30PM
Location: Noosa Shire Council Chambers , 9 Pelican Street , Tewantin , QLD 4565 , Australia
Organiser: Noosa Shire Council
Duration: 02:15:03
Synopsis: Tourism Noosa: Performance‑tied deed, static funding, governance, contingency control, DMP reshape, Wastewater: End outfalls, 100% recycling, AMPs: Parks plan, data reset, MOU: Noosa‑Gympie waste.
Meeting Attendees
Committee Members
Joe Jurisevic Amelia Lorentson Clare Stewart Frank Wilkie Executive Officers
S Waters, Chief Executive Officer L Sengstock, Director Infrastructure Services K Rawlings, Director Environment & Sustainable Development A Hamblin, Acting Director Community Services Meeting Transcript
Joe Jurisevic 00:04.329
Thank you. Good afternoon everyone, and welcome to today's Services & Organisation Committee Meeting, break number 23, for this Council. Before we begin, I'd like to acknowledge the Traditional Custodians of the lands upon which we've met, Kabi Kabi People, and pay respects to their owners. Past, present, and future. As far as attendance goes, I believe right on attendance we have the Mayor online today, late Lenny, live from- Good morning everyone, afternoon from- just got to move in a second. You've move and second can we go through everything else before we do that or do we need to do that at the very beginning of the meeting? With the Mayor online we need a resolution to acknowledge that the Mayor is online. Happy to move it. To acknowledge and accept that the Mayor is attending via Microsoft Teams. All in favour? Thank you. Guys have it. Thank you. Welcome online. Thank you. You're welcome to come online. You. Can I get a confirmation of the Minutes of the previous meeting? Moved by Councillor Wilkie, seconded by Councillor Lorentson. All in favour? That's an aye from you, Clare. Aye. Thank you. Moved by Councillor Wilkie. Lorentson. All good, we've got her. There are no presentations or deputations that I'm aware of. No, there are none. We move onto item 5, reports for consideration on committee. Item 1 is the parks and playgrounds asset management plan, but we've had a request to move to item 2 first. That is the Noosa – Gympie Waste Management Memorandum of Understanding. We'll go to item 2 first. Little page is on, and welcome Kyrone Raine to the table. Kyrone Raine would you like to give us a bit of an overview of the Memorandum of Understanding and why it's needed? Kyrone 02:11.852
Thanks Councillor. The report table is to authorise the CEO to progress and sign a Memorandum of Understanding with Gympie Regional Council, allowing Council staff to work together on mutually beneficial activities, in particular but not limited to waste management. The goal. For a waste management perspective is to identify partnerships within waste. For infrastructure and waste management which would be beneficial to both parties. There are several benefits for Noosa and Gympie residents of which a major one is to utilise the over both jurisdictions to support capital feasibility event of many. Major infrastructure which in turn support potential funding from. Entities such as Council of Mayors South East Queensland. The MOU is designed to draw project. Planning processes which will include the necessary. Council approvals required. While being led by a steering committee with. Representatives from both councils. Joe Jurisevic 03:13.870
As I mentioned in the report, the Council is not a member of CoMSEQ who we are currently dealing with. But my understanding is that they have applied. Scott Waters 03:23.034
To become a member of CoMSEQ? Chair, that's absolutely correct. We have applied to become an associate member. Of Council of Mayors South East Queensland and there's. A view that will be accepted in the next CoMSEQ meeting and the CEO of Council of Mayors South East Queensland is aware and has no concerns in Noosa Council forming a relationship with the Council in relation to waste. Some of the funding opportunities for CoMSEQ as well? Kyrone 03:52.841
It looks like, absolutely. Questions, Councillors? Frank Wilkie 03:56.925
Just the make-up of the steering committee in Kyrone, what's proposed? Kyrone 04:00.749
I think it's pretty open at present so we need to get the MOU signed for Gympie side and then. Thing will be get together work out what that steering committee looks like. Yep. Would it involve sharing waste infrastructure like landfill? At present that hasn't been discussed but there's always a potential. They'll have. They're looking for a new landfill site at Gympie right at this present time. We've obviously got our own landfill but more and have been about treatment of waste, not necessarily landfill. That's the general sort of consensus that we're going for treatment facilities, waste diversion. We have capacity for another, is it 40 years? 50 years. What about Gympie, how are they placed? At present I think they're pretty low in terms of years but they're planning to look forward to something with a lot more potential than that opportunity. Ultimately this is more about diversion and reuse than landfills? Exactly, landfill will be the bottom of the pile and effectively we'll be looking to divert as much as we can. In the report there's a reference to utilising land banks, what does that mean exactly? If we're producing organic streams so the back end of composting or anaerobic digestion for argument's sake the requirement is to spread that material to a land bank and that could be farming communities or known farming entities that we could pair up with and they'd be using that material for or in the replacement of with fertiliser that would Council's garden be one recipient of that sort of material? That would be the intent yes we'd have to get to a certain quality parks and gardens would require our material to meet that certain quality mainly for germination of weeds or but that's quality we haven't yet been able to achieve with our current process. Joe Jurisevic 05:58.648
Thank you. That's obviously an opportunity going forward to look at what the needs of end users would be of a product if we do go down that line and try to facilitate the means to produce that good product. I think that to say. Kyrone 06:15.337
Stretches not just from organic material but other materials, concrete and so forth. You know, Gympie have a lot more industrial zones than we do, potentially better uses for some of the material we produce and I think joining up with them will be. A big plus in exactly that. Joe Jurisevic 06:30.936
I see indeed, drainage for gravel and tewart can be produced as well. Amelia Lorentson 06:34.956
Yep. In terms of the Memorandum of Understanding Kyrone, it's not a legally binding agreement. In terms of cost, are there any financial implications with signing an MOU? Kyrone 06:50.318
Not that I'm aware of. I'd tell you none at present. It's a, yeah, as you said, it's not a legally binding document. The goal is to work on a project, work on a project by basis to get us to a point where we would find something that is legally binding. So we get to a point at that point where we're looking at an investment, we're looking at the arrangements and they might become left. Will have to become binding at that point on. Joe Jurisevic 07:15.762
So we'll come back. To Council before any of that. Exactly. Yeah, one would assume the other is also there that economies of scale may actually produce savings in the long term for the size and scale of operations or even present opportunities because of the size and scale of the operation by yeah, I agree. With councils. Kyrone 07:33.256
And part of that would be just the feasibility of some of the infrastructure requires that capacity. Frank Wilkie 07:39.532
Just a follow up question. Joe's that obviously there are advantages of cooperating with another Council, that's fantastic, was there discussions of a similar nature undertaken with Sunshine Coast Council and why was the decision to. Kyrone 07:54.776
Have an MOU with Gympie norwell councils? I think we're still talking to Sunshine Coast, it's not that we don't talk to them, I think that is on its way in terms of that level of agreement. They've got processes and infrastructure that's well advanced about and we are involved. Of that infrastructure. To the level that we're talking to Gympie, I would say it's not at that level just yet, but we are working towards that. Joe Jurisevic 08:29.908
Clare, do you have any questions at all? Clare Stewart 08:32.354
No, all good. I think it's a really positive step, collaborating with that neighbour. Share resources, share costs. Potentially it's good. Amelia Lorentson 08:40.094
Anything further, Megan? I do. I have another question, Chair. I'm just thinking, some time ago when we first started with Council, engaged with regional Council, Sunshine Coast, Gympie, to have a look at feasibility of actually working together and whether it was advised to go on your own or not, has that report sort of resurfaced and guided this decision or not? Kyrone 09:07.735
I think this decision's been taken purely with CoMSEQ in mind. Okay. CoMSEQ's been relatively new to us and to Noosa Council, but one of the key criteria of CoMSEQ is we are working in unison with our neighbours. And give being one of those and Sunshine Coast as well, so I think we will end up down this sort of path in the Sunshine Coast, but that is one of the key criterias. So I wouldn't say that report's driven this, but that's probably more of a result of CoMSEQ rather than the report. Thank you. Scott Waters 09:43.246
And further from the galloway Council, Tom, you've got a question. With Gympie's positioning to the west and to the north, there's really not a lot of bigger towns, you know, there's umari and like little tiny towns. Tom Wegener 09:55.539
Towns is it so it just really makes sense that we work with them. Like they're our kind of, our orbit, we're in our little like scene together going south, you know, they have much bigger councils, but it makes a lot of sense, doesn't it? Kyrone 10:09.254
Well, I think that probably the biggest thing from a practical point of view, from my world anyway, is logistics. The with Gympie, you know, from our landfill to the centre of Gympie's 35 minutes, that's a massive advantage in the waste world, because everything's got to be transported. If you're moving material, whether that's organic material to a land bank or material to some sort of treatment facility, whether it's coming here or going there, that 35 minutes is a massive benefit for a financial model. And I think that's where. We're looking to in terms of getting to a project by basis that the financial model stacks up and that's this sort of waste sharing and waste resource sharing helps us with that financial feasibility. Joe Jurisevic 10:57.901
I know we've looked at or we've spoken about the opportunity before with regard to services on the North Shore, in particular Teewah. My understanding is that Gympie facilitates the waste services on the North Shore? Yes, I believe they do, yes. So there may be an opportunity for further enhanced discussion with regard to Teewah recycling may be incorporated into all recycling services on the North Shore? Yep, something to think about, definitely. Any further Councillors? If not, can I have a mover? Councillor Wilkie, seconder, Councillor Lorentson. All in favour? Yes. Thank you, Clare. Mayor Clare? Thank you. How are you doing? Thanks, guys. Back to item 1 on the agenda, which is the parks and playground asset management act. This is and I notice Brian's not here. He's away on holiday. Matt 11:52.962
Thank you. So I like any you so Brian was the author of the report. So I'll just give a quick summary. So Council has a statutory requirement to develop asset management plans for its major asset classes. So this is the last of eight. In the suite. And yeah basically it considers some key objectives such as service levels, financial life cycle costs, things like that and the objectives are aligned with our Council asset management Roadmap and also the Queensland Audit Office asset management outcomes. Amelia Lorentson 12:42.241
A simple one for you Matt, why are we undertaking this review and when was the last time parks and playgrounds asset management plan was reviewed? Matt 12:54.481
I might have to defer. Adam, do you know the age when the previous one was? Previous one would be about five years. Yeah, but they're not on a five-year cycle, ideally. That's correct. So we started as I said before this is the final of eight so we started with our major asset classes such as roads and things that worked our way to this so with parks and playgrounds it's all in terms of the overall value of the asset the whole of the assets this is probably the least in terms of the value but it's probably one of the ones where there's a lot there's a high quantity of assets just they're just smaller assets and they make up you know there's I think we have well we have 2,000 assets so that's individual items but it's across to around about 250 parks so I think there's 80 playgrounds in the Shire yeah so that sort of getting back to your question about the importance of it is to bring everything together and get a good framework around it all. Frank Wilkie 13:51.102
Yeah I had a question about what that 2,000 parks and playground assets encompasses so there's 250 parks 80 playgrounds so the assets include equipment. Matt 14:03.672
Does yes items individual items yeah so you have playgrounds are the obvious one but we also have park shelters which is a lot of we have barbecues we have individual the furniture so if you think about Gympie Terrace for an example how much furniture we have down there you know just individual items. So one Chair would be one asset? Joe Jurisevic 14:23.109
Yes. One Chair, one table, one shelver? Correct. One swing, one slippery dip? That's right. Adam 14:34.509
That's right. Amelia Lorentson 14:36.150
Other are there any state or Federal requirements regarding management of playgrounds in the open space or reserves or is this just something we undertake as a Council? Matt 14:46.954
Yes, so in terms of the assets themselves, particularly playgrounds, they do have Australian standards around them in terms of it. It's all mainly around safety and risk obviously. Yeah, so we try our best to meet those standards and those standards involve frequencies as well like frequencies of inspections and then condition ratings and things like that so that's what informs our renewal programs. Joe Jurisevic 15:12.727
Also have requirements on the frequency of inspection of that. Matt 15:17.588
They do yeah because every piece of gear is a little bit different you know you have the different companies that have their own individual styles and models bit like. Joe Jurisevic 15:26.496
Your car where you get a very small a very small change, a 10,000 k service or a 15,000 k service. Yeah, man. Yeah. Fair, have you got any questions at all? You're muted. Sorry, you're on mute Clare. Clare Stewart 15:42.678
No, I guess this is quite separate, isn't it, to funding that we put towards obviously our parks and gardens going forward. This is just the plan, isn't it? This doesn't take into account if we want to add additional funding, this is basically just the overarching plan. Matt 15:58.538
That's correct. That's right, yes. Joe Jurisevic 16:01.136
But having said that, there's an element in this that is mentioned with regard to future planning, with regard to needs. Adam 16:09.116
Future capital works are in there as part of the dollar figures. But nothing for grants or anything like that will be forecasted just yet. Joe Jurisevic 16:17.894
Now, as far as future needs, where additional equipment may be required, or the overview of. Whether the level of equipment is sufficient for a level of. Yes, that goes with the hierarchy of the park. And that's one of my questions. If you guys are finished, I've got a series of questions. Amelia Lorentson 16:39.474
Oh, I've got a series of questions too. OK, where am I going to start? OK, I'm going to start with accessibility. So we. Assess hazards. Do we assess accessibility of our playgrounds, I was just recently approached by some residents who asked why we don't have any wheelchair access picnic tables at any of our parks. How is that information. Accessibility, captured? How are community expectations captured or collated? And that probably links with my next question Matt, so I'll throw this one in. Have we had any public liability claims attributable to. Council playgrounds? Again, where is that information collated and does that guide future needs? Matt 17:39.273
Yeah, I'll answer that one since it's. So we don't, to my knowledge, have any public liability claims. We have had some very minor incidents where children have fallen. Off a swing and hurt themselves, but it hasn't been due to failure of our equipment or failure. Of our service standards. It's just, you know, the nature of a playground. That's kind of what they're like. Sorry, the first part of your question. Oh, the disability stuff. Yes. I'm not quite sure about what's happened in the past, but it's certainly something that's now front of mind when we're thinking about renewing. Renewals and upgrades and things like that, so it's sort of become a fairly standard, I suppose, consideration, and there's a lot of new technology and new designs that do incorporate. We have one that I'm aware of in the Shire in terms of in the playground. We've got what's called a liberty swing down at the Pirate Playground at Gympie Terrace, but it's one of the older, it's like original, I think, versions of that style of thing. And yeah, and the playground hasn't been renewed or upgraded since that was installed and the whole playground. So obviously going forward. Would come down to things like, well, we'll certainly factor in things like specific requests from families or whatever that have children with disabilities. I know that the hinterland playground incorporated certain elements into that. And I know that we're looking at renewing some tables and shelters down Gympie Terrace, for example. And we're just working with the design team on tweaking the designs of the tables to allow for wheelchair access. So it's all about dimensions inside, in between the post and the slab and the approach and the sort of the entry and exit points. So certainly something that's being incorporated into our work. Fantastic. Amelia Lorentson 19:42.705
Can I just share some information? The area outside the boathouse, that's where a lot of the Seahorse Nippers families congregate on a Friday afternoon. So there's a picnic table right near there. So it's part of that investigation. It? That area would be ideal. Thank you. Matt? Joe Jurisevic 20:06.129
I'm glad you mentioned the access element. I'm assuming pathway links and actually linking to the shelter. That's right. Exactly. Adam 20:16.057
Just to answer that one too, Councillor. As you know, we're doing a full master plan of Gympie Terrace as well. So that will incorporate a number of those types of things as we go forward and making sure that we do allow for or if there's ideas. And you know how much, if you think back 20 years, 10 years and now, how much playgrounds have changed and park furniture has changed. And it's just a gradual thing. And as we renew, replace look for the bigger and better or more accessible or whatever it might be, types of equipment. So it's really just a rolling program. Joe Jurisevic 20:48.849
Yeah, the real idea now, I think in the report we actually, our park is mentioned and it's due for renewal in the next. Adam 20:54.455
Yeah, there's a number of, yeah, yeah, that's right, So we just need to have that in mind. And there's some more specific disability type furniture equipment that can be incorporated now. So we just need to make sure that we've got that on our list as we go forward. Matt 21:10.030
All the abilities is the term I was looking for. You. All abilities, say. Yes. Amelia Lorentson 21:16.254
Yeah. 2,000 parks and playground assets are on financial, on Council's financial register. Natural assets, trees. Where are trees kept? Captured? In particular, you know, are near these picnic tables. Matt 21:35.272
Where is that captured in our asset management plan? So trees aren't considered financial assets, but however we are, we're working on it. So we've done audits in a lot of our precinct areas, so Gympie Terrace, for example, a few years ago, we ordered at all the trees and captured them all. We assigned them an asset number, and they are now in our system mapped as assets and able to be referred to and we've, so they're logged and they're managed accordingly, but they're not financial assets. We kind of have to treat them separately. And I know that we're working on it the moment as part of the urban greening program or project where we're working with some of the other staff and Council on a bit of a system there because we're going to be doing a lot of new planting throughout the urban area of Noosa and both road reserves and parks. So we're working on a system there and I'm having regular meetings about developing that. Exciting. Joe Jurisevic 22:33.201
Yeah. That's good. From that perspective, I would follow on from that question. Whilst they might not be a financial asset, they're clearly absolutely. We should document and capture and understand them and that way the condition assessments and all the rest of the specific training and those sort of things to follow through. So that would be an advantage to yourself Matt, with by regards GetTranscribed to how you manage that asset the road. Matt 23:06.021
Enough to an asset that they're not going to actually damage it through root contact, but the shade itself, yeah, it's the way to go. Joe Jurisevic 23:14.019
I was like, you know, from a, mate's perspective, the tree was known by, as tree number one, two, three, four, that limbs you know that the limbs are, it's being audited, ordered and it's being assessed, the arborist has gone there, you know the limbs are secure or whether it needs trimming and the like, so. That's the benefit of it. That's the perspective, yeah, I can see a benefit. Amelia Lorentson 23:32.961
But in terms of financial, there is a financial element with, natural assets when you look at their life cycles or life management. When you look at future risk, climate change, we know bushfires, water scarcity has been one of the number one climate, future climate risk. Change, and that's got financial impact on trees, when we've got thousands and of trees in the Shire. So somehow I think that's got to be captured somewhere in our financial asset management plan. Adam 24:08.763
A lot of spin-offs though, a lot of consequences. If you monetise your assets then you've got to, then it goes into our overall asset base as a Council which has a whole lot of other implications and risk. So that's the decision that's been taken in the past is we don't monetise them but we certainly manage them. They're on a register but they're not monetised as such. Joe Jurisevic 24:31.301
Monetized yeah. Any further? Amelia Lorentson 24:34.640
In terms of demographics, precinct demographics, lot of our suburbs have changed a lot and the people living in those suburbs have changed. I note in the report you've got usage but do we actually understand who are using it and whether they're suitable for the demographic of that precinct? Matt 24:58.172
Try to get we try to get a handle on that as we go but it's it is quite difficult without doing actual, I suppose, surveys. Or the census. Amelia Lorentson 25:08.230
We've got the 2021 census. Matt 25:10.212
Yeah, we probably needed a bit more work in that space to get a better handle on that. Yeah, things change. In. Joe Jurisevic 25:18.244
I'll ask you several questions. Amelia Lorentson 25:19.282
Yeah. And in terms of even dogs, I've got a situation at Rainbow Park where it's frequented by both residents and lots of dog owners with dogs on lead. And there's no freshwater tap there. In fact, there are no taps at all at rainbow creek. So it'd be great, again, in terms of usage to break it down to not just kids and people that use it, but also who've got pets. Mm-hmm. Okay. Unknown 25:49.325
Yeah. Remember we had a park without a cat? Matt 25:54.900
Yeah, Rainbow Park doesn't have a tap. Amelia Lorentson 25:56.958
It's just to do with the accessibility to the nearest mains and the cost involved. It's on my list of Council initiatives, jase, I remember that. I'm going to need you to say, absolutely it is. Joe Jurisevic 26:15.348
You see where I'm going with all my questions. Amelia Lorentson 26:25.533
And just another idea that I'll throw at you while I have the opportunity. Do we have a sign, you know, I'm thinking of public toilets. When you go into a public toilet at a shopping centre, for example, it'll say the last time that someone visited and maintained. Can we do something similar because again one of the many requests that I get is when was the last time we actually had a Council staff maintain and I was in a situation just recently at north orient park and I you're and I really commend Ryan Kelsey you've got some fantastic staff that work in parks and playground but they had been there recently but no one knew so that's just an idea if there's an access or a public information sign where we could just make a note or next visit will be such-and a date. Matt 27:19.326
Yeah so I managed that I oversee the management of the cleaning of public amenities contract which is our major cleaning contract covers all the park amenities blocks and a few other things it's coming up for the tenders expiring at the end of August so the first of September will be a new and we're doing the procurement and developing and refining as the specifications for that at the moment and that what you just suggested is something that we we've already identified in terms of something similar to what the shopping mall toilets have a last cleaned and signed by the cleaning contractor you know I agree it would definitely sort out a lot of those complaints that we all get I know you guys receive a few that we get a few as well and a lot of the time it's they're making that they're the question but the reality is that the cleaner has just been there within a few hours previous yeah so it'll definitely help and that. Joe Jurisevic 28:18.361
Follows on the on sort to a sort of drives where an amenities block may or not be situated time a good it's a good. Adam 28:34.433
Question and that's part of that part of the planning and master planning exercise that's going on for the bigger areas amenities. Joe Jurisevic 28:40.651
Wasn't something I specifically mentioned but that's the sort of thing I was alluding to in the range of questions and I guess. Adam 28:50.360
That's part of with the changing environment changing demographic we need to consider all those you know some of the parks may no longer need to be the type of park that they are they could be something totally different may need an amenities because they become bigger or they're in a different area now a different you know there's a different demographic around them all that needs to be considered we certainly considering the all abilities change rooms toilets that type of stuff going into some of our parks as well because you know we've recognised that there's that but there a need for those things but again it all comes down to planning budgets and time to get it done so you know we've got it on our radar but which. Joe Jurisevic 29:28.410
Parks as well because you know we've recognised that but there that suddenly someone needs to go to the toilet. What do you do? The. Adam 29:37.754
Most of it with that we've got now in place we're far more able to react and able to plan for that type of change now than we ever have before. Frank Wilkie 29:50.995
Thanks for the report, thank you for the report. The most striking thing about it is the condition asset value by asset type graph on page 3 and if I'm reading it correctly it million dollars worth of the assets are in reasonably good condition, two, but about eight and a half million are in really poor condition. Have I read that right? You have? Yeah. Orfield is so the question I have is, we seem to be doing record capital works programs every year. It's astonishing the amount of work the team's doing. Are we, when I see a profile like that, it begs the question, are we allocating funds in the right way when we've got so many assets in a poor condition, a state that you hope to avoid with a plan like this? Adam 30:48.351
So with those assets that are in condition five. A lot of them are age-based. Now, with the data we have, a lot of those are your seats or wood that's out there on your tables and so on. Now, I believe a lot of those have been replaced over the course of their life cycle, that's an audit we're going to undertake as well with Matt's team. And we may go out to contract for that as well. So the high volume there, I do believe they are lower than that, just based on age and how we capture things in the system. We know the date of when it was installed, but you can have an age of 10 years for your useful life on these tables or chairs, but they can go past that as well. But that's just purely how long we expect them to last. Frank Wilkie 31:49.140
Are we sweating these assets too long? And do we have need to allocate money in a different way to ensure that we keep these assets in a better condition when it comes to the budget? Matt 32:01.739
Yeah, look, is the $4 million enough annually? If I read that right, you're right there. So again, I think it comes down to the hierarchy of where the parks are located and the overall usage. We have, as I said, we've got a lot of parks. I think there's about 20 plus, around about 20 parks just in Noosa Waters alone. They're all pocket parks from developers. Like that, they will have assets in the in them to some degree, like they might just have one table, but the park doesn't get used often as others, and so you renew your assets, your condition deteriorates. They can deteriorate just from the weather or they can deteriorate from use. So where they're deteriorating from use, obviously the parks that are more popular and highly frequented, the assets, the condition drops quicker and that's when we tend to do the renewals and the replacements. Frank Wilkie 32:59.346
So what Adam was saying, age-based assessment, if they're in these parks that are rarely used, they can be an asset that is ten 10 years old that's technically the end of its life, but it's still got life in it because it's only been used that much. Matt 33:13.243
And it can have a lick of paint or a bit of a sand and oil, and then it's good to go for another few years. And we know that it's not getting the pressure wear and tear on it. Might just be the sun and the rain that makes it sort of weather a bit, and we can just do a maintenance repair. Frank Wilkie 33:30.284
So is there another way of assessing these assets that would give a profile that doesn't give such an alarming picture because I'm sure you would repost those assets if they were in poor condition. Adam 33:42.684
Daniel is in poor condition. We can manually change the condition of an asset within the system. Just a full audit would need to be undertaken with 2,000 separate assets. It's getting the right stuff or whether we go to contract for that to look at those and then it so it's a it is a task but it's one that we're planning for as. Joe Jurisevic 34:05.605
You as you want to take an inspection you can see that the asset is maintenance doesn't does needs maintenance, replacing and then as a result of that inspection you could go back and reclassify that asset as per what its actual condition is as opposed to correct. Matt 34:21.259
And that's a discussion you have with your team so it's the reclassification that's. Joe Jurisevic 34:24.935
Where we're heading to get into a more inspected and identified level of asset knowledge. Frank Wilkie 34:33.546
So that feeds into another question I had on page two there was any assets that have that are breached condition five will be included in the development and renewals program of the 10-year capital rewards program. So my understanding is you want to renew it before it reaches. Unidentified Speaker 34:51.594
In an ideal world you'd want to renew it before it reaches condition five? Adam 34:56.358
Not necessarily. So this is one we talked about as well. Level five is essentially the trigger to then put it in. When we say it goes into the 10 year capital plan, it doesn't mean it goes into year nine of the capital plan, it just means that how we have a 10 year capital plan. So it just goes into the plan, if you call it the plan. And if it's really, like if it's Gympie a wooden seat that's down in Gympie Terrace that's subject to weather and usage and just wears out quicker, and it gets to level five and it might be that we know it's got a year left and then we've got to replace it. Or if it's something in a smaller park that's not used but we know it's at level five because of time, you then put it into the 10 year might be at a year four or five because we know it's got plenty. Of life left in it. That's what that means. It's just a trigger. Level five doesn't mean that it's at the end of its life, it just means it's a trigger to then be. Addressed. Joe Jurisevic 35:48.962
It's exactly how I read the same question that I asked. Condition five to me is it's too late. In the way this asset management thing is working, condition five is the time condition five right, now when is the time we need to plan for its replacement. Frank Wilkie 36:04.376
No. So condition is not necessarily for, it's approaching replacement time. Life cycle. And it needs to be addressed. Adam 36:12.860
It now needs to be scheduled for. Correct. Condition five is when you make the assessment, is it disposal, is it replacement? Joe Jurisevic 36:20.465
Yeah or is it overall? Over yeah. We get something disposal? That's right, exactly. Yeah, thank you. All of those. That clarifies it, thank you, 'cause that was one of my questions as well. You're welcome. Amelia Lorentson 36:30.863
In terms of the Cooroy Hinterland Playground, has the cost of that impacted. Levels of services and management of the other parks within the Shire? Matt 36:42.552
Yeah, so the Cooroy playground is still on maintenance, so it's still within its first 12 months. It's coming off pretty soon, but it's still on being maintained by the contractor that built it. Amelia Lorentson 36:56.749
So the impacts will be seen next. Matt 36:59.575
Yes, we've factored it into the next financial year, all those costs, the maintenance costs and things. Adam 37:05.387
So we've got additional staff. This is always part of the overall plan when it gets handed over. We have additional staff and additional resource that goes into that, maintaining that park. Okay. Amelia Lorentson 37:17.631
Terms of staff, I've had some concerns raised in the community, in particular after the realignment. Our parks and gardens, I think, are merging. And the question I've been asked by a resident is, does that mean where will our parks be adequately staffed? Scott Waters 37:40.890
Through the Chair, Councillor Lorentson, that's actually off-topic. Oh, excuse me. But we're very happy to respond in that there is specific work that's being undertaken within our depot environment at the moment, and that's to work towards a multi-skilled workforce. Very happy to work with that particular resident that may have some concerns, but please note that the standards of service that was counselled with us today is the standard of service that we'll be delivering tomorrow. What we're trying to work towards and achieve. And there's very significant work that Larry, Brian and the team are delivering in the depot is how can we have our workforce more skilled to deliver more and very different types of works taking away from an old traditional structure which made us be if you're parks and gardens that's all you do and if you're a civil ops that is all you do that is all you do to a more modern way of delivering local government outdoor services on a multi-skilled basis. So MSWs or multi-skilled workers is a process that is being undertaken. We're working closely unions on that as well because it is a change. Please note that is somewhat different to the functional realignment that the organisation has gone through and is specific to the depot and somewhat off topic when we're talking about asset management plans. Joe Jurisevic 38:56.787
I'll challenge you I'll challenge a bit on that. You a because bit on that. The tone of asset management is maintenance of the assets, and that kind of thing, so having the workforce and the capability delivering on that maintenance and the assessments and the like requires an honest workforce to be able to not only prepare them, but to be able to assess them and see if they need to see how they go through. So I welcome the opportunity. I think that offers a bit more variety of challenges in the everyday work environment as well. I thought it could afford employees. I welcome that opportunity as well. Scott Waters 39:32.054
Chair, through Larry, Brian and also Matt, that's all the team's working towards. We've gone over the days of the silo. You do one thing and you'll go on thing only. But we're working towards that. It is a sensitive issue. We're talking about long-term employees that are having changes to their day-to work. So there is some elements there, but note that the team that are managing and leading the depot are taking this task. It's somewhat difficult, but working with unions and key leaders within that workforce that they're doing a great job to transition to what is a more modern contemporary way of delivering an outside multi-skilled workforce. Clare Stewart 40:11.146
Clare's got a hand up. I'm trying to see if Amelia's finished first. Oh, good. Thank you. Jo? Amelia, Clare. Oh, thanks, John. Joe. Good question. Lara, when you're talking about those levels, the conditions, sort of condition four, condition five, and, you know, we look then and determine whether it's a new renewal upgrade, some of those things you're talking about and they are minor works with, you know, park benches or, you know, latticework in a rotunda or something in a park, can that potentially be brought into those. What we're looking at in the budget with this potentially, I mean, those pools of. Funds for minor capital works and that can sort of be a follow-over from that. So if we do see something that needs immediate attention or, you know, a community member draws it to our attention, we can action it pretty quickly through. Potentially that new pool of funding. Not being approved. I don't know about you, but. Adam 41:06.819
No, no, I think, sorry, answer I think the, um, to that is if it's urgent work, then we get it done anyway through our own maintenance programs and we've got the ability to do that. How we're set up. So we can do that. If it's something that's a little bit left of centre that may not be prioritised right now that needs to be brought forward, then that's. Certainly something we're talking about in terms of our budgets going forward and how we have that ability to do that. So, yeah, we'll cover it no matter what, I think is probably the thing. If it's urgent, emergent and risk to Council, then we would sort that through our own day to because we have the ability to do that. And then there's other things that are, you know, maybe lower down on the priority list that for some, for whatever reason, because we're going to get limited budget, then they're the things we can talk about in the new budget as we go forward. Unidentified Speaker 42:02.865
Okay, thank you. Other do you need further aid? Joe Jurisevic 42:05.049
No I think you have some yeah, so along the lines of what Mayor was asking, one of the questions I asked is annual reactive versus preventative maintenance budget. Obviously, timber assets require oiling on a preventative maintenance and you'd schedule that in for, I don't know, an annual, six-monthly, two-year, whatever. Periodic maintenance. Versus, come to the asset, we're going to do the painting, we go, oh, we can see the rock here, there's no point applying the oil until this piece of the timber is replaced. Reactive maintenance. So that element comes in. So in, not quite the pools of the maintenance, but how it's, the division of the maintenance budget, there's got to be an element of reactive maintenance and an element of preventive maintenance. Preventative maintenance or ongoing maintenance. Do we have a break up of that within that maintenance budget or do we specifically just have a maintenance budget and reactive elements at hand with a different line? Matt 43:13.317
So like I can ask that one. Chair. So within our operational maintenance budget, which we sort of manage internally in my team, we do have those situations covered for. We have probably, I'd say it's at a guess, it's probably about 60% that preventative schedule sort of proactive. So it's your sanding and your oiling and your painting and your soft fall replacements. Grease and oil. And then we do find things, as you say, through our inspections and our attendance bit at the parks, we find things that are broken and a bit of vandalism, graffiti, things like that. They get covered as well within, so there's elements of our budget where we're allowed for an itemised, you know, broken bits of equipment and having to buy replacement parts for playgrounds. Some timber. You know, just things like that. They definitely get factored into it, so we allow for both, and I reckon it's about a 60%, 60-40, yeah. Joe Jurisevic 44:18.954
Okay, that answers that question. Now that's one of the things that I often get asked is that, how come that's not getting repaid. Getting repaired, isn't there any money in the budget? Clearly there is. Matt 44:29.849
There's often delays as well, because some of your specialist parts for playgrounds can take a few months to order, so we'll order them as soon as we're aware of the issue, but then, yeah, we might have to, you know, secure that piece of it, you know, bunt it off, make sure that no one can use it. And we are starting to now also put signs giving a bit of a why and time so we don't get all the complaints and the CRMs yet. Joe Jurisevic 44:56.504
The more information you provide, the better informed the public are to understand the wrongs and the reasons behind that issue. Well that's great, glad to hear that. Speaking, I'm glad you mentioned graffiti. It's one of the questions that came up as I was reading through it. Suggested graffiti wasn't. Um reactive maintenance. Graffiti clearly is reactive maintenance and even in the schedule there it said graffiti, I've seen graffiti within 24 hours or something else within. So why is graffiti not considered reactive maintenance when clearly it is a reactive maintenance? That might be semantics in the way the report's written, but I read that graffiti wasn't considered as reactive maintenance, but clearly the way it's addressed is reactive maintenance. I think that cleared itself up there, but again there's one element within the table that suggests it wasn't this is reactive maintenance. Amelia Lorentson 45:47.209
24.24. Page 24, we're feeding. Joe Jurisevic 45:52.514
Our table does say it's reactive maintenance. Amelia Lorentson 45:54.437
Says it's reactive and responded, emergencies responded to same day. Reactive maintenance reports. Joe Jurisevic 45:59.804
There was somewhere else where I didn't get that. Impression, then later on I did get that impression. There might be an element of semantics within the report where graffiti panel is just not referred to in the same way. Matt 46:12.286
So any graffiti in parks, we're on to it straight away as soon as it comes to our attention, depending obviously on the role of human. But anything that's obscene or anything like that, we're out straight away, get rid of it. If it's just something, a tag or something like that, we'll get to it within 10 days or as soon as we possibly can. Joe Jurisevic 46:31.600
Do we still need to use youth justice to deal with, you know, offenders of graffiti, dealing with graffiti? Matt 46:37.167
Yeah, we take photos of the graffiti and send it through. There's a hotline for it. But do we actually get offenders coming back and clearing up that graffiti? Not that I'm aware. Not through Council that we're aware of, no. Joe Jurisevic 46:49.333
Is that something we can, I know it has happened in the past, is that something we can look at again? Yeah, I'd have to look into that. Community development and all. Yeah, I understand. You very much. Frank the asked a question about the, yeah, condition five, and that was sort of the way it read, you know, we're waiting for it to come to the end of its life before that, and that's clearly not the case. Condition five we know was the end of the program and scheduled for replacement, so one would think that good preventative and reactive maintenance would help prolong the life of most equipment. Beyond that time period provided it's not abused or challenged in some other way, shape or form and in a weather condition or the like. I've asked about reactive maintenance. How do we determine renewal along the lines of what Amelia was asking. How do we determine renewal as like for versus upgrades or for more or better equipment, different long-lasting materials. So how do we make the valued assessment on upgrades and whether we just go with the same type of style or we actually look at what is better, longer-lasting, more facilitating, I.e. hardwood requires a lot of maintenance, is hardwood the ideal product to stick in the ground, for example, or to make seats out of that need to be oiled on a frequent basis. I know that Noosa look and feel comes into this a lot, but time has moved on and hardwoods are a limited resource. Where does sustainability come into the elements of asset renewal? Matt 48:37.373
So just getting back to the original part of that is renewal in terms of that in the asset world is a like for or a modern day equivalent replacement. An upgrade is a bigger and better or changing the, um say it's a playground changing it to two swings changing the function or adding an element, that sort of thing. So with renewal, when we renew something like for it's not absolute like for it's using the modern day materials, the technologies that are, and we try, we always try to go for as low a maintenance as possible. The and use opportunity it. For sustainability. Yes, using materials that are sustainable, environmentally friendly and all that. So, and at the moment, the Noosa Design Principles is under review by the design run through the infrastructure planning and delivery design branch. And I've had myself and Brian have had a lot of input into that. Yeah and we've had a lot of input lately into it around the maintenance side of it and the material side of it so yeah that's certainly something every time something comes up for renewal and is considered. Design all that we definitely try to incorporate that the best possible solutions. Joe Jurisevic 49:59.171
One question I've been asked with regard to the graphs is figure six and I think this. And I think this boils down to how I interpret it. There are three lines below that 10 million figure. Yep. And there's one green line going up which is an accumulation. It's the only element of accumulation. Correct. Each of those is year on and each of those years has been totalled to the previous year to create that green line going forward. Yes. That's alright. I didn't get it the first time and when I looked at it again I thought this is the only way that this could make any sense. The accrual. Yep. The last one is there's no mention of the LGIP in the asset management plan. How do they relate? 2.4 mentions identifying future demand forecasts which we've spoken a bit about here. And Amelia's talked about existing parks and infrastructure, so what are the parameters that will determine future needs and how these will be determined? Is it through the LGIP? Is it, 'cause that's, once assets that's have reached their end they're in the watch, is the LGIP still staying in play? Classification of parks and the like, how does the LGIP and the asset management plan come together? Scott Waters 51:16.153
I can help answer that. So the issue that we're facing around LGIP or our particular Council is that we will have very limited growth into the future. Is there for when we have future growth and development to be able to deliver across the local government. Joe Jurisevic 51:34.638
Just for those online, local government infrastructure. Scott Waters 51:37.762
Thank you Chair. So the problem that we're facing is that we have very limited, if any, future growth and that the LGIP is there to be able to look at the forward utilisation of developer contributions at the end of the day. How are we going to deliver those and what does that actually mean? Councils across Queensland are no longer sitting on large development contribution reserves that really aren't being spent and the developers unsure of where they're going. We as a Council would have-fund to sell our future renewals because we're not then in a position of receiving new equipment or new parts coming from the developer because we have limited development opportunities. So it is definitely one for us that from an asset management planning perspective this work is extremely important because it will then need to be able to inform what our future budget is going to be in the renewal, replacement, refurbishment, have it what we will do with each individual and or particular park groups that we have so it's setting the standard what is the standard of service in each individual park what's the categorization of that park into the future and then how will we review that and we do know that when neighbourhoods with young kids grow to older kids that mum and dad then pick up the phone to the Council and say that piece of equipment isn't really fit for purpose for us anymore we want to see a basketball court or we want to see a skateball or something of the like so LGIP the future for us is not a tool that can be a predictor unless there is a change in the scope of growth and development so one of the things that we could. Joe Jurisevic 53:15.855
Potentially look at is across a suburb one of the better terminology okay different categories equipment within that. Catering for younger, next age group, maybe four or five different categories of that with different elements catering for different age needs that might facilitate a range of uses. What's more centrally located for the younger and as we sort of lay it out, what is it to be travelled to? Adam 53:49.424
That's part of the broader planning exercise as well because you've got to look at that new hierarchy of parks and for these guys it's a hierarchy of parks. And terms maintaining the furniture that's in there or the grass or the trees whatever it might be but then it's a matter of what equipment goes into those particular parks on hierarchy and that changes as we talked about before with demographics. As a suburb becomes older or younger you've got to provide the different services. Joe Jurisevic 54:18.907
Is there a way to provide a mix that caters for a blend perhaps and that's why I use the LGIP as the example thinking as the CEO because the LGIP is what us and gets us there in the first place. But once we're not growing anymore, the LGIP ceases to give us that direction. So in that renewal process, exactly the sort of thing I'm alluding to here, how do we then look at what we upgrade to or change to or can we put in a blend and a mix that caters for a of age groups or a range of uses? Adam 54:53.997
No question, that's what we are doing and I guess I think Gympie Terrace is a classic example of that. It's doing the master plan of that, understanding what the usage is, you know, that's the disabled or the all abilities tables, it's the all abilities swings and play equipment. It's just all of that needs to be brought into it and that, you know, gets own its master plan, own plan to deliver against it. Joe Jurisevic 55:17.875
So from an all abilities perspective, how many all abilities and where do we situate them across the region so that everybody has one within a particular region within about five kilometres or ten kilometres or in a suburban area that a park is no more than certain. 800 metres for example from the ferds residence or something like that. We have a formula to. Adam 55:44.585
Find- To be honest I think we'll capture a lot of that and this- Kim's going to hit you on a computer- but the placemaking. Absolutely. You know we do it in Pomona first but then as we move along that's exactly what that should capture because that's the community feedback saying we want this and we need this and this is what suits our community so if. Joe Jurisevic 56:01.851
That's where our asset management plan for the future. Adam 56:04.571
Well it all ties in together so it's a whole group it's not just these guys who are selecting equipment putting it in there it's just being advised by the other groups in Council to say this is what we need. Joe Jurisevic 56:14.531
As to what's appropriate and where it's appropriate. Absolutely. And that's again the LGIP was the driver of that so I'm looking for the future as to how we continue to view it. Review. Adam 56:22.558
And that's exactly what we're doing and that's what part of the realignment is all about. It's all about just making sure we all talk to each other and don't just go like for. Joe Jurisevic 56:30.878
So we aren't walking beyond and talking to all the other elements of the system and the community to ensure that we meet their needs. Another question Amelia? Amelia Lorentson 56:41.874
In terms of the hierarchy, Matt can I just ask a couple of questions? So the parks and playgrounds have been classified in accordance with the service it provides. There is a hierarchy or a criteria that helps you understand which level a park fits into. A couple of questions. Environmental values, so we're looking at economic, we're looking at usage. Does the environmental does that sit under cultural reasons? Sort of not spelled out that the environmental value of a park should be somehow listed. Again, I use orient north park where it's got identified cash arena trees. Yep. For our vulnerable species, the glossy blacks. So how is the importance of the vegetation captured within the criteria? Matt 57:39.745
Good question, so. Adam 57:44.143
So the hierarchy as it stands is based on the service it provides. So when we're bringing natural values into there, this is primarily looking at, the asset management plan looks at it from that, the financial aspect and what we have on our register currently. So that's what drives that. So in terms of purely, natural, it would not affect the hierarchy as much if it's just a purely an open space. Okay. The way we structure it in this organisation, that's natural areas and environment that have that, sitting under their, watch, if you like. And that's where, you know, you've got to, draw sort of lines somewhere. And that's where, in terms of the types of trees, if, you know, they, if they've got a question. On that they would go to natural areas and environment to understand what those trees are used for currently and what the, if they need to be replaced, what they're replaced with, or should they be kept because they're of a certain value. But that's where we've got to work in together. There's not just one department and that's where we are getting much better at in making sure that we don't just go off on our own tangent or our own so silo. Joe Jurisevic 58:55.828
One sorry, just one other question. Page 7 of the asset management plan on level 3 refers to Heritage Park in Tewantin. I'm assuming that's Heritage Park. That should be Heritage Park or Heritage Park? Yes, probably. Can we just clarify one thing? Matt 59:12.773
Parklands is the. Region, Heritage Park is the park, yeah? Yep. Can we just clarify that and make sure that actually correctly just referred by the park manager? Joe Jurisevic 59:21.921
Yep, sure. I don't think any. When I looked at Heritage Park I was going, "Well, the only park you could be referring to would be Heritage Park." Yeah, there's no Heritage Park anywhere on there. No, I think that's just a. Yep. A technical typo. That's right. Amelia Lorentson 59:37.032
And just one last question with the criteria description. Level four, infrequent use each week. It'd be interesting why the park isn't used a lot and it could be as simple as, and again this is just on the street, it doesn't have a barbecue facility, it doesn't have a basketball hoop, it doesn't have a tap for the dogs to walk through, so it'd be great to break that down because to me it's a wasted asset and maybe we can maximise the use if we looked at, you know, what needs to be added there. Joe Jurisevic 01:00:13.558
One would think that if a park is underutilised, maybe we need to go out and talk to the community and say what do we need to put in this park to make it more accessible or more interesting or more valuable to the community as an asset to be giving off. Matt 01:00:28.212
I know of some parks that my staff go to maintain and the soft fall doesn't even have a footprint in it and there's the soft fall under the swing set or something and so it's clear that no one's using it and it could be that the demographics have changed and there's no young kids there anymore. Joe Jurisevic 01:00:45.352
Maybe that's the time when we need to go out to the community if we're looking at that asset and maybe do a little bit of a letterbox drop around and say are you using the park? What can we do better to make the park more interesting for you? Are the current level of equipment in the park suiting the local community's needs? Frank Wilkie 01:01:05.347
Happy to move the recommendation Mr Chair. Joe Jurisevic 01:01:07.068
Oh that's your second? We haven't moved anything or today. Clare, nothing further from here? You? All good. In favour? All those in favour? Thank you, thanks Alan. Thank you guys. We that through your list of questions? Yeah. Yeah. Thanks guys. I didn't realise you had three other questions. Richard's here. That's right. Amelia Lorentson 01:01:31.136
It's an important asset. Awesome. Unidentified Speaker 01:01:33.004
Yeah, absolutely. It is. Thanks guys. I think they're coming. Joe Jurisevic 01:01:39.979
Thank you. Item three. Tourism Noosa funding agreement. Clare Stewart 01:01:53.688
Clare. I don't have any declarable conflict of interest in this matter, so I don't think there's going to be a wall, but can you see it? I can. You see it on your screen? No, I can't. I don't have we'll call it any declarable conflict of interest in this matter, because I have a friendship with, hang on, Kat, is it up there? It should be on the board view, on your. Joe Jurisevic 01:02:21.849
Board view. Those online, if you'll bear with us, we're using a new system this month for the first time, and we're just coming to terms with some of the challenges of some of the views that we've got. I'll just share it. Through Teams, won't be a moment. Can you see that, Clare? Is that better? Clare, can you see that? Clare Stewart 01:02:51.063
Hang on, Joe, I'm just. In Microsoft Teams. Is it email through cat? In Microsoft Teams. I'm sharing it in your teams. Joe Jurisevic 01:02:57.596
It's in teams. Clare Stewart 01:03:01.923
For a second, guys. Okay. Yes, thank you, cat. In accordance with. I, Councillor Stewart, inform the meeting that after a declarable conflict of interest in this matter, as Liam decreed, your Director of tourism, Noosa, is a friend. As a result of my conflict now will leave the meeting room while the matter is considered and voted on. Joe Jurisevic 01:03:20.649
Thank you, thank you, Mayor Clare. We'll wait until the meeting is. Hang on, yep. And done. All right. Mr CEO, item 5.3 has your name as those, adeline. Can we get the summary of the item. Scott Waters 01:03:41.852
Chair, thank you. I understand the intent is to have this particular item referred to the General Committee. So Council's very happy to be able to talk through the report for you and take any questions that you might have to be able to help you go through that process for further consideration at the General Committee. Do you mind if I go through the general? Yes. The advice that I have is that yes. No, I'm just completely informed, sorry. Just secondary have resolution. A bleed in yep, I would have expected a two-footer. Yes. Council, is Tourism Noosa? No, I was going to say cheers a little bit. In terms Tourism Noosa, the single largest contribution of funding that this Council makes for any organisation. This is not a decision for this Council lightly. Council does need time to be able to work through and deliberate the provision of funds to an entity that, yes, is the largest economic contributor to our local government area, but also an entity with 600 members. Those members also need to have the ability to be able to start to shoulder the load when it comes to funding and marketing and the delivery of services for this particular industry and sector. For me, just over 12 months in the role and having. Background within tourism, I've taken a particular interest in this item for our Council to ensure that we're able to enhance how we have governance overarching and overriding everything that we do for. This particular funding that we provide. Tourism Noosa is an organisation that externally within the tourism sector has a fantastic reputation. Marketing is what they do and they do that very well. Know that because as a community we see the high level of tourism that comes through our particular community day in out and it's why us as not just elected members of the Council but officers, our community as a whole are undergoing a destination management we process. Do not want to see Noosa love to death but we do need to be able to have a strong tourism sector and a strong representative body at this point in time to have that representative body continue this Council has make a decision as to how it funds that tourism body into the future the recommendation that you have before you is about funding Tourism Noosa at the same level that we have through previous agreements and through this current year into future years it doesn't preclude us to have special projects or other elements of funding added to Tourism Noosa but I do believe within the time that I've been here that it is prudent that we work with Tourism Noosa on not only their efficiency and effectiveness as an organisation but also their governance as an organisation as well too. The efficiency and effectiveness of Tourism Noosa and future funding should be dependent on how they run their business because let's face it they are running a business. It's a representative business of a cooperative of tourism businesses overall but it's still a business that is 90% funded by this Council. We do need to see how they will manage future funds and through efficiency and effectiveness they can have further funding available for the different pieces of work that tourism and Noosa do but they need to be able to start to look internally first and look at what savings are available before to Council and asking for more money or going to their members and working through what a new membership scheme or a membership program may be some of the great work that Tourism Noosa does how do they monetise that for them and create better products have strong relationships with the numerous associations and representative bodies that our local government area has how can they be leaders for Council to be able to provide these funds really the basis of the funding and performance deed that you had before you is just that it's providing funding but it's contingent upon performance for Tourism Noosa means they need to have a fully strategic plan as approved by this Council they need to have an operating plan similar very to what our Council has to deal with our governments an operating plan that governs that 12 months aligned to the budget so we know exactly what they're doing and they also know exactly what they're doing and where they're going. Then a quarterly report to this Council delivered by Tourism Noosa either to this committee or to the P&E committee that demonstrates that Tourism Noosa has delivered against what that operating plan is. So three pieces of governance work that Tourism Noosa will need to do they'll also need to do an efficiency and effectiveness review as part of this agreement and they'll also need to take regular reviews of their board and the performance as well. So there is a lot that we have been there. We have briefed this through to you on three separate occasions and we've done our very best to work with Tourism Noosa as the funding receiver and take into account all of the views and requests from the Council. There are some elements though that we haven't been able to achieve. One is having specific funding go to specific areas. Tourism Noosa is just not that advanced. At this point in time, until they have a strategic plan, an operational plan, quarterly reporting, it's very difficult for us to fund one or two specific areas and put that into a particular project bucket or piece think of work. In I the future we can get there by working with them. The agreement and the way it's been negotiated is a two plus two deal. So it pushes this through funding of this financial year and also next financial year and will be the second year of the next term of Council before this needs to be decided upon by the Council again. My recommendation to the Council though is we start a lot earlier. We don't get to the stage where we are now in April and we're unsure as to how tourism booths will be able to operate if we don't provide that funding overall. The other element to this is that past 30 June 2025, if this is operating and working well, there's the ability to continue this for another two years. So it's a two plus two deal. Funding remains static throughout that time. Tourism Noosa will need to find their own efficiencies within their own business if they are to look at having more funds available for marketing or wanting to do more activations or different projects. Doesn't preclude them from coming to this Council with a great idea or coming to this Council and saying we'd like to take on some of the work that you're doing and do this on your behalf. If that's an opportunity it's for this Council table to decide on the strategic basis. I do know that there's two parts to our community that there's a part here that's very much saying look let's get in and let's support our tourism sector and there's a big part of our community that's saying well you know this has impacted our lifestyle this is causing issues for us I think this though is now a great opportunity to really set a line in the sand for Tourism Noosa to be able to say here are the very clear expectations of this Council for what we want you to do with the money that we provide here are the clear governance elements that we now have in place to ensure that we do that. Should you not do that, there are mechanisms for remedy by this Council within this agreement. Those can even be as much as cancellation of this particular agreement overall, terminating it. So it's a serious document. It puts parameters around Tourism Noosa that they haven't had before. It still provides the same level of funding for Tourism Noosa. And our hope as a Council is now that with very clear direction, they can get in and deliver for our community. One part that I haven't touched on though is the Destination Management Plan. Once the Destination Management Plan is completed our Council and Tourism Noosa have the ability to be able to sit around the table, review the outcomes of the Destination Management Plan, and upon review of that, we can make amendments and changes to the agreement that's enshrined within there. Document there for you as well too. So Councillors, not voted upon today, that I absolutely understand, a referral to general, but I'm happy to take any questions that you may have and we'll try to make a fair and balanced agreement it's a very nuanced agreement, which sure is a new stuff, but it is one that is very much within the gantz's fibres, the I'm happy to take any questions. Frank Wilkie 01:12:21.603
Thank you Mr CEO for the report, excellent. Lot of work involved that. And I have some clarifying questions and I'll save my debate for next week. Could you elaborate on the DMP timeframe? When do we expect this work to be done? And how that will, at what phase of the agreement will that potentially affect the agreement? Will it be at the end of the first two year term or could it be earlier? I don't know. Scott Waters 01:12:47.636
Deputy Mayor, through the Chair, I'll take that question in two parts. I might defer to the Director for the timeframe around the DMP and then I can add some advice. On the basis of that as to how that will affect and be delivered. So Kim, if I could defer to you on the DMP question. Kim Rawlings 01:13:06.158
Thanks Scott and through the Chair. Councillor Wilkie, we are in the process of developing a Discussion Paper for the Destination Management Plan that will be the first stage of community engagement on it. That needs to go through Council and through the PCG which will happen I'm hoping in the next four to six weeks and then we'll run a community engagement process. Around it. That process will very much inform the development of the Destination Management Plan. My hope as you know with community engagement processes will go out for a certain amount of time. I think it will engender a lot of interest and potentially a lot of public debate. So it's a little hard to predict exactly how much time that process will take. We want to do it properly, thoroughly and get it right. It's a really important. Piece so that could, you know, there could be a good couple of months in that process. Then there's the development of the Draft Destination Management Plan that will again be worked through with Council and the PCG and consulted on. I'd hope that we'd have it by the end of the year for Council endorsement and consideration. That's our current timeframe. That's what we're working to. As you can see, I'm sort of allowing a little bit of flexibility in that because of the nature of the topic and the amount of. Frank Wilkie 01:14:29.456
Interest I think it's going to garner. Of that process could perhaps become a reshaping or recrafting of the role of Tourism Noosa. Does this agreement give us any capacity to change the funding agreement with Tourism Noosa before the end of the first two-year term as the CEO or is the agreement written in a way intervention of an early appointment? Scott Waters 01:14:58.372
Does the Chair at an earlier point? Absolutely does. Through so the Chair, Councillor it's Wilkie, absolutely been does. Written in a way that once the destination management absolutely plan does. So is adopted by the Council, I would recommend, albeit we are coming into caretaker election period, but within three months of that DMP being adopted by the Council, I think it would be proven for the Council to be able to set a time frame with Tourism Noosa to look at adjustments to this agreement. Letting it go longer just leaves it more open for debate once and the made Council's made the decision on the DMP, I think three months, sit down with Tourism Noosa and say the reshaping in our view is this and here's how we'd like it to be taken forward and have Tourism Noosa consider and come back with what they'd like to do. Unidentified Speaker 01:15:44.608
Okay, thank you. My next question, the funding agreement. Frank Wilkie 01:15:49.208
Agreement and the report makes reference to efficiency dividend which may involve, if they're demonstrated, efficiencies are demonstrated, may involve the waiving of Council's internal costs which are charged to Tourism Noosa. Do we have a ballpark figure about what yeah what amount that is? Scott Waters 01:16:08.840
Through the Chair it's about $130,000 per annum so it is significant and it is important that Tourism Noosa if you know we as a Councillor we're not going to fund you at any higher level Tourism Noosa but we're happy to help your bottom line you also need to start to make efforts to improve your bottom line and your efficiency and effectiveness so we're happy to start that process but it's for Tourism Noosa to start to demonstrate that now how can that business run better running a better business there should be better for more funds and there should be a. Unidentified Speaker 01:16:41.383
Better outcome to the community so is it acting as a double incentive so if they show these efficiency improve efficiencies which will free up cash within their organisation we then will reward them with more cash. Scott Waters 01:16:54.249
Potentially. Yeah definitely and utilises a fairly standard tool. Unidentified Speaker 01:16:58.797
By waiving the internal costs. Yeah and within government that that's a fairly standard cause that you would utilise for ongoing funding agreements too. To put in an efficiency dividend and that we either fund you less to that amount but we're not forcing Tourism Noosa on that at the moment but we're very much pushing them into that direction that if they want to have more funds be more efficient. Now the next question is about the funding agreement made provision or made mandatory that Tourism Noosa set aside $350,000 for downturns and tourism visitation. They had to dip into funds when COVID hit. So to reduce that amount by $100,000 to $250,000, are we and Tourism Noosa, is it suggested that we, as partners, banking on a reduction of that amount? Frank Wilkie 01:17:54.844
In the frequency of perhaps climate-induced disasters or any other sort of downturn. Cost of living, like the two greatest global threats at the moment are climate-induced disasters and also. Of living. We both have the potential to impact on visitation. Yes. So by reducing the contingency to 250,000, are we banking that that's less likely or are we doing it? What discussions were there around the adequacy of that amount of heat. Scott Waters 01:18:25.333
Through the Chair, Deputy Mayor, it really is just capacity for tourism users to be able to replenish that reserve. Has been extinguished and the advice that they. Had provided was to be able to fully replenish that reserve would cause difficulties within that business. So we negotiated a lesser level of $250,000 and more so about how the business is running and operating and its capacity to have available free cash, as opposed to taking those other elements into account, something I think when the DMP is finalised, the potential for a revisit, DMP will also take into all of the other threats and changes to the tourism industry and impacts in the future and prudent to work through then, but it was one of the key markers that came back when we had finalised the legal document that you have before you, was specifically around the capacity to replenish that reserve to the full level and that was a concession that we made to help tourism whistler. Unidentified Speaker 01:19:26.522
Okay, so that reserve is currently empty? That's my understanding. Thank you. Answer. Amelia Lorentson 01:19:36.993
I'll just sort of follow on from where Frank's left in terms of the overhead costs that have been removed. In terms of CPI, consumer price index, I note that the agreement has no mention of CPI. My question is why, and is it reasonable to withhold CPI? And in my three years in Council, I don't think I've ever seen an agreement that hasn't factored in a CPI increase or a capped amount increase. Scott Waters 01:20:09.917
Through the Chair, given that most of our agreements are year-to that would be dealt with, Councillor Lorentson, within each of those agreements at that time. We very rarely have a numerous multi-year agreement so Tourism Noosa is an anomaly in that respect. So it's grant-to is how we work. So that's why you won't see that CPI, but I think it's really important for Tourism Noosa receiving these funds that they are able to demonstrate efficiency and effectiveness within their business. The ability for Tourism Noosa to free up cash in the future really is incumbent on Tourism Noosa for them as an entity to look at how they're running the business and for Tourism Noosa in the future to be able to demonstrate to this Council of we've created these efficiencies and we've delivered these great outcomes. Council, if you fund us more we can deliver these outcomes. It shouldn't be a situation where. Council more money but we're still not changing our model or doing anything differently. So that's where we've taken it. The view is it's reasonable. It's been accepted by Tourism Noosa at this point in time and we're happy to talk to the board of Tourism Noosa about. But I think it's a good safeguard for this Council and it pushes more efficiency and effectiveness in the business. Amelia Lorentson 01:21:26.203
Again just following on with Frank's question, the contingency fund. I note that I've got the previous agreement in front of me. It was called the marketing cash. Contingency and the cause of the agreement actually stipulates that the cash, the marketing cash contingency be used only for marketing activity required outside. So wording is quite wording is different in this agreement. Can you explain or give me some details why and what the implications of that omission of marketing means? Scott Waters 01:22:07.299
I'm through the shade, state Councillor Council, Lawrence. This is very much there for Tourism Noosa to be able to have funds in reserve for the future of Tourism Noosa. Should there be an event or something that occurs for that business that it may no longer operate, it is proven for tourism Noosa to have some sort of safeguard in there. Knowing this is a new agreement, totally redrafted into a funding and performance deed, there was the review of the previous agreement as part of this, but it was viewed to have a more robust document in a deed style that has a number of different elements to it. What do the two what does the $250,000 mean as a contingency fund? Ultimately it's there on an agreed basis to work with Council if there is some sort of event that can be utilised, but it also has additional funds that then safeguard the business into the future. And given that from a cash flow basis, we're providing funds immediately when they become due for Tourism Noosa. I think it's important for that business to have some funds available should there be an issue in the future. Amelia Lorentson 01:23:18.648
And that's, I note in the agreement, clause 11.1, number two, the approval's got to be, sorry, any withdrawal funding out of the contingency fund has to actually meet with Council approval. So it has to go through Council. Scott Waters 01:23:36.887
And through the Chair of Council, because it's ultimately our money. Excellent. And that's what does need to be understood, that these are Council funds. So, yeah, there's an additional safeguard in there. Amelia Lorentson 01:23:49.319
Council observer position. So I sit as an observer, which means I'm excluded from any matters that are considered commercial in confidence. The past agreement actually gave. A Council observer under course 20.5 the choice to either sit as a Council observer or they can elect to sit as a board Director. That choice has been removed from this agreement and can I ask and I know the reasons just some details as to why this decision was made. Scott Waters 01:24:30.173
To the Chair, Councillor Lorentson, at the end of the day I would dissuade any Councillor from taking on a Director position as a Councillor. Directors liability first and foremost becomes an issue for anybody taking that particular role. There is the provision under the Local Government Act to be a Director on a board of an entity that we fund. It immediately puts you though into a conflict of interest situation as well, precluding from budget or planning matters, but there are elements that make it what might seem as attractive to be on the Director and a Director on a board and to be able to vote and have a high degree of input. For a Councillor it actually creates a lot of impost for you delivering your role the recommendation is always to be an observer and to really be there to be able to provide advice and assistance to be able to understand how Council funds are being spent by the entity and what the future for the entity is going to be in relation to how that affects Council policy and be able to report back to the Council. So it's really an assisting role as opposed to a decision-making role. We've made the decision to fund. We have a robust agreement in place as to how our funds are to be spent. The observer role is really to understand and ensure that is being delivered at that level. So I would not recommend that be taken up. There is a provision under that there's only very few circumstances that really should be undertaken and that's why there's been that change there. In consultation with the Council we've ensured though that staff matters within Tourism Noosa have a degree of confidentiality about, like all staff matters, so it would be expected that you wouldn't be present for those staff matters but if there are any financial matters that are demonstrating difficulties it is absolutely the role of the observant be able to understand those and provide advice back to Council so we can help and assist and remedy any situation that might occur. Amelia Lorentson 01:26:43.415
Efficiencies and be able to understand those and provide advice back to Council so we can help and assist and remedy any situation that might occur efficiencies and effectiveness review I note on page 64 that will be under taken by Tourism Noosa and they are also determining the scope and was structure I consideration on page 64 that will be under taken the scope and structure review was consideration given for an independent review. Scott Waters 01:27:05.909
Through the Chair Council I believe that it would still be delivered independently that that's the view that I would take it but allowed Tourism Noosa the latitude to be able to deliver that they know their business they know their scope I'm not looking for anything in particular in relation to their efficiency and effectiveness I just really want to be able to see them deliver a better business for themselves and then efficiency and effectiveness review should deliver that but if it's not to the satisfaction of Council again we have remedy to that and we can have a discussion with Tourism Noosa about it but I know that they through discussions with the Chair and the Acting CEO they are committed to be able to be delivering on that review and see that as an important part. Amelia Lorentson 01:27:52.907
And given it's an obligation that we've imposed on Tourism Noosa, who's picking up the cost for the review? To be able to be delivering on- Jurisa okay. You. Unidentified Speaker 01:28:05.892
Just to clarify on the question, Amelia, you were talking about the review of the report? Amelia Lorentson 01:28:10.998
Yep, it's some of it. Tourism Noosa's priority obligations and performance measures, one of their KPIs, Frank. By 31st of December, they're required to undertake and provide a Council and efficiency and effectiveness review. Scope and structure is a big term, so I'm envisaging that's going to have. Board skills. Absolutely. So board will be reviewed, Tourism Noosa reviewed, their workplace planning, everything will be reviewed. Unidentified Speaker 01:28:42.905
Yes, that's my understanding. My question was, who's going to do the review? The children's nurse and I had an external consultant that's what I've just asked, yeah. Scott Waters 01:28:50.841
Through the Chair, Deputy Mayor, look, this will be best delivered via an external. It's like auditing yourself. No, it's like that. It'd be like auditing yourself. But they pay for it. Yeah, not recommended, yeah, that's right. Amelia Lorentson 01:29:14.727
I've got some more questions, thank you, through the Chair. In terms of events, there's lots of reference in terms of duplication. Can you explain, so TN and Council will take reasonable steps to avoid any duplication of funding. Does so so what does so mean? Currently we have some events that put applications for funding through TN and also through Council. Does this preclude them, they've got to make a decision one or the other? Can you explain how that's going to work? Scott Waters 01:29:51.228
Yeah, do the Chair, Councillor Lance, and look events are, let's put it this way, it's a scramble egg right now, is the issue that we're dealing with. We provide funds to Tourism Noosa. Then administer those funds through a grant program to events. And then we have those event organisers that may or not be successful then come to the Council and ask for more money. Ultimately it's still Council money. So through the functional realignment of the organisation we've split events within the Council business. We've elevated that to be within the Environment Strategy team led by Kim as our Director in that department and it really is a sit-down with tewars and Noosa to be able to look at the funding that they are delivering for events, how events are being managed within Noosa and ultimately we stop the duplication of roles and how we stop the duplication of funding. We can't be in the position to be able to fund through one entity and then provide funding through us as the primary entity. There needs to be a better way of doing this and we're really open to working with Tourism Noosa around that. Is it with a role that's best GN? Is it a role that's best served just within Council? Something for us to work through jointly. What doesn't leave Council though is within our property team where the land use delivered. That still stays there as merely a regulatory compliance function. That continues within that team. But how we look at let's say our top 20 events, either on a profit or not-for-profit basis, how we help work with them with funding and what Tourism Noosa's role is in that is something that we'll work through as an outcome of this agreement. Amelia Lorentson 01:31:35.271
And this is just for everyone's information. I don't think a lot of people know Tourism Noosa sponsor 1313 of events throughout the calendar year. Eight of those actually have regional and hinterland dispersal. I just think that's a really important stat that needs to be shared. Scott Waters 01:31:54.815
Tourism Noosa sponsor 1313 of events throughout the calendar year. Eight of those actually have regional and hinterland dispersal. Lorentson, ultimately Council funds. So while Tourism Noosa is administering this, ultimately that money is Council money going through. So important point to understand on that as well too. Joe Jurisevic 01:32:10.249
Just to clarify, that's tourism and events, hinterland funding of Noosa? Is that good to be on? Unidentified Speaker 01:32:18.737
Mm-hmm. Should I go to Brian in the meantime? Amelia Lorentson 01:32:23.705
Yep, go ahead. Brian Stockwell 01:32:24.297
Alright. So I'll I have a couple of queries in regard to the total quantum and allocation of funding. The first one is about what the specific nature of the 2 +2 is. So is it at TN's discretion to continue on the two years? Is it mutually agreed or is it Council's discretion whether we continue on the agreement for the second two-year period? Scott Waters 01:32:46.517
Through the Chair, Councillor Stockwell, it would need to be mutually agreed. And given that we now have very clear government's parameters, it would become more clearer closer to the end of the agreement. If not earlier, if they were not being met, it would be an easier decision and discussion for the Council to have. So now that we have- there's no ambiguity in our relationship anymore, but it should be a joint decision as to whether the parties continue for the next two years, but yeah, a decision for the future. Brian Stockwell 01:33:17.523
And the second part then is, currently as it sits, there is no allocation within the different roles but there's a requirement for them to adjust to the Destination Management Plan. So is it sufficient within the current drafting of the agreement such that when the Destination Management Plan, if Council to shift the percentage of allocation between say marketing and sustainability and other aspects of their business, is there sufficient flexibility within the agreement as well to achieve that in years two, three and four? Scott Waters 01:34:01.815
Through the Chair, it's written with that intent, Councillor Stockwell, that we can't wait for the DMP. Wait for the DMP is the issue. So I spoke about scrambled eggs before, we've got chicken and eggs here. Figure out how we would dearly love to have the DMP inform this now. We're just not there yet. Tourism Noosa need funding certainly coming into the new financial year but the very clear market point within this agreement is the DMP and it is a sit-down of what the outcomes of what the DMP was, what is the role of Tourism Noosa in the future and how we work together to be able to deliver that but yes it's written with the intent that the Destination Management Plan is a very important component and it's a point for both parties to sit down and discuss what the future that holds it to me. Amelia Lorentson 01:34:54.020
Happy to meet you. Joe Jurisevic 01:34:57.032
Are there further Councillors? No, it's a general, case. Stubbs? Yes. And senator bayer-Hugh? Councillor Wilkie. Seconded. That would be Mr boonatini-Tingall. All in favour? Carried. Inanimate. We'll have to get the Mayor back in. I'll just cancel it. Another 22 minutes. All in favour? All against? We'll right, we're go going to if I can. Item 4, the proposed lease tenancy for the Peregian Digital Hub. Kip Rawlings, our Director. It a good night, and I love you. Kim Rawlings 01:35:56.951
Thanks, Councillor Jurisevic. Chris Boden, our Digital Hub Director, is on a well-reserved break, so that's why I'm stepping in for him. This report. Recommends Council agree to a commercial lease for a space that's become available at the digital hub. With our construction of our new AI Lab next door, we've been able to move some of our co-lab functions so that space where the wooden seating is at the moment where there's guest speakers and things that were happening in the existing hub, we're repurposing that space and tentating, proposing to tenant part of it. So this lease takes place at the moment. Takes up about 75 square metres of that space. As per usual, we've run a process through our provider who works with us on these Colliers to run a market process and they have attracted a local tech company. Called Ibuki through that process and the report recommends that we enter into a lease with Ibuki with this option of three people. Potential extensions, a two-year lease with options of three potential extensions. Unidentified Speaker 01:37:19.065
That's it. Where are they situated currently? Kim Rawlings 01:37:25.094
I knew someone was going to ask that. I should have checked. Amelia Lorentson 01:37:27.437
I've got the answer. So the answer. So they've got 12 staff. Are located in Sydney, Holland, Philippines and an advisory board in the US and UK. They are local though? Kim Rawlings 01:37:41.357
They do have a presence here? Amelia Lorentson 01:37:42.899
They do. They're based in Peregian and according to their links I did a little bit of looking around. Unidentified Speaker 01:37:49.716
Great. No, it's fantastic that a local. Frank Wilkie 01:37:53.796
Business is doing so well. It sounds like we're in global climate change. Exactly the sort of business we want to attract. Very aligned. Digital hub. It's great that we're expanding. Yep. And perhaps after two years they'll be even bigger and be able to take up other premises in the Civic or somewhere else here. That's the hope for them. Business will accelerate by being part of this Peregian Digital Hub. Yep. Wish them every success. Amelia Lorentson 01:38:21.894
Any questions? I'm reading, so they're white label marketplaces. I think my understanding of what they do, online bookings and marketplace technology that helps local tourism operators gain exposure. Am I right? Kim Rawlings 01:38:36.879
Yeah, absolutely. They do marketplace, they do booking platforms, so tours and classes. Amelia Lorentson 01:38:42.517
Those groupon sorts of scoop. Joe Jurisevic 01:38:47.792
Clare, any questions at all? Good, thank you. Nothing further? I'll move it. Councillor Wilkie seconded it, Councillor Lorentson all in favour? That's an aye from Clare. Can we hear the verbal aye please Clare? Yes. Thank you. Thanks Councillors. Thank you. We move on to the last item in public. Which is item 5, the motion to the ALGA National General Assembly 2023. Scott Waters 01:39:20.715
A three Chair I'll present. This time, but. Ultimately it's a motion that's been brought to the Council table by Councillor Lorentson and Councillor Lorentson will be attending the Australian Local Government Association's National General Assembly in Canberra this year. And like the local government association of Queensland, there's the ability to be able to have motions put before the National General Assembly for consideration of the assembly that forms policy at a national level. It so needs to be at a Federal government policy level to be able to have, firstly it be accepted by the Australian Local Government Association, then debated, and then the Australian association policy executive, which is made up of all of the presidents of the local government associations of each state and territory, then work through a process as to whether this is accepted as policy for lobbying with the Australian Federal government. Thank you Councillor much. ARNSTON SPOKE TO ME ABOUT A NUMBER OF PROPOSED MOTIONS AND I WORKED WITH Council ARNSTON TO GET WHAT WE THOUGHT WOULD BE THE BETTER FIT WITHIN THE GUIDELINES AND AS YOU 'LL NOTE FROM THE REPORT THEY ARE QUITE CLEAR. AS TO WHAT IS REQUIRED AND WHY BECAUSE THEY ARE NATIONAL LEVEL. SO through the Chair I MAY ASK IF Council WARRENSON CAN SPEAK TO Council WARRENSON'S MOTION AND WHAT Councillor Lorentson WARRENSON IS WANTING TO ACHIEVE BUT THIS to bring this to the Council table from the operational element of the Council, from strategic, the Council should be able to make a decision to take that forward. Joe Jurisevic 01:41:04.545
I think that would be wholly appropriate for the Council to turn around and speak to our own motion. Amelia Lorentson 01:41:11.661
I'll speak to it. This is something that I think everyone knows I'm quite passionate about. I went to the LGAQ with a similar motion in Cairns just recently in October 2022 and my purpose there was to get wastewater reuse on the State's list of priorities and that was upheld almost unanimously. So this is sort of at the next step. So I'm going to read what I wrote and I think that will be clearer in my intent and why it's important for me to do this on behalf of Noosa. Our beaches and coastline are some of our most important public places. It's unacceptable that in 2023 treated and untreated sewage is still being discharged into our oceans. A practice that commenced. Australia in the sixties. Our environment and community demand a better way of managing waste. Wastewater creates management problems for local regional governments and wastewater providers that has environmental, socio-economic and public. Health consequences. Wastewater reuse however creates enormous opportunity for local regional governments. Advocating for a national policy and strategy that aims at one, no new ocean and estuarine. Sewage outfalls to be built or developed along the Australian coastline and two, dedicated funding to develop new methods and technologies and make every effort to recycle 100% of all treated wastewater generated to avoid the need to discharge. In the ocean. By advocating this, we encourage the wastewater reuse and we ensure that our ocean outfalls are not used. The ocean foundation, the outfall database, data gathered by. This group in 2016 from 165 of the 175 ocean outfalls. 165 of the 175 ocean outfalls. Provided the first national snapshot of wastewater distribution. Discharges to Australian coastal environments. The total volume of wastewater discharge to Australia's oceans in 2016 was 1,350 gigaliters. Equivalent to 2.7 Sydney harbours. The potential value of this water would have been more than $1 billion had as little as 20% been recycled. Again, that data's come from the Clean Ocean Foundation outfall database. Why I'm going to Canberra is because of what's happening in our backyard here in Noosa. We've got a sewage treatment plant at Burgess Creek that discharges treated effluent directly into the coral sea at Sunshine Beach. The significant volume of discharge and constant outflow going into Burgess Creek and our oceans in my opinion is causing erosion to our dunes and coastal ecosystems. That's also threatening road infrastructure and homes. I question and will continue to question why an activity dumping treated wastewater and contaminated stormwater into our oceans is tolerated and in fact legal. Are we tolerating practices that compromise the environment, are reasonably foreseeable and preventable? Is it environmental best practice? Is the permitted use environment and practices that were okay 20 plus years ago still relevant? And if we're okay with it and the water quality has met water quality criteria, then why aren't we reusing it? So in October 2022, I went to Cairns. I advocated that we needed, as a state and as a country and as a water industry, support less wasteful distribution and use of water, as well as water treatment and recycling. Water scarcity, extreme weather events and population growth require that we are more efficient with our water management and more sustainable with our sewerage and stormwater management. What's required is legislative changes, governmental support and incentives for the utilisation of reclaimed wastewater. We must aim to recycle 100% of wastewater. We must seek out and encourage wastewater reuse markets to drive investment in water reuse that respect the environment and create jobs. We must actively seek out public-private partnerships that increase investments in projects, again, that respect the environment, such as converting sewage treatment plants to produce biogas and electricity from waste. Sources. UNESCO made it clear that climate change and water quality and water scarcity is one of the biggest threats to the health of our environment and community, and whilst it might not be currently possible to way with marine outfalls completely, we must be forward-thinking and do what we can to look at alternatives and new technologies to lessen the environmental impact. We must understand that the value of water is greater than the cost of an ocean outfall and that our beaches, our dunes, our natural environment and the health of Australians must be a key priority for this country. Therefore, ASCET Council supports this motion that calls on the National General Assembly a national policy that aims at no new ocean and estuarine sewerage outfalls to be built or developed along the Australian coastline and that dedicated funding is provided to support local regional governments and wastewater providers with existing ocean and estuarine outfalls. To develop new methods, technologies and make every effort to recycle 100% of all treated wastewater generated within the localities and avoid need discharge in the ocean. People and planet before profit. Thank you. Frank Wilkie 01:47:41.400
Look I'm going to support this motion. Wouldn't it be wonderful if it was achieved? If 100% of all waste water was recycled? I think it's a very noble aim and I think it would be a wonderful thing if it was a policy that. And funding and resources dedicated towards that outcome. Like the report but I do have to pick up one element of it. I do have a question. There's a statement in here and it's clearly a statement of opinion that the waste water going to Burgess Creek is it's causing erosion to our dunes and coastal ecosystems that are threatening road infrastructure and private homes. Probably a question for Director of environment and planning. Is there any evidence to suggest that the water. Down Burgess Creek is causing erosion that's threatening road infrastructure and private homes? Kim Rawlings 01:48:36.005
Through the Chair, no, we can't categorically say that. There isn't substantiated evidence of that as yet. As Councillors know, we are in partnership with University of the Sunshine Coast undertaking a research project looking at these exact issues. So a model is being developed that was looking at the flows, the velocity, the whole environment for Burgess Creek and what impacts that might be having on the surrounding environment. We've only just started that, we're about three months into that partnership. The model has started to be developed but we are still needing a few more data inputs so we're some months away from having that sort of statement being able to be categorically made. Frank Wilkie 01:49:23.927
Of course the outcome of this motion is much bigger than what's happening locally and I would not stand in the way of this motion because of a point of fact like that. You very yeah. Unidentified Speaker 01:49:39.136
Thank you, Kim. Amelia Lorentson 01:49:42.241
Thanks, Kim. Can I just add the aim of 100% recyclable reuse water. There's actually councils already doing it so it is achievable and one of my other aspirations, Councillor Wilkie, is to somehow facilitate and whether it's through Noosa Council or the LGAQ state a wastewater national technology and innovation expo where we can share a national or state wastewater technology and innovation expo where we can share what's actually happening, real life projects, innovation, best practice techniques and sustainable water management and I've got huge files on councils that are doing it so well. It is so achievable. It's not a dream, it's not an aspiration. Not an aspiration. All we need is political will and community to back us. And as much as I hate to say it, money. And, you know, I get it. This costs a lot. Who's going to pay for it? And if it gets passed on to the rate payer, you know, not everyone's going to be happy with it. And that's why I'm going to Federal government. And asking for dedicated funding for these projects, it is achievable. That's why I think it's a good idea. It's occurring piecemeal across the country already. It is. But if there is a policy at a national level, we can put it all together. Absolutely. And looking at, in terms of, rather than supply, needs. Because there's some dams that are full. And there's some places, some localities where they're declared emptied. Um you know, some places around Australia where they're at drought levels. So it'd be great as part of the strategy to actually have a look at need rather than supply. Where is water actually needed? And whether it's pipelines, whether it's conversion, the solutions are there. Joe Jurisevic 01:51:39.550
You clear, got anything to add to this? Clare Stewart 01:51:44.609
No, very short, capitalised motion and I'll call the group attending to look at that and find her in the Minutes where she's done at this place. Joe Jurisevic 01:51:55.181
Thank you. Likewise, very I'm very happy to support this. The reason, my recollection of the reason that a lot of councils are at that point is that this was an issue that was addressed by governments in the past and they did put resources and it appears to have fallen off the agenda to some degree. We're going to cap be you like Australia, where they and talk about droughts are an extremely prevalent part of the landscape in this country, we shouldn't be wasting water. We shouldn't be losing. A resource that can potentially be reused anywhere. It's an element of recycling that should be embraced and we should look at the opportunities. I understand there are members in the community that are challenged by the CoMSEQ of using treated waste water in some way, shape or form and that there are some challenges towards utilising it. But, where possible, we should look at the opportunities that are so I'm happy to support this going forward and see if we can perhaps, if not all, re-evaluate the use of waste water and where it can and can't be facilitated to drought-proof to this country in some way, or can try and help drought-proof this country in some way, shape or form, if that is in any way, shape or form an achievable goal. So I commend you, Councillor Lorentson, on bringing this to us and I'll take it to the National General Assembly and I wish you every success in approving and moving forward with the application. Amelia Lorentson 01:53:37.755
One last thing I'd love to add is but it's not going to general so I'm just going to take the opportunity but I think people forget water is finite once it's gone but wastewater isn't it's the only type of water that's actually increasing and again with population growth climate change I keep talking about water scarcity but wastewater is the only thing that's guaranteed to increase not we water. Joe Jurisevic 01:54:08.530
In the urban area tend to take it for granted because it's a not that case everywhere. Frank Wilkie 01:54:16.886
We could get into a broader conversation about the world being a closed system that no every drop of water that was here 50 billion years ago is still here because it's recycled naturally. Unidentified Speaker 01:54:30.168
Yeah elucidate yeah yeah every drop we drinks probably been through the kidneys of the dinosaur the number of elements of. Unidentified Speaker 01:54:35.872
Recycled water that goes through different river systems and water supplies in the country. Joe Jurisevic 01:54:44.479
Water supplies in the country. But anyway, yes. I'm happy to second it. Thank you. Move, seconded. All in favour? Yes. Thank you Mayor Clare. Carried unanimously. To the last item, for consideration today. There's no reports made only by the committee. We do have a confidential session listed around the centralised legal services file. Before we go into confidential session, we'll leave our motion to go into confidential session. Frank Wilkie 01:55:16.962
Just a question for the CEO. Why is this iron guard confidential? Scott Waters 01:55:22.641
It has legal details that could be identifiable. Cases? The attachment has individual cases for three months worth of cancelled legal law. Joe Jurisevic 01:55:38.023
Are we going to confidential? Yes. Are we going to a confidential session? Amelia Lorentson 01:55:42.466
Happy to second. Unidentified Speaker 01:55:43.327
We need the reasons. Joe Jurisevic 01:55:47.039
Meeting closed. Amelia Lorentson 01:55:48.999
They are section 254J3. Unidentified Speaker 01:55:54.259
Confidential legal issues. Yeah. There's if two items. Cases yeah. Amelia Lorentson 01:56:00.324
It'll be the same reason. Joe Jurisevic 01:56:09.962
I can fix that up later but it's the same as last time. Before. June 2. Yeah. Unidentified Speaker 01:56:17.622
I'll. Amelia Lorentson 01:56:21.342
It up from here sometime. Joe Jurisevic 01:56:22.662
Okay. All in favour? So I've moved it. Cancelled all. In favour? Yes. Joe Jurisevic 02:14:20.201
Okay, welcome back everybody. We have a motion that the matter before us on central eyes for legal services trial be referred to General Committee. Do I have a mover? Councillor Wilkie. I'll second it. All in favour? Yes. Unanimously carried. So that matter will now be referred to General Committee for further consideration. We need no further items on the agenda. I'll close the meeting now at 3:47pm. Thank you all for your time. Clare, good job. Amelia Lorentson 02:14:56.251
Thank you, Chair. Clare Stewart 02:14:57.899
Thank you, everyone. Thank you, Chair. Bye everyone. Related Noosa Council Meetings
← Browse all Noosa Shire Council meeting transcripts
