Ordinary Meeting, 16 May 2024
Date: Thursday, 16 May 2024 at 5:00PM
Location: Noosa Shire Council Chambers , 9 Pelican Street , Tewantin , QLD 4565 , Australia
Organiser: Noosa Shire Council
Duration: 01:42:51
Synopsis: Opposition to State fast-track planning pathway to protect local control, Shark Control briefing before advocacy, Noosa Plan amendments to consultation, Community housing sale approved, Contracts awarded.
Meeting Attendees
Councillors
Frank Wilkie Karen Finzel Amelia Lorentson Jessica Phillips Brian Stockwell Tom Wegener Nicola Wilson Executive Officers
Acting Chief Executive Officer Larry Sengstock Director Community Services Kerri Contini Director Corporate Services Trent Grauf Director Strategy And Environment Kim Rawlings Acting Director Infrastructure Services Shaun Walsh Director Development & Regulation Richard MacGillivray AI-Generated Meeting Insight
Key Decisions & Discussions Frank Wilkie secured unanimous support to lodge a formal submission opposing elements of Queensland’s HAAPOLA consequential amendments, citing risks to Noosa’s planning integrity and community appeal rights (00:00–03:40) (Mayoral Minute Item 3.1). Brian Stockwell backed the submission, warning the State Facilitated Development pathway sets too-low thresholds (15% affordable), lacks duration controls, and weakens adherence to local schemes (04:14–08:03) (Item 3.1). Amelia Lorentson and Tom Wegener argued the State’s approach overreaches and erodes Noosa’s self-determination in planning (08:06–11:25) (Item 3.1). Amelia Lorentson won unanimous support for a CEO report on Council’s role/policy on the Shark Control Program (nets and drumlines), data transparency, temporary net relocation in whale season, and assessment of emerging technologies; advocacy is paused until a DAF briefing to Councillors (12:54–25:02) (Notified Motion 5.1, amended). Frank Wilkie ’s amendment required DAF briefing before any advocacy or policy resolution on shark nets; carried unanimously (22:27–23:35) (5.1). Planning & Environment approvals adopted unanimously: minor changes for Peregian Beach mixed use (214 David Low Way), landfill conditions (Doonan), motorcycle/scooter sales (Rene St), and representations for hardware & trade supplies (Bunnings site), maintaining key conditions (58:27–59:50) (8.1 Items 5.1–5.4). Capital Program 2023/24 Q3 status noted (8.2 Item 6.1); Operational Plan Q3 and April Financials noted with sustainability indicators added (8.3 Items 6.1–6.2). Planning applications decided under delegation were noted after handling conflicts (01:02:35–01:02:46) (8.3 Item 6.3). Amendments to Noosa Plan 2020 endorsed for public notification and consultation for 31 business days; CEO authorised to incorporate Minister’s conditional advice (8.3 Item 7.1). Disposal of proposed Lot 1, 62 Lake Macdonald Dr to Coast2Bay Housing Group approved under s236 LGR 2012 exemption; CEO delegated to complete subdivision, remediation tenders, and contract execution to deliver community housing (8.3 Item 7.2). Street sweeping contract CN00619 awarded to Specialised Pavement Services Pty Ltd (2-year term + 3 x 12-month options); CEO to negotiate final contract (8.3 Item 7.3). Council approved the July–December 2024 meeting schedule (9.1); broad 2024 engagement program was noted (9.2); corrected consolidated Subordinate Local Law No.1 adopted to fix an omission in Schedule 10 (9.3). Contract CN00319B (Upper Pinbarren Creek Rd landslides) awarded to Hazell Bros Group; CEO delegated administration and up to 11.5% variation (post confidential session) (10.1). Contentious / Transparency Matters Brian Stockwell cautioned HAAPOLA’s SFD powers resemble historic centralised overrides, risking poor outcomes; urged “use-it-or-lose-it” incentives for land-banked approvals (04:14–08:03) (3.1). Debra Walz challenged Council’s engagement culture as perceived “tick-box,” urging genuine forums and policy reviews (Community Engagement Policy; Social Justice Charter) (38:13–51:30) (7.1 Deputation noted in agenda). Frank Wilkie rebutted, listing high-response engagements (livability, foreshore, heritage, DMP, waste) and committing to continuous improvement (01:11:04–01:16:10) (9.2). River Catchment Plan timeline pressure: public asked why July 2024 resolution may slip; officers cited induction/capacity constraints and potential budget need for “full and meaningful” consultation (52:09–54:22; 01:27:40–01:31:23) (11.1 Q&A; 9.2). Fluoride petition follow-up: Seqwater confirmed fluoridation is a State public health measure; ceasing would be complex and costly given grid integration; Council to relay technical queries to Seqwater (54:37–58:25) (11.2 Q&A). Shark Control: broad community group consultations cited; unanimity to seek DAF briefing before advocacy; recognition of polarized views on nets (12:54–34:37) (5.1). Legal / Risk HAAPOLA SFD pathway risks: bypass of LG assessment, limited public submissions, no appeal rights, affordable housing not secured in perpetuity, potential exceedance of height/scale and loss of overlay protections (Minutes 3.1; 00:00–03:40). Community housing land disposal relied on s236(1)(b) LGR 2012 exemption; CEO delegated under LGA ss257, 262 to contract with Coast2Bay, protecting Council’s interests (8.3 Item 7.2). Confidential procurement handled under s254J(3)(g) LGR 2012; CEO authorised to vary CN00319B up to 11.5%—ensure contract management controls (10.1). Subordinate Local Law No.1 consolidated version corrected under LGA s32; low enforcement risk confirmed; process improvements promised to prevent recurrence (9.3; 01:34:30–01:36:51). River Plan consultation duty: October 2023 procedural motion for “final and fully costed” plan by July 2024 noted; officers warned timing/budget constraints—risk of trust erosion if unmet (52:09–54:22; 01:29:05–01:31:07) (11.1; 9.2). Conflicts of Interest Karen Finzel declared a COI re Altum Property Group items due to a 2020 campaign volunteer association; left the room (8.3 Item 6.3; 01:00:38–01:01:30). Amelia Lorentson declared a COI re MC Bain (personal ties); left the room (8.3 Item 6.3; 01:01:30–01:02:03). Brian Stockwell noted prior Altum-related declaration is no longer applicable this term (01:02:05–01:02:35) (8.3 Item 6.3). Jessica Phillips declared a COI for CN00319B due to spouse’s employer association; Council resolved she could participate as no financial interest or benefit was evident (10.1; 01:37:38–01:40:12). Shark Control, Whales, and By-catch Amelia Lorentson sought clearer State reporting (e.g., which side of nets species are caught), GIS mapping, and exploration of temporary net relocations at Laguna Bay during whale migration; noted whale alarms to be installed (12:54–22:27) (5.1). Frank Wilkie ensured DAF briefing precedes any advocacy; consensus to evaluate alternatives (e-barriers, SMART drumlines, electronic deterrence) before changing stance (22:27–25:02) (5.1). Jessica Phillips flagged youth concern about by-catch; community appetite to “do better” than legacy nets while maintaining safety (24:38–25:02) (5.1). Tom Wegener referenced local education initiatives (Surf Smart) and queried workload; CEO confirmed initial step is an information report, not consultation (27:13–31:51) (5.1). Planning Scheme & Development Controls Noosa Plan 2020 Amendments endorsed for 31 business days of public notification per Minister’s conditional approval; CEO authorised to refine content per advice (8.3 Item 7.1). Multiple MCU changes approved, balancing minor flexibility with retention of key conditions (e.g., Bunnings trade/hardware mix) to protect intended land-use outcomes (8.1 Items 5.1–5.4). Community Engagement Program Council highlighted extensive recent engagements (livability survey; foreshore; heritage; DMP) and “close-the-loop” commitments; will prioritise where community influence is meaningful to avoid fatigue (01:06:37–01:16:10) (9.2). Upcoming: DMP Phase 2 and River Plan consultation dependent on Council decisions, scheduling capacity, and potential budget (01:27:09–01:29:41) (9.2). Housing & Community Assets Community housing delivery advanced via land disposal to Coast2Bay under statutory exemption; CEO empowered to procure remediation/subdivision works and execute sale at market value under HOA conditions (8.3 Item 7.2). Brian Stockwell linked actions to prior Housing Strategy consultation priorities and concurrent planning scheme amendments (01:31:23–01:34:30) (8.3; 7.1–7.2). Infrastructure Recovery Upper Pinbarren Creek Rd landslides remediation (CN00319B) awarded; noted as among final 2022 flood recovery projects, enhancing slope stability for residents (01:41:51–01:42:27) (10.1).
Official Meeting Minutes
MINUTES Ordinary Meeting Thursday, 16 May 2024 5:00 PM Council Chambers, 9 Pelican Street, Tewantin Crs Frank Wilkie (Chair), Karen Finzel, Amelia Lorentson, Jessica Phillips, Brian Stockwell, Tom Wegener, Nicola Wilson “Noosa Shire – different by nature” ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 16 MAY 2024 1. ATTENDANCE & APOLOGIES COUNCILLORS Cr Frank Wilkie (Chair) Cr Karen Finzel Cr Amelia Lorentson Cr Jessica Phillips Cr Brian Stockwell Cr Tom Wegener Cr Nicola Wilson EXECUTIVE Acting Chief Executive Officer Larry Sengstock Director Community Services Kerri Contini Director Corporate Services Trent Grauf Director Strategy and Environment Kim Rawlings Acting Director Infrastructure Services Shaun Walsh Director Development & Regulation Richard MacGillivray APOLOGIES Nil. 2. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES Council Resolution Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Brian Stockwell The Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting held on 18 April 2024 be received and confirmed. Carried unanimously. 3. MAYORAL MINUTES 1. HOUSING AVAILABILITY AND AFFORDABILITY (PLANNING AND OTHER LEGISLATION AMENDMENT) ACT 2023 (HAAPOLA) AND CONSEQUENTIAL AMENDMENTS Council Resolution Moved: Cr Frank Wilkie That Council note the State Government has responded to the current housing challenge through the recently passed HAAPOLA Bill. However, the consequential amendments being proposed to the supporting Regulations, Ministerial Guidelines and Development Assessment Rules, have potential to circumvent and undermine Council’s good planning through its planning scheme that could result in unacceptable development outcomes for the Noosa Community. The HAAPOLA supporting material is currently on public consultation and it is recommended that Council make a formal submission raising particular concerns on the new State Facilitated Development (SDF) process, specifically: ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 16 MAY 2024 The SDF process bypasses local government’s statutory role to assess and decide development applications against planning schemes for declared SFD proposals; Provides only a minimal (15%) affordable housing requirement with the breadth of eligible development being broadly defined; The process does not clearly outline how affordable housing approved under SFD will be maintained in perpetuity; provides limited opportunity for the public to make submissions on development proposals which have no appeal rights; may result in inconsistent development outcomes in inappropriate locations where amenity may be comprised, and building height and scale of development limits may be exceeded; and may severely impact areas which have previously received protection under environmental overlays. Carried unanimously. 4. PETITIONS Nil. 5. NOTIFIED MOTIONS 5.1. SHARK CONTROL Motion Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips 5.1 SHARK CONTROL That Council requests the Chief Executive Officer to prepare a report for an upcoming Council Meeting addressing the following key issues: 1. Role and Policy Decision: The report should clearly outline the Council’s role and policy position on the State government’s Shark control program, the use of shark nets and drumlines, including any ongoing and future trials. 2. Advocacy and Support to the State: The Council recognises the importance of advocating for and supporting matters that are significant to our community. The Chief Executive Officer is requested to identify and articulate these matters in the report. This may include, but is not limited to the following: Continued advances in reporting: In its role as an advocate, Council supports the importance of transparent reporting from the State government regarding the effectiveness of shark nets and drumlines noting the annual catch data is provided on the State government website. It urges the consideration of further improvements to data reporting including which side of the nets marine species are caught on, to evaluate the shark control program’s efficacy and therefore minimise impacts on non-target species, and GIS mapping with interactive maps to improve clarity and provide a more comprehensive understanding of the data. ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 16 MAY 2024 Investigation of temporary net relocation during specific periods: Council requests the State government to provide advice and explore the feasibility of temporarily relocating shark nets at Laguna Bay to a location that may mitigate the risk of by-catch and/or whale issues during the upcoming whale migration period. It is noted that DAFs Marine Animal Release Teams have just completed their annual training and whale alarms will be going on the nets during the next changeover. Continuous Evaluation of Technological Advancements: The Council advocates for the State government to continually evaluate the latest technological advancements in shark protection devices. The report should outline other possible recommendations on new technologies for consideration by the State government such as the Shark Safe Barriers’ model of electronic current deterrence developed in South Africa in terms of its cost-effectiveness and success rate. Noosa Council extends an invitation to the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries (DAF) to present their findings on the Shark Control Program. This presentation could be a valuable addition to the Council report, providing comprehensive insights into the effectiveness and impact of the program. The DAF’s expertise and firsthand experience with the Shark Control Program would offer a unique perspective, potentially highlighting areas of success and identifying opportunities for improvement for consideration by the Councillors. Amendment Moved: Cr Frank Wilkie Seconded: Cr Brian Stockwell That: Item 1 be amended to read: "1. Role and Policy Decision: The report should clearly outline the Council’s role and recommend a policy position on the State government’s Shark control program, the use of shark nets and drumlines, including any ongoing and future trials." the following sentence be deleted: "Noosa Council extends an invitation to the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries (DAF) to present their findings on the Shark Control Program." and the following sentence be added after dot point 3: "It be agreed that advocacy to the State on any aspect of the Shark Control Program or resolution on a Council position on shark nets not occur until Noosa Councillors have had a presentation from the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries (DAF) on the Shark Control Program." Carried unanimously. Council Resolution Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That Council requests the Chief Executive Officer to prepare a report for an upcoming Council Meeting addressing the following key issues: 1. Role and Policy Decision: The report should clearly outline the Council’s role and recommend a policy position on the State government’s Shark control program, the use of shark nets and drumlines, including any ongoing and future trials. 2. Advocacy and Support to the State: The Council recognises the importance of advocating for and supporting matters that are significant to our community. The Chief Executive Officer is requested to identify and articulate these matters in the report. This may include, but is not limited to the following: ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 16 MAY 2024 Continued advances in reporting: In its role as an advocate, Council supports the importance of transparent reporting from the State government regarding the effectiveness of shark nets and drumlines noting the annual catch data is provided on the State government website. It urges the consideration of further improvements to data reporting including which side of the nets marine species are caught on, to evaluate the shark control program’s efficacy and therefore minimise impacts on non-target species, and GIS mapping with interactive maps to improve clarity and provide a more comprehensive understanding of the data. Investigation of temporary net relocation during specific periods: Council requests the State government to provide advice and explore the feasibility of temporarily relocating shark nets at Laguna Bay to a location that may mitigate the risk of by-catch and/or whale issues during the upcoming whale migration period. It is noted that DAFs Marine Animal Release Teams have just completed their annual training and whale alarms will be going on the nets during the next changeover. Continuous Evaluation of Technological Advancements: The Council advocates for the State government to continually evaluate the latest technological advancements in shark protection devices. The report should outline other possible recommendations on new technologies for consideration by the State government such as the Shark Safe Barriers’ model of electronic current deterrence developed in South Africa in terms of its costeffectiveness and success rate. It be agreed that advocacy to the State on any aspect of the Shark Control Program or resolution on a Council position on shark nets not occur until Noosa Councillors have had a presentation from the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries (DAF) on the Shark Control Program. This presentation could be a valuable addition to the Council report, providing comprehensive insights into the effectiveness and impact of the program. The DAF’s expertise and firsthand experience with the Shark Control Program would offer a unique perspective, potentially highlighting areas of success and identifying opportunities for improvement for consideration by the Councillors. Carried unanimously. 6. PRESENTATIONS Nil. 7. DEPUTATIONS 7.1. DEBRA WALZ TOPIC: COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT 11. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 16 MAY 2024 11.1. ANDREW MCCARTHY - DRAFT NOOSA RIVER CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT PLAN Question 1. With only two months to go, Mr Sengstock what actions have been undertaken, and/or what plans have the Council put in place to conduct a full community and stakeholder consultation on the Draft Noosa River Catchment Management Plan so that Council can report back in July 2024 with a final and fully costed NRCMP in line with October 2023 procedural motion? Response provided by Director Strategy & Environment, Kim Rawlings The Council election and caretaker occurs over a number of months, as previously advised we have been in a process of providing information and induction for our new Council on many many Council p[projects, services and initiatives. The River Plan being just one of these. In this context Council is currently receiving information and considering how best to move forward on the River Plan. Question 2. The inclusion of 'To Consider a Conservation Park' in the Draft Catchment Plan created a substantial public backlash. Has the Council contacted the relevant state authorities to see if they would approve a Conservation park over the Noosa River before splitting the community by adding It again? If not, why not? Response provided by Director Strategy & Environment, Kim Rawlings Yes, Council has been in contact with the Department of Environment and Science (DES). Quite rightly DES have not indicated support or not support, nor has Council asked them to indicate support or otherwise, as there is a process of investigation required to be undertaken before any indication on support or otherwise could occur. DES have been clear on the process required for establishment of a conservation park anywhere which would include undertaking a detailed feasibility study, including an assessment of current natural, cultural and socio-economic values of the river, engaging with First Nations people and undertaking public consultation prior to making any formal request to the Minister. Further steps would still then be required including the development a draft management agreement with the State Government. 11.2. DEBRA WALZ - FLUORIDE Question 1. Can Council provide an update regarding progress with SEQWater in relation to removing fluoride from Noosa Shire's drinking water, including a cost analysis and estimate timeframe on the impact on Council's budget over the period of time to transition to fluoride free water? Response provided by Director Development & Regulation, Richard MacGillivray It’s important to highlight Noosa Council does not manage the treatment and distribution of potable water in Noosa. Treatment is undertaken by Seqwater and distribution by UnityWater. As the operators of the fluoride dosing process, it is appropriate for Seqwater to provide advice on these matters. The question received by Council from Ms Walz on 5 December 2023 was forwarded to Seqwater for advice on 7 December 2023. I can advise a response was finally received from Seqwater in April this year. In their response Seqwater confirm that the ‘Fluoridation of the water supply is a public health measure administered by the Queensland Government’. ‘Seqwater monitors fluoride concentrations in ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 16 MAY 2024 drinking water continuously and reports the result to Queensland Health regularly’. Their response also states that ‘to date, no Council that Seqwater supplies in South East Queensland has requested to cease fluoridation of potable water. Therefore, an economic cost analysis and works management timeframe is not available. Any such analysis would need to consider a range of factors given the Noosa Water Supply Zone is connected to the broader SEQ Water Grid. Noosa was connected to the grid in 2012 to bolster water security for the region, particularly in times of drought.’ Notwithstanding that no specific economic cost analysis has been provided by Seqwater, given the Noosa Water Supply is connected and receives water from the broader SEQ Water Grid, it is clear that the process would be complex and the cost to ratepayers to remove fluoride from the potable water supply would likely be significant. The matters raised in the petition received by Council is currently being reviewed and a response will be provided in due course. Question 2. What is the molecular form of the fluoride compound that is used in Noosa Shire's water, including the origin of this compound, and is this compound chemically pure? Response provided by Director Development & Regulation, Richard MacGillivray The chemical processes and materials employed in the fluoridation of water across SEQ are significantly outside the scope of Council's remit, and it is advised that this enquiry can be best addressed directly with the water supplier, Seqwater. 8. CONSIDERATION OF COMMITTEE REPORTS 8.1. PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE REPORT - 7 MAY 2024 ATTENDANCE & APOLOGIES COMMITTEE MEMBERS Cr Amelia Lorentson, Chair (via Microsoft Teams) Cr Brian Stockwell Cr Frank Wilkie Cr Tom Wegener NON COMMITTEE MEMBERS Nil EXECUTIVE Acting Chief Executive Officer Larry Sengstock Director Development & Regulation Richard MacGillivray Director Strategy & Environment Kim Rawlings APOLOGIES Nil. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 16 MAY 2024 5.1. MCU22/0154.01 – APPLICATION FOR A MINOR CHANGE TO A DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL FOR FOOD AND DRINK OUTLET, SHOPS AND OFFICES AT 214 DAVID LOW WAY, PEREGIAN BEACH That Council note the report by the Development Planner to the Planning & Environment Committee Meeting dated 7 May 2024 regarding Application No. MCU22/0154.01 to make a minor change to an existing approval for Food and Drink Outlet, Shops & Offices situated at 214 David Low Way Peregian Beach and: A. Agree to amend Condition 2, as outlined in Attachment 1. B. Note this report is prepared in accordance with Section 63(5) of the Planning Act 2016. 5.2. 132005.638.03 - OTHER CHANGE TO AN EXISTING APPROVAL FOR MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE – EXPANSION OF SPECIAL PURPOSE (WASTE DISPOSAL AND RECYCLING FACILITY) & ONGOING CLEARING PURPOSES AT 561 EUMUNDI NOOSA ROAD, DOONAN That Council note the report by the Development Planner to the Planning & Environment Committee Meeting dated 7 May 2024 regarding Application No. 132005.638.03 for Representations to the Other Change approval to an existing development permit for Material Change of Use – Waste Disposal & Recycling Facility and Ongoing Clearing Purposes, situated at Noosa Landfill at 561 Eumundi Noosa Rd Doonan Qld 4562 and: A. Agree to amend conditions 40 and 43, as outlined in Attachment 1; and B. Note this report is prepared in accordance with Section 63(5) of the Planning Act 2016. 5.3. MCU21/0104.01 APPLICATION FOR A MINOR CHANGE TO A DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL FOR A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE OF PREMISES (UNDEFINED USE – MOTORCYCLE / SCOOTER SALES & REPAIR) – 16 RENE ST, NOOSAVILLE That Council note the report by the Senior Development Planner to the Planning & Environment Committee Meeting dated 7 May 2024 regarding Application No. MCU21/0104.01 to make a minor change to an existing approval for a Material Change of Use of Premises (Undefined Use – Motorcycle/Scooter Sales & Repair) situated at 16 Rene St, Noosaville and: A. Approve the change. B. Amend conditions 2, 5, 7, 8 and 10 as outlined in Attachment 1. C. Note the report is provided in accordance with Section 63(5) of the Planning Act 2016. 5.4. MCU22/0051 REPRESENTATIONS TO DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL FOR MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE - HARDWARE & TRADE SUPPLIES AT 178 EUMUNDI NOOSA ROAD, NOOSAVILLE That Council note the report by the Coordinator Planning to the Planning & Environment Committee Meeting dated 7 May 2024 regarding representations made in relation to Development Approval MCU22/0051 for Hardware and Trade Supplies situated at 178 Eumundi Noosa Rd Noosaville and: A. Agree to amend conditions 3, 7, 13,15, 20 and 21 as outlined in Attachment 1; B. Delete conditions 39 & 40; C. Refuse the representations made to conditions 5 for the following reasons: Condition 5 The condition is a reasonable requirement given the application was made over 178 Eumundi Noosa Road which includes the existing Bunnings Warehouse. The retention of a significant hardware component and trade sales area within the Bunnings Warehouse is an important consideration in the assessment of the ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 16 MAY 2024 proposed trade supplies store and the original Bunnings Warehouse. D. Note the report is provided in accordance with Section 63(5) of the Planning Act 2016. Council Resolution Moved: Cr Tom Wegener Seconded: Cr Amelia Lorentson That the report of the Planning and Environment Committee meeting dated 7 May 2023 be received and the recommendations therein be adopted. Carried unanimously. 8.2. SERVICES & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE REPORT - 7 MAY 2024 ATTENDANCE & APOLOGIES COMMITTEE MEMBERS Cr Karen Finzel, Chair Cr Jessica Phillips Cr Frank Wilkie Cr Nicola Wilson NON COMMITTEE MEMBERS Cr Amelia Lorentson Cr Tom Wegener EXECUTIVE Acting Chief Executive Officer Larry Sengstock Director Community Services Kerri Contini Acting Director Infrastructure Services Shaun Walsh (via Microsoft Teams) APOLOGIES Nil COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL 6.1. CAPITAL PROGRAM 2023/24 DELIVERY STATUS That Council note the report by the Infrastructure Planning Officer to the Services & Organisation Committee Meeting 7 May 2024 providing an update on the delivery of the 2023/24 Capital Program as at 31 March 2024. Council Resolution Moved: Cr Karen Finzel Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That the report of the Services & Organisation Committee meeting dated 7 May 2024 be received and the recommendations therein be adopted. Carried unanimously. ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 16 MAY 2024 8.3. GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING REPORT - 13 MAY 2024 ATTENDANCE & APOLOGIES COMMITTEE MEMBERS Cr Brian Stockwell (Chair) Cr Karen Finzel Cr Amelia Lorentson Cr Jessica Phillips Cr Tom Wegener Cr Frank Wilkie Cr Nicola Wilson EXECUTIVE Acting Chief Executive Officer Larry Sengstock Director Corporate Services Trent Grauf Director Strategy and Environment Kim Rawlings Director Development & Regulation Richard MacGillivray APOLOGIES Nil. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL 6.1. OPERATIONAL PLAN 2023-24 Q3 QUARTERLY REPORTING That Council note the report by the Chief Executive Officer (Acting) to the General Committee dated 13 May 2024 regarding the 2023-24 Operational Plan and: A. Note the progress report for Q3 2023-24 Operational Plan to 31 March 2024 provided as Attachment 1; B. Note the comments on the progress of all initiatives identified provided as Attachment 2; and C. Note the status of Council's Key Performance Indicators as provided as Attachment 3. 6.2. FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE REPORT – APRIL 2024 That Council note the report by the Manager Financial Services (Acting) to the General Committee Meeting dated 13 May 2024 outlining April 2024 year to date financial performance against budget, including changes to the financial performance report with the inclusion of key financial sustainability indicators. 6.3. PLANNING APPLICATIONS DECIDED BY DELEGATED AUTHORITY - JANUARY, FEBRUARY, MARCH & APRIL 2024 In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009, Cr Finzel provided the following declaration to the meeting of a declarable conflict of interest in this matter: I, Cr Finzel, inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter in relation to applications MCU21/0228.01 & OPW21/0364.014 (Combined with MCU21/0228.01) by Altum Property Group which are Items 7 & 22 in the Delegated Authority report. Leigh McCready who is associated with the applicant to the best of my knowledge, was involved in a volunteer capacity for my 2020 election campaign with Future Noosa, which is no longer an entity. As a result of my conflict of interest I will now leave the meeting room while the matter is considered and voted on. Cr Finzel left the meeting. ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 16 MAY 2024 In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009, Cr Lorentson provided the following declaration to the meeting of a declarable conflict of interest in this matter: I, Cr Lorentson, inform the meeting that I have a declared conflict of interest in relation to the application OPW21/0353.02 by MC Bain which is Item 13 in the Delegated Authority report, due to my personal relationship with the applicant Mark Bain and the Bain Family who are family friends. We have attended social events together, and our children have attended school together. As a result of my conflict of interest I will now leave the meeting room while the matter is considered and voted on. Cr Lorentson left the meeting. Cr Stockwell informed the meeting that he had previously declared conflicts of interest in relation to applications made by Altum Property Group in the Planning Applications by Delegated Authority Reports. Cr Stockwell advised: During the last term I, Cr Stockwell, declared a conflict relating to Leigh McCready and the Altum property group relating to events in the lead up to the 2020 election. As this issue was prior to the relevant term, and as I am advised Leigh McCready no longer has an interest in the company it is not my intent to continue to make this declaration. Council Resolution Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener That Council note the report by the Development Assessment Manager to the General Committee Meeting 13 May 2024 regarding applications that have been decided by delegated authority as per Attachment 1. Carried unanimously. Crs Finzel and Lorentson returned to the meeting. 7.1. CONFIDENTIAL - NOT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE - ENDORSEMENT OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO NOOSA PLAN 2020 FOR THE PURPOSE OF PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMUNITY CONSULTATION That Council note the report by the Strategy and Sustainability Manager to the General Committee Meeting dated 13 May 2024 regarding proposed amendments to Noosa Plan 2020 and: A. Endorse the proposed amendments to Noosa Plan 2020 provided as tracked changes in Attachment 3 for the purpose of public notification and community consultation; B. Authorise the Chief Executive Officer to make additional changes to the proposed amendments to Noosa Plan 2020 contained in Attachment 3 as required by the Minister's conditional approval and Minister's certain advice recommendations outlined in this report; C. Authorise public notification and community consultation for a period of 31 business days and in accordance with the Community Engagement Plan as amended by the Minister's conditional approval; D. Following public notification bring forward a community consultation report for Council consideration; E. Make the proposed amendments publicly available on Council's website as of 31 May 2024, being the first day of public notification. ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 16 MAY 2024 7.2. CONFIDENTIAL - DISPOSAL OF LAND FOR COMMUNITY HOUSING That Council A. Note the report by the Senior Strategic Planner to the General Committee dated 13 May 2024 regarding the disposal of proposed Lot 1, 62 Lake Macdonald Drive to Coast2Bay Housing Group; B. Delegate to the CEO the power to perform the actions required to undertake the subdivision of the base parcel including: 1. tender for the remediation works; 2. negotiate, finalise and execute a contract for the remediation works for the sum generally outlined in the Report: 3. finalise the scope for subdivision works; 4. tender for the subdivision works; 5. enter to negotiate, finalise and execute a contract for the subdivision works for the sum generally outlined in the Report; and 6. finalise the subdivision works. C. Resolve that the exemption to dispose of a non-current asset other than by tender or auction contained in section 236(1)(b) of the Local Government Regulation applies to the disposal of proposed Lot 1. D. Approve to dispose of proposed Lot 1 of land under section 236 of the Local Government Regulation 2012 to Coast2Bay Housing Group subject to: 1. provisions outlined in the Heads of Agreement dated 4 April 2024; 2. purchase price being the market value outlined in the Report; and 3. other conditions which the CEO considers appropriate for the protection of Council's interests; E. Pursuant to section 257 of the Local Government Act 2009 (Qld), delegate to the Chief Executive Officer the power to negotiate, approve and pursuant to section 262 of the Local Government Act 2009 (Qld), enter into a contract on behalf of Noosa Shire Council for the disposal of proposed Lot 1 to Coast2Bay Housing Group on the conditions outlined above for the purpose of delivering the community housing outcomes. 7.3. CONFIDENTIAL - CN00619 – PROVISION OF STREET SWEEPING SERVICES That Council A. Note the report by the Maintenance Planning Coordinator regarding the provision of Street Sweeping Services to the General Committee dated 13 May 2024; B. Award both separable portions of Contract No. CN00619 Provision of Street Sweeping Services to Specialised Pavement Services Pty Ltd, for an initial term of up to two (2) years, commencing 1 July 2024 and expiring 30 June 2026, with an option to extend for three (3) further periods of up to twelve (12) months each. The option to extend will be at Council’s own discretion and subject to the Contractor’s ability to meet the requirements under the Contract; and C. Authorise the CEO to negotiate the final contract with Specialised Pavement Services Pty Ltd. Council Resolution Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Nicola Wilson That the report of the General Committee meeting dated 13 May 2024 be received and the recommendations therein be adopted except where dealt with by separate resolution. Carried unanimously. ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 16 MAY 2024 9. ORDINARY MEETING REPORTS 9.1. PROPOSED MEETING SCHEDULE - JULY TO DECEMBER 2024 Council Resolution Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Nicola Wilson That Council note the report by the Chief Executive Officer (Acting) to the Ordinary Meeting dated 16 May 2024 and approve the Council Meeting dates for the remainder of 2024 (July-December) as set out in Attachment 1 to the Report. Carried unanimously. 9.2. OVERVIEW OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT PROGRAM FOR 2024 Council Resolution Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Amelia Lorentson That Council note the report by the Chief Executive Officer to the Ordinary Meeting dated 16 May 2024 regarding Council's community engagement program for the remainder of 2024. Carried unanimously. 9.3. ADOPTION OF AMENDED CONSOLIDATED VERSION OF SUBORDINATE LOCAL LAW NO. 1 (ADMINISTRATION) 2015 TO RECTIFY FORMATTING ERROR Council Resolution Moved: Cr Tom Wegener Seconded: Cr Amelia Lorentson That Council adopt, pursuant to section 32 of the Queensland Local Government Act 2009, a Consolidated Version of Subordinate Local Law No. 1 (Administration) 2015 in the form in Attachment 1 to this Report, which rectifies the unintentional omission of section 3(c)(i) – (iv) of Schedule 10. Carried unanimously. 10. CONFIDENTIAL SESSION ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 16 MAY 2024 10.1. CONFIDENTIAL - CONTRACT NUMBER CN00319B - UPPER PINBARREN CREEK ROAD LANDSLIDES In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009, Cr Phillips provided the following declaration to the meeting of a declarable conflict of interest in this matter: I, Cr Phillips, inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter as I have become aware that the company my husband works for is associated with a company that tendered an application for confidential contract number CN00319B. However he has had no involvement in any construction of the tender. Although I have a declarable conflict of interest, I do not believe a reasonable person could have a perception of bias because I am not closely related to the applicant and they are not recommended for the tender. Therefore, I choose to remain in the meeting room. However, I will respect the decision of the meeting on whether I can remain and participate in the decision. Council Resolution Moved: Cr Stockwell Seconded: Cr Wilson That Council note the declarable conflict of interest by Cr Phillips and determine that Cr Phillips participates and votes on this matter because Council believes that a reasonable person would trust that the final decision is made in the public interest. Carried unanimously. Cr Phillips did not vote on the above motion. CLOSURE OF THE MEETING TO THE PUBLIC Council Resolution Moved: Cr Frank Wilkie Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That the meeting be closed to the public pursuant to section 254J(3)(g) of the Local Government Regulation 2012 for the purpose of discussing Item 10.1 Contract Number CN00319B - Upper Pinbarren Creed Road Landslides. Carried unanimously. RE-OPENING OF THE MEETING TO THE PUBLIC Council Resolution Moved: Cr Frank Wilkie Seconded: Cr Karen Finzel That the meeting be re-opened to the public. Carried unanimously. ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 16 MAY 2024 Council Resolution Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener That Council note the report by the Disaster Reconstruction Coordinator to the Ordinary Meeting dated 16 May 2024 and: 1. Award Contract No. CN00319B for Landslide Remedial Works - Upper Pinbarren Creek Road to Hazell Bros Group Pty Ltd; 2. Delegate to the Chief Executive Officer the power to negotiate, finalise, execute and do all things necessary to administer the Contract on behalf of Council; and 3. Delegate to the Chief Executive Officer the power to amend the contract up to 11.5% of the total contract value. Carried unanimously. 12. NEXT MEETING The next Ordinary Meeting will be held at hinterland venue on Thursday 20 June 2024 at 5.00pm. 13. MEETING CLOSURE The meeting closed at 07:08 PM
Meeting Transcript
Frank Wilkie 00:00.180
I'd like to acknowledge that we're meeting on the traditional lands of the Kabi Kabi People and I pay my respects to elders past, present and emerging. Note that all councils are in attendance. Item 2 is the confirmation of the Minutes. May I have a mover and a seconder for the Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting held on the 18th of April. Happy to move, thank you. Moved by Councillor Lorentson and seconded by Councillor Stockwell. Thank you. All in favour? That's carried unanimously. I have a Mayoral minute. I hereby give notice of my intention to move the following motion of the Ordinary Meeting on Thursday 16 May. It's to do with the housing availability and affordability planning and other legislation amendment act and consequential amendments. Motion reads the motion reads that Council note the State government has responded to the current housing challenge through the recently passed bill. However, the consequential amendments being proposed to the supporting regulations, ministerial guidelines and development assessment rules have potential to circumvent and council's good planning through its planning scheme. It could result in unacceptable development outcomes for the Noosa community. The bill's supporting material is currently on public consultation and it is recommended that Council make a formal submission raising particular concerns on new state-facilitated development process, specifically that the State-facilitated development process bypasses local government's role to assess and decide development applications against planning schemes for these declared proposals. It provides only a minimal 15% affordable housing requirement with the breadth of eligible development broadly defined. The process does not clearly outline how affordable housing approved under this process will be maintained in perpetuity. It provides limited opportunity to the public to make submissions on development proposals which public. It may result in inconsistent development outcomes in inappropriate locations where amenity may be compromised, building height and scale development limits may be exceeded and may severely impact areas which have previously received. Protection under environmental outlays. I can just speak further on this. The proposed amendments will provide a new development assessment process where a development application will be assessed by the State government rather than the local government. To bypass Noosa bypass Noosa there's a Council, development proposals must include affordable an housing component equal to at least 15% of all promise. Because the applications do not need to comply with the Noosa planning scheme there is potentially no limit to the height or size of the developments that could occur on any lot deemed to have suitable infrastructure to support them. This could mean multi-storey units of unspecified height and low density residential neighbourhoods. There are also reduced time frames for approvals and limited feedback opportunity for residents who may be affected. It's important to acknowledge Noosa Council has a strong and proud history of upholding Noosa planning schemes, which have been enshrined and reinforced through numerous upheld Planning & Environment Court decisions. This persistent and dedicated approach to local government planning has made Noosa of the community and destination it is today that our residents and visitors love. This Council is also very aware and supportive of achieving greater housing outcomes for our community as addressed in council's comprehensive housing plan. Strategy endorsed over two years ago. This strategy has a range of actions already underway to achieve these outcomes in a manner that aligns with community expectations. As highlighted above there are significant concerns that the State facilitated development process may threaten or undermine this approach and Noosa Council will be strongly seeking the State government to reconsider their approach to this process to address concerns raised above and importantly ensure the local planning instruments such as the Noosa Plan 2020 will be adhered to. Does anyone else wish to speak to the motion? Brian Stockwell 04:13.666
Yeah, I'll speak to the motion. I would read out the name of the piece of legislation we're talking to but it's far too complex. I suggest we rename it the Russ hinz memorial act because not since the Joe bielke Peterson era have we had a state government that has given the minister such sweeping powers over development. We know what happened in that era when minister had those powers. It was a recipe for really poor outcomes and a lot of other things that the FitzGerald inquiry exposed. I'm not suggesting this is in that case I do understand that this the reason for the act is bonafide a desire by the government to get more affordable and more social housing into the system as quick as possible it is unfortunately based on what local government thinks incorrect interpretation of the constraints on development I think every local government in South East Queensland acknowledges there is ample land sitting in the ownership of developers what with approved development that has not proceeded so if we wanted to actually get more housing perhaps the first thing is to start looking at legislation to make it use it or lose it rather than sitting on it the other has changed, thing that I think has changed and this only is a subordinate legislation is they've got into the detail and the detail in my opinion has set the bar for this streamlined process far too low if this as when it was proposed in my mind was really focused on public housing on community housing co-ops of getting that stock going as quick as possible and I know there may be opportunities in our Shire and they've always had an ability to approve for emergency housing going straight through to the State they're all things that there's a reasonable trust in the system is a reputational but this simple benchmark of going into a estate development that has yet to establish the development control unit to assess these applications for a private development with just 15% of loosely defined affordable housing with no apparent restrictions on the length of time it has to stay affordable. So, it could be you get this approval and you sell the block within a very short period and there's no clear path within these regulations to make sure that 15% of affordable housing is maintained. To me it be easily can remedied by having a far more respectful approach to local government which does instead of saying may take consideration of the plan, will take consideration of the plan. It's more like respecting the intent of the zones at the moment which we believe is something that it may see proponents come up with things that are what we would consider inconsistent. So to me, all levels of government, should be focused on how we increase the supply. I think this particular regulation has been developed far too quickly and has probably been too far influenced by a fairly fundamentalist view that increasing supply will make more and we know that's not the case in our Shire. We know there's a range of other concepts that we put forward into our Housing Strategy and are contained in the draft amendments that later on in this agenda we will approve to go out to public consultation and I support the Mayor in this endeavour. Frank Wilkie 08:04.050
Any other Councillors wish to speak to the motion? I'll speak to the motion. Amelia Lorentson 08:09.128
So the housing availability and affordability bill. Proposes substantial changes. Mayor Wilkie you've addressed those quite eloquently and simply in the Mayoral minute. The changes that I want to sort of talk to include the potential adjustments to building heights and reduction in the assessment criteria, both which can have significant impact on Noosa. From my perspective, some of the draft bill's changes are simply an overreach. They exceed what is reasonable and certain changes appear to lack as Councillor Stockwell alluded to. Lack of sound planning. And from my perspective, what it lacks is effective or any collaboration with local government. And most importantly, it lacks inclusive participation. I'm still waiting from the State. Discussions on topics such as density, schools, road, infrastructure, and the preservation of our lifestyle. Effective planning and growth collaboration are not just important for preserving our cultural heritage, they're also critical in preserving our identity and lifestyle. Noosa Council recognises the housing crisis. In fact, last year in another Mayoral minute, we urged the State government to acknowledge the substantial strategic work that Noosa Council's been doing for over five years now to improve housing choice and affordability, including comprehensive housing needs analysis, monitoring the impact of short-term accommodation on permanent housing, adopting a Housing Strategy and preparing planning scheme amendments that specifically address the housing crisis. It appears that we, local governments, are shouldering the burden of the state's lack of action in providing social and affordable housing and that our voices are not being acknowledged. I'm encouraging the community to submit their feedback on the draft recommendation to the State and make our concerns heard. Noosa is eager to contribute the solution but it must be a collaborative effort not a combative one. State government must consider alternative solutions before overriding local government decisions or again more importantly before. Limiting, meaningful community participation. I'm happy to support the Mayoral minute. Frank Wilkie 10:59.658
Thank you Councillor Lorentson. Councillor Wegener. Tom Wegener 11:03.663
Yeah thank you, thank you Mayor Wilkie for bringing this up and new making this Mayoral minute. It just appears as though this new act deletes Noosa residents right to self-determination when it comes to enacting their own planning scheme. It's really quite ridiculous. So thank you, thank you Councillors for speaking up. Frank Wilkie 11:27.433
To the motion. Councillor Finzel please. Thank you. Karen Finzel 11:31.714
Thank you Mr. Mayor for bringing that to our attention this evening on behalf of all Councillors and our community. I support this motion. I'd like to just say firstly that knowledge sharing is an absolute prerequisite for the success of any collaborative. Effort and over many years we have worked collectively with our community, with our staff, with our local planning strategic planners and it is critical. That our community's voice is heard and together that we strengthen communities. Our identity and the values that we live by and stand on have been paramount in the identity of Noosa for many years and I support this motion. Barrow by the Mayor. Thank you. Frank Wilkie 12:17.063
Thank you. Any other discussion on the Mayoral minute? Thank you Councillors for your support. I would just like to stipulate that it does reflect our collective position on this. So that's the reason why it was brought forward. Thank you. I'll put it to the vote those in favour. That's unanimous. Are there any petitions Mr. CEO? No. We have one notified motion. Councillor Lorentson would you like to move your motion? Yes. Okay. Amelia Lorentson 12:55.072
Okay, Council request this Chief Executive Officer to prepare a report for the upcoming Council meeting addressing the following issues. One, clear policy decision. The report should clearly outline council's policy position on the use of shark drumlines including any ongoing and future trials. Two, advocacy to state. Advocacy and support to the State. Council recognises the importance of advocating for and supporting matters that are significant to our community. The CEO is requested to identify and articulate these matters in the report. This may include, but it is not limited to the following. Continued advances in reporting. In its role as an advocate, Council supports the importance of transparent reporting from the State government regarding effectiveness of sharp shark nets and drumlines, noting that the annual catch data is provided on the State government website. It urges the consideration of further improvements to data reporting, including which side of the nets marine species are caught on to evaluate shark control programs efficiency and therefore minimising impacts on non-target species, and GIS mapping with interactive maps to improve clarity and provide a more comprehensive understanding of the data. 2. Investigation of temporary net relocation during specific periods. Council requests that the State government to provide advice and explore the feasibility of temporarily relocating shark nets at Laguna Bay to a location that mitigates of bycatch and/or whale issues during the upcoming whale migration period. It's noted that DAF's marine animal release teams had just completed their annual training and whale alarms will be going on the nets during the next changeover. Three continuous evaluation. And technological advancements. Council advocates or the State government should continually evaluate the latest technological advancements in shark protection devices. The report should outline other possible recommendations on new technologies for. By the State government such as the shark state barriers. Safe barriers model of electronic current deterrence developed in south africa in terms of cost effectiveness and success rate. Noosa Council also extends an invitation to DAF to present their findings on the Shark Control Program. The presentation could be a valuable addition to the Council report. Providing comprehensive insights into the effectiveness and impact of the program. Deaf expertise and first-hand experience with the Shark Control Program. But also offer a unique perspective, potentially highlighting areas of success. And identifying opportunities for improvement. This collaboration could also help build stronger relationships between Noosa Council and DAF. Paving the way for future partnerships on environmental and wildlife management initiatives. Frank Wilkie 16:17.063
All right, can we have a seconder for the motion, please? So it I don't looks like Brian Stockwell 16:26.428
Yeah, I don't think he can. Amelia Lorentson 16:29.844
If she's moving something, she can move something. No, I'll stick to what's on the screen. The DAF's expertise and first-hand experience with the Shark Control Program would offer a unique perspective, potentially highlighting areas of success and identifying opportunities for improvement for consideration by the Councillors. Can we have a seconder for that, please? Me. Seconder, Councillor Jess Phillips. Councillor Lorentson. De longesville. Noosa Council is not responsible for managing shark nets and drumlines as it's a state government's responsibility. In September 2019, the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries published the Queensland Shark Control Program, review of alternative approaches which provides extensive data on current shark protection devices, their bycatch and potential future approaches. The Queensland Shark Control Program aims to reduce the risk of shark bites by using shark nets and drumlines across Queensland beaches. The program also conducts trials of new technology, records all the animals captured, and supports and conducts research to understand shark behaviour. Noosa Council has no policy regarding shark nets, drumlines and trials and no previous report on this matter has ever been presented to the Council. It's essential that we establish a clear policy position on the issue as opinion varies regarding the use of shark nets and drumlines. Some people prioritise human safety while others advocate for marine conservation. A clear policy can help balance these perspectives and manage community expectations. Noosa Council can play a significant role in advocating and supporting the Queensland Shark Control Program by establishing a policy position. This way Council can raise awareness about the importance of the program. Noosa Council can also advocate for its clear objectives to the State and actively engage in state-led trials and initiatives to drive the assessment and adoption of evidence-based predatory species mitigation controls and more importantly advocate to ensure that the program meets the needs and expectations of our community. Also the State Shark Control Program is expected to bring forward recommendations in June or July this year. These recommendations may include replacing the drumlines, lethal drumlines with smart drumlines and facing out shark mitigation programs. Having a policy position would allow Noosa Council to respond effectively to these recommendations. Previous responses from the State government have indicated that support of key stakeholders such as Noosa Council is vital in determining where the trials and transitions can occur. Given these factors, it would be beneficial for Noosa Council to have a clear policy position on shark nets and drumlines and this would allow them to effectively engage with the community, respond to state recommendations and contribute to the ongoing discussion about Shark Control measures. It's important to note that any policy should be based on scientific evidence, community input and a commitment to both public safety and environment. Sustainability. In my motion, and I won't read it out, but I also reference how the motions aligned with our Environment Strategy and good work of the Noosa Biosphere Reserve Foundation in implementing several of these positive shark control measures and I also summarise the shark control programs and they're great work in this space so the program's been began in 2020 and he's just a to be concluded in 2025 with a review coming up in June and that the recommendations will inform future shark management decisions from Queensland including a new plan that's proposed for 2025 and 2026 so I'll leave that reading to you there's some great graphs maps and references but I will add that in preparing this report I've consulted with a lot of community groups ocean users and non-ocean users environmentalists to business groups and I think when we work together we come out we end up with really great outcomes and the I've got from feedback that the shark the Oceans For All group surfrider, Noosa surfing community alliance, Noosa Heads Surf Lifesaving Club, Noosa Biosphere Reserve, the Noosa World Surfing Reserve, Noosa Boardriders club, the Noosa Malibu Club, Hastings Street Association, Tourism Noosa, beach permit holders and surf schools that everyone is in agreeance that we need to have a clear policy position and also understand the roles and responsibilities of Council. And state and the where we can drive assessment and that is in actively looking for alternative mitigation measures. SHARPNEC's SHARPNET's six decades surely there's got to be something better and more effective for protection of beachgoers and also to minimise harm for marine species. Thank you Councillors. Frank Wilkie 22:28.132
I'd like to move an amendment under item 1 be amended to read recommended to the role and policy position of the report should clearly outline the council's role and recommend the policy position on state government's Shark Control Program. Of shark nets and drumlines, including any ongoing future trials. And in the last paragraph, it will read: it would be agreed that advocacy to the State on any aspect of the Shark Control Program or resolution on a Council position on SHARPNET's not occur until Noosa Councillors have had a presentation from the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries on the Shark Control Program. May I have a seconder for that please? Have you in a second? Thank you. Look, I've run this by Councillor Lorentson and I understand she's quite comfortable with that. What I'm saying. It represents the intent of what the notified motion intends to do. With staff may recommend a policy position, it's up to Councillors to adopt the policy position and we may have some, I believe, room for some debate around that. And at the end, I think it was the intent, it just articulates and makes it plain. We won't be prescribing any position or undertaking any advocacy to the State until all new and returned Councillors have had a presentation from DAF on the latest technologies. Which I think was entirely consistent with what Councillor Lorentson intended and the notified with this motion and I commend her on any other Councillors wish to speak to the proposed amendments? I'll put it to the vote. Those in favour? That's unanimous. We can now go back to the original motion which has been slightly amended. Councillor Lorentson Lawrence and mayer, Councillors wish to speak to the motion? Jessica Phillips 24:39.410
I only have one little, I thought of lots of words for this but I only have one and to quote my six-year-old after a presentation from DAF, mum can you please take down the shark nets? Because our young people, you know, she was so concerned about all the things that we know and the research that's out there so I'm really, thank you Councillor Lorentson. For bringing this to Council and I look forward to seeing what happens next. Frank Wilkie 25:02.772
Thank you Councillor. Sorry for the time. Thank you Councillor. Tom Wegener 25:10.170
Councillor Wilkie, could you in a much shorter couple of sentences explain what you really want with this? Amelia Lorentson 25:20.142
What I really want Tom is basically an acknowledgement that Noosa Council can play significant role in helping state really sort out alternative mitigation measures so I'll give you years an example. Ago Noosa Council did not have a policy position. The drone surveillance trial was offered to all councils and not Noosa Council. Has. SLSQ had to, I think, approach our ex-CEO to ask permission. We almost missed out on a huge opportunity to partake in drone surveillance. And the drone surveillance is still. It's still happening at Noosa Main Beach and it's a really critical part, you know, part of the solution. So what I would like is Noosa Council to be actively putting their hand up for trials so that we can run concurrent trials alongside our NETs. So not removal of NETs but concurrent. Alongside our NETs. But my position is there's just got to be something better. But until we find something better, that is scientifically proven, that. Provides better protection than what we have, then the nets have to stay. And that's not our remit. So. So I think I've gone over the two sentences. It's understanding this I think I've gone over the two sentences. It's understanding is a state decision that Council can play a huge role in the space of advocacy and work with state. Tom Wegener 27:14.174
In my experience we have the clear. CERF smart program that came out of the Noosa national reserve foundation had the charbonnet symposium, and all sorts of people coming out of that came several programs including the CERF smart program surf which was is fantastic I really really appreciate that it's the program where you teach people very actively to look at the ocean to see what's happening in there before you jump in there birds diving is the water brown is the what are the currents doing it actually opens up beyond looking for sharks but looking for the conditions that could put you at risk including at risk of you know the shark so it in with and that, I was, I've been. Being that on the board of the Noosa Biosphere Reserve Foundation we were very active in that and the State was there a state program with it back and forth so I did my question is aren't we already in this case space do we need do to ask we need to ask the CEO to bring a report back when we already are in this space is that? We'll take that as a Frank Wilkie 28:24.591
Stitch Tom rather than another question yeah so any other Councillors wish to speak to the motion? Councilor Councillor Finzel question yes please Karen Finzel 28:36.919
Thank you Councillor Lorentson for bringing that to the table tonight it is really important as we look at advancements in technology and doing things better and collaborating for better outcomes for all people the sector, including our community. Just have a question with regards to in your research putting this together did you identify any other coastal tourism towns along the east Coast of Australia or around the whole of Australia that are implementing trials. And what of success has that been and what uptake in their communities are people wanting to get engaged looking those alternatives? Amelia Lorentson 29:19.732
I think that question is probably left for department of fisheries agriculture and fisheries so the Shark Control program five-year program that looked at trials across Australia and it actually looked at eco barriers to drone surveillance to electronic barriers to shark lines and drumlines so part of the presentations with Department of Agriculture and Fisheries will be a summation of what has been trialled, what is effective and what's not effective. Thank you. Frank Wilkie 29:53.741
Councillors councillor's wish to speak to the motion? Tom Wegener 29:56.832
I'll close. No. I guess I'm still just confused. Do you have another question? Yes, maybe to the CEO. The is if we propose this gets voted in, will this put extra work on you and staff to pull yourself off of the very, very busy schedule we have in front of us? Obviously, we're going to be voting on our schedule of community consultation. And this is it appears this is a community consultation issue. Larry Sengstock 30:34.760
Mr. CEO, you want to venture an answer? Um, the intention is not to do consultation. The intention is to come back with a report based on what's happening now and what are the facts. That it can be considered by the, and we have done quite a bit of work already on this topic, but it's time to, if this notice of motion gets accepted, then it's time to bring some sort of information back for you to consider and then we take it from there. The next steps in terms of if that's enough information or whether there's further things, but I think a report or a presentation from DAP would be a big piece of that, just to understand exactly what is happening out there. So that's really, I think that's really the case is to further understand. We're being asked what is our position, this would help to provide information and background so that we can at least individually, if not all together, understand the current situation. Tom Wegener 31:36.309
Would we have to go up to public consultation your with a policy? Thank you. Larry Sengstock 31:40.748
Thank that's not the intention at this point, no. The intention is just to bring a report back, basically, understanding what the current situation is. Tom Wegener 31:51.847
Okay, so the question is to bring back a report. That's the notice, that's what this notice was. That's what we're asking for. Okay, but we're not asking for the final policy. That's a ways down the track. That's what we're asking for. Brian Stockwell 32:05.629
Okay, I'll have a bite at it just so I can say that I think, Councillor Wegener, what this does is seek to get staff to pull together a briefing, which we understand is underway, get a current state of play from the State, and then determine based on that whether this Council wants to have a position that it advises the State government it's purely a preparatory phase of saying, giving the opportunity for Councillors to say, "Well, this is a matter of public interest, and this Council believes this is the way ahead." Thank you. I just have a question. Karen Finzel 32:48.869
Yes, a question to the CEO Through the Chair. Just to clarify, when we get the presentation from DAF, would that also be to the staff, Noosa Council staff, as well as Councillors, or is it just to the Councillors? Larry Sengstock 33:06.212
We already have quite a good relationship with DAF, so our staff are getting reports on a regular basis, so that immediately would provide most of the report anyway, a great deal of the report. But I think having the more important but opportunity for Councillors, and there will be certain staff members involved in that as well, so that was an opportunity to have that question answered. Again, I must reiterate, this is a state issue. It's a state matter. Thank you. Frank Wilkie 33:46.807
I understand that, as said before, the staff have already prepared a report on this. Motion here will help better inform the final version of the report. We'll get a presentation from DAF. What we're asking for here is the start of the process for us to have an internal conversation about where we might want to land. Some Councillors may want to take the shark beds out immediately. Oh my six-year-old does. There are six-year-olds in the community who want to take the shark beds out immediately. Other Councillors may have different views. So it's the start of the process. This motion ensures that it will be well informed and can't predict where but I think it's timely that we have this discussion and arrive at a policy position if we can. Thank you, Councillor Lorentson. Amelia Lorentson 34:37.927
I'll close and I'll address a couple of things that Councillor Wegener said. Firstly, I have had quite a few conversations with board members from the Noosa Biosphere Reserve who've actually commended me on bringing this report to Council. Sandy Bolton, our member of parliament for nearly two years, has been pressing Council for a clear policy position on this. Her are ineffective efforts in advocacy unless she understands where this community sits on this issue. So for those reasons, and also I've been sitting in this space for two years, I was part of the Shark symposium program. Reference to workload, the environment staff have already started preparing a briefing note and in my report I actually referenced the Noosa Environment Strategy. We have an in-principle policy position already in play. Our is not Environment Strategy, there's nothing controversial about that. What we need is to be clear. We've been ducking the issue for two years since I've been asking for it. Two years, my gosh, it's a state issue, too controversial, let's just stay away from this. We need to lead the narrative. We need to be bold and courageous and we need to drive state. We need to drive them and push them in finding better solutions. You know, our beach goer population know, I patrol least the at Noosa Main Beach. Goer population has grown exponentially. So whether you care about marine life or not, safety of beach goers, if there is something than a net that doesn't reach the bottom of the ocean, that doesn't run across the entire beach, if there's something better there that's going to protect a swimmer or a mum or a dad or our kids or surfers, then I for one would love to put our hand up for a trial. So in conclusion I'll keep this brief. The use of shark nets and drumlines is a topic that divides our community. Some people believe that can protect us from shark attacks and others argue that there are better alternatives. Research suggests nets may be effective and some scientists believe that relying solely on them is a misguided approach. Therefore, it's crucial that we or state, explore other options that are based on current and most recent technology and data. Clear policy position will allow Council to work with and drive the State government towards implementing innovative solutions that balance public safety with the protection of marine ecosystems. Furthermore, it will enable Council to respond effectively to the recommendations of the Shark Control Program that are expected be published. To come to which account, which are expected to be published in a. Few months. Thank you. Councillor Wilson. We'll put it to the vote. Those in favour? Frank Wilkie 37:52.405
That is unanimous. That's carried. We have no presentations. We have one deputation from Debra Walz. Ms Walsh, would you like to come to the podium to present your deputation? Debra Walz 38:11.162
Thank you, Frank. Congratulations first on your successful election and re-election. On behalf of the community, I wish you all the best as you work to serve the Noosa community and make positive changes for the future. All worked exceptionally hard to impress us enough to put that number one next to your name. There is a community assumption now that you will be responsible and respectful to those of us who have elected you as you know, local councils are very relevant, so it is vital that Councillors take their work very seriously and their roles with the community and towards each other. Councillors in I know councils enter local councils with the best intent. Well, at least the majority do. There are 77 councils in Queensland who are elected to offer their time, energy, dedication, passion and belief in local Council to their local communities. Being a publicly elected person brings a host of complexity to a councillor's life. Whilst there are many benefits, it is often a thankless job and you cannot make everyone happy. As a Councillor there will always be someone who doesn't agree with you. Someone who will be willing to tell you that you're wrong and sometimes people who will express their displeasure with you. This is part and parcel of public life if you're a Councillor you signed up for it. So in the past we have seen a rise in frustrated members of the public feeling unheard, stifled, ignored or dismissed when they have engaged with Council and Councillors. Usually it is a the bureaucracy of Council that the public struggles with angst comes from being managed and not heard we've seen consultations tickle much of the community consultations as a tick box exercise that proved Council never intended to listen in the first place I'd like to speak on community engagement primarily because it has been emphasised by all of you as being a necessary element of being a member of the Council and this Council every one of the elected Councillors identified community consultation and engagement as being an essential component of a councillor's position by definition community engagement is a process it involves people working together to address issues and make positive changes in their shared environment it involves building relationships fostering dialogue and collaborating to create sustainable solutions that benefit the community as a whole I'm probably preaching to the converted here because I'm sure we are all on the same page or at least I hope so the question in the community is will our new Council find the desire to implement what they promised in their campaign policies have on record your promises now and policies. Now design is the time to put desire into action and make change from what has been the status quo pushing through past comfort patterns toward increased open public exchange and accountability in relation to community engagement this is what residents will be watching for is it time to review council's current community engagement policy while there are numerous ways to enter into community engagement including volunteerism advocacy public participation and decision making and community organising Noosa Council advertise the four main ways of engaging and these apply particularly to Council meetings. Petitioning Council number one. So this relates to ten or more people who primarily lobby the Council regarding a particular issue. We've had a few of these over the years and they've created some change in policy albeit they do take a big commitment by many people in the community to organise and coordinate so it's not an easy process. Number two: deputations. I've presented a few of these and in relation to timeframe follow-up and acknowledgement by Council I find fault. Once again, not an easy process considering the amount of research that goes into a deputation and the often lack of follow-through by Council. Presentation is basically presentations, and over time. A gift or an award by Council. This could not really be considered an engagement process. Number four, public question time. A way to raise genuine questions about a matter within the jurisdiction of Council. Residents are limited to which are responded to by Council staff with no immediate opportunity for any type of dialogue. This format of engagement provides an opportunity to connect with Council staff after Council meetings which has been my experience although sometimes with unsatisfactory outcomes. None of these engagement processes allows community members to speak directly to elected Council members with the opportunity for ongoing communication and issue discussion. Standing Orders for Council meetings 19th November 2020 version which I have observed over the past years it's not always been adhered to and wondering if the time has come for a review of this document. While considering review perhaps the 2018 Noosa Council social justice charter could be included. This document was originally developed in collaboration with members of the community round it would be useful to know if this community round table group still exists. Amongst other things this Charters purpose is to guide councils direction in forming partnerships with community. Would be credit to the community connect e-newsletter and Your Say Noosa for providing electronic online access to Council for community members to comment and have a say the noosa's Noosa's 2015 service social strategy is another guiding document although an ageing strategy but still maintains relevancy by outlining council's role which is to work in partnership with residents and local organisations the best interests of the community and explains how the community can assist Council by keeping Council informed about the needs and aspirations of residents. I'm sure the new councillors Councillors have researched these documents, particularly prior to and leading into the elections, the which may have contributed to community engagement being a recurring theme discussed by all candidates during this period. This takes me to the council's overriding community engagement document Council engagement policy August 2014 updated version 2023. I won't recite the whole or the entire document here but I would like to focus on what Council has identified as benefits of effective engagement. Council and the and community working together to address local issues and collectively achieving better outcomes. A higher level of community input into decisions made by Council. An improved level of community understanding about councils, processes and services. Increased awareness across Council of community views and concerns. Opportunities for Council to draw upon community expertise. The potential for time and cost savings due to better alignment between community needs and Council decisions. Increased social capital due to a greater trust and knowledge acquired while working collaboratively with the community. And lastly, stronger relationships between Councillors, Council officers. Residents, including stakeholder groups. You can see Council has many documents that support community engagement and there's more. However, this area got little mention in the 2022-23 annual report. In fact, it was very light on in relation to community engagement. In the report, there is a commitment by Council to keep the community informed of its projects, plans, initiatives and activities across the Shire. That's not exactly a game changer. Engagement. Council also recognises community engagement as a vital part of effective democracy and good governance. The community engagement policy Council adopted in March 2023 outlines the principles of engagement as being inclusive, transparent, appropriate, accountable, timely, well-resourced, informative and understanding our changing community. The Your Say portal seems to have success in identifying 22,000 visitors to that site but resulting in only 1,800 people participating and providing input into 86 Council projects. The Local Government Act 2009 current as at 1st of February 2024, outlines in chapter 2 local government principles that underpin this act. The local government principles are transparent and effective processes and decision making in the public interest and development and management of assets and infrastructure and delivery of effective services. Democratic representation, social conclusion inclusion and meaningful. Community engagement and good governance of and by local government and ethical and legal behaviour of Councillors, local government, employees and Councillor advisers. You'll recall I was involved in organising a couple of pre-election community meetings which some of you attended. These were well attended and feedback was that they were equally successful in terms of engagement and community issue identification. You'll agree I'm sure that community meetings to discuss local issues can be a valuable way to engage residents ensure their concerns are heard and addressed. There is a substantial amount of work involved in facilitating such a meeting including consideration of planning, preparation, ensuring accountability, measurable outcomes. Cultural awareness and protocols but it's well worth the effort because to acknowledge, address and Resolve community issues to create a more inclusive, responsive and sustainable community where residents concerns are heard and acted upon is something we would all agree is what we want to achieve. Council's policies obviously support this goal. Along with many issues and concerns community members expressed leading up to the election and during the campaigning and polling days, it was identified our community has a clear goal to be acknowledged and have their sense of ownership. Well-being respected it is therefore up to all of us to facilitate this to happen being an open and transparent Council I ask you should we have community forums? It's obvious Council meetings do not provide the opportunity to community to ask questions or comment generally and residents in general are reluctant for whatever reason, to pursue Councillors councillors with specific issues regular community forums may provide a conduit for ratepayers to raise concerns. Let me reassure you have a willing hopeful and engaging community out there with expectations that you can deliver what they need how do you find out what it is they need? Thank you for taking the time to listen to me and I have every faith in you and trust that the next four years will be productive and enjoyable for you all. Frank Wilkie 51:30.426
Thank you Debra. As we have a number of reports direct to the Ordinary Meeting tonight, including a confidential item for which we have to close the gallery, I would like to bring forward item 11. Is public question time. Otherwise we have to close the meeting and reopen the meeting to have the public question time. We have two submissions to public question time. Item 11.1 is Andrew McCarthy. Mr McCarthy is not here tonight, so if I could ask our Director Strategy and Environment, Kim Rawlings, to read his questions. Provide a response, please. Sure. Thank you. Kim Rawlings 52:10.202
Good evening, Mayor and Councillors. Question one is, with only two months to go, Mr Sengstock, what actions have been undertaken. Senstop, and all. What plans have the Council put in place to conduct a full community and stakeholder consultation on the draft Noosa River Catchment Management Plan so that Council can report back in July 2024 with a final and fully-costed plan in line with the October 2023 procedural motion? In terms of a response. The Council election and caretaker period occurs over a number of months. As previously advised, we have been in the process of providing information and induction for our new Council on many, Council projects, services and initiatives. I'm sure Councillors can attest to that. The river plan being just one of these. In this context, Councillors currently receiving information and considering how best to move forward on the river plan. The second question is the inclusion of to consider a conservation park in the draft catchment plan created a. Public backlash. Has the Council contacted the relevant state authorities to see if they would approve a conservation park over the Noosa River before splitting the community by adding it in again? If not, why not? In terms of a response. Yes, Council has been in contact with the Department of Environment and Science. Quite rightly, the Department of Environment and Science have not indicated support or not support, nor has Council asked them to indicate support. As there is a process of investigation required to be undertaken before any indication on support or otherwise could occur, the Department of Environment and Science have been clear on the process required for establishment of a conservation park anywhere, which would include undertaking a detailed feasibility study, including an assessment of current natural, cultural and socio-economic values of the river, engaging with First Nations people, and undertaking public consultation prior to making any formal request to the minister. Further steps would then still need to be required, including the development of a draft management agreement with the State government. Frank Wilkie 54:23.371
Thank you, Kim. We welcome back Debra Walz. Ms Walsh, we come up to the lectern to read your questions, which will be responded to by Director for development and regulation, Richard MacGillivray. Unidentified Speaker 54:38.381
Thank you very much. Ms Walsh and Richard. Kerri Contini 54:44.093
Just for the benefit of the new Councillors, this question relates to a public question to Council on the 5th of December last year, which had not been fully responded to. So Council committed to follow up on that. The so the question is. Can Council provide an update regarding progress with Seqwater in relation to removing fluoride from Noosa shire's drinking water, including a cost analysis and estimate timeframe on the impact of council's. Budget over the period of time to transition to fluoride-free water? Richard MacGillivray 55:26.360
Thank you Debra. It's important to highlight that Noosa Council does not manage the treatment and distribution of potable water in Noosa. The treatment is undertaken distribution. By Seqwater and distributed by Unitywater. As the operators of the fluoride dosing process, it is appropriate for Seqwater to provide advice on these matters. The questions received from Council from Ms. Walts on the. 5th of December 2023 was forwarded on to Seqwater for advice on the 7th of December 2023. I can advise that a response was finally received from Seqwater in April of this year. And their response, Seqwater confirmed that the fluoridation of water supply is a public health measure administered by the Queensland government. Seqwater monitors the fluoride concentrations in drinking water continuously and reports on the results to Queensland Health regulatory. Their response also states that to date no Council that Seqwater supplies in South East Queensland has requested to cease prorogation of potable water. Therefore, an economic cost analysis and works management timeframe is not available. As such analysis. Would need to consider a range of factors given the Noosa water supply zone is connected to the broader Seqwater Grid. Noosa was connected to the grid in 2012 to bolster water security for the region, particularly in times of drought. Notwithstanding that no specific economic cost analysis has been provided by Seqwater. A CQ order. Given the new the Noosa water supply is connected and receives water from the broader Seqwater Grid, it is clear that the process would be complex and the cost to ratepayers to remove fluoride from the potable water supply would matter is relatively simple. Likely be significant. The matter is raised in the petition received by Council is currently being reviewed and a response will be provided to you in due course. Kerri Contini 57:28.824
The second question is in relation to the say no to fluoride petition. Accepted and tabled at the Ordinary Meeting in December last year. The question is what is the molecular form of the fluoride compound that is used in the Noosa shires water including the origin of the compound and is this compound chemically pure. Richard MacGillivray 57:53.958
Great question. The chemical process and materials employed in the fluoridation of water across SEQ are significantly outside the scope of council's remit and therefore it's advised that this inquiry can be best addressed directly with the water supply Seqwater ACP what I would like to do I'm happy to reach out directly to seek your contact from Seqwater to assist you with this inquiry and any other similar inquiries you might have of a similar nature just to assist with getting some responses to your very technical questions so that. Debra Walz 58:25.584
Thank you, thank you Richard. Frank Wilkie 58:29.109
Thank you Debra, thank you Richard. That brings us to item 8, consideration of committee reports. That is items 5 these.1 is a are committee recommendations. Application for a minor change to a development approval for a food and drink outlet, Shops & Offices at 214 David Low Way, Peregian Beach. 5.2, other change to an existing approval for a Material Change of Use, expansion of special purpose waste disposal. Recycling facility and ongoing clearing purposes at 561 Eumundi Road. Doonan, application for a minor change to a development approval. For a Material Change of Use of premises, undefined use of motorcycles, scooter sales and repair of 16 Rene St, Noosaville. Noosaville item 5.4 ripple is another MCU. Representations to development approval, Material Change of Use, hardware and trade supplies at 178 Eumundi, Noosa Road, Noosaville and for those in the gallery, these were reports that went to the planning and committee and their recommendations were accepted so they've come to appear. Can I have a mover and a seconder for the recommendations to be adopted? I'll let you wegg. That's a move from Councillor Wegener, seconded by Councillor Lorentson. Anyone wish to speak to the.all in favour? Carried unanimously. Item 8.2 is the Services & Organisation Committee report. There was one item referred from there, which is the capital program 2023-24 delivery status. Can I have a mover and a seconder for the recommendations to be adopted, please? Moved by Councillor Finzel, seconded by Councillor Jess Phillips. All in favour? That's carried unanimously. You've got to be quick off the mark. General Committee report, General Committee recommendations, 6.1 operational plan, 2023 24, quarter, third quarter, reporting. 6.2 Financial Performance Report for the month of April. 6.3 planning applications decided by delegated authority, January, February, March and April 2024. Do we have any COIs for this, please? Thank you. Councillor Finzel. Karen Finzel 01:00:39.561
I, Councillor Finzel, inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in the matter in relation to applications MCU21/0228.01 and OPW21/0364.014. With combined with MCU21/0228.01 by Altum Property Group, which are items 7 and 22 in the delegated authority report. Leigh McCready, who is associated with the applicant to the best of my knowledge, was involved in a volunteer. Capacity for my 2020 election campaign with Future Noosa, which is no longer an entity. As a result of my conflict of interest, I will now leave the meeting room while the matter is considered and voted on. Amelia Lorentson 01:01:26.609
Thank you. Councillor Finzel. Frank Wilkie 01:01:30.797
Councillor Lorentson. Amelia Lorentson 01:01:30.797
I, Councillor Lorentson, have informed the meeting that I have a declared conflict of interest in relation to application. It's in OPW21/0353, O2 by Mark Bain, which is item three in the delegated authority report. Due to my personal relationship with the applicant mark Bain and the Bain family, who are family friends, we've attended social events together in our children, have attended school together. As a result of my conflict of interest, I will now leave the meeting room while the matter is considered and voted on. You, Frank Wilkie 01:02:03.991
Councillor Lorentson. Brian Stockwell 01:02:06.173
I'm going to repeat the undeclaration that I did at the General Committee Meeting, so it's on the Ordinary Meeting minutes, and that is that during the last term, I declared a conflict of interest relating to Leigh McCready and the Altum Property Group relating to events in the lead up to the 2020 election. As this issue was prior to the relevant term, and as I am advised, labour critting McCready longer no longer has an interest in the company. It is not my intent to continue to make this declaration. Frank Wilkie 01:02:36.133
Thank you, Councillor Stockwell. Can we have a move or a seconder for the committee recommendation? Brian Stockwell 01:02:42.681
Happy to move. Frank Wilkie 01:02:44.572
Second. By Councillor Wegener. All in favour? That's carried. Can we have Councillors Finzel and Lorentson back in the meeting room, please? Righto, 7.1 confidential, not for public release endorsement of proposed amendments to Noosa Plan 2020 for the purpose of public notification community consultation. 7.2 at the General Committee was another confidential item, disposal of land for community housing. 7.3 was another confidential item, which was the provision of street-sweeping services. Can I have a move and a second I have a for second the recommendations for the recommendations General Committee? For the general so moved. By Councillor Stockwell. Seconded by Councillor Nicola Wilson. All in favour? Carried unanimously. We have three reports direct to the Ordinary Meeting. 9.1 is the proposed meeting schedule, July to December 2024. CEO, can you give us a summary of this report, please? Certainly. Thank you. Larry Sengstock 01:04:01.376
At our first meeting, we were advised to adopt a meeting schedule, which we did for the first three months, based on our current or existing scheduled meetings, so our S&O PME General Committee and then our Ordinary Meeting. We did that with the intention of having further discussions around the idea of potentially looking at alternative ways to hold our meeting schedule and see if there was alternatives that maybe more efficient for us and conducive to what we need to do. We've had a couple of meetings around that. And still in a position where we feel that we just need to continue with the current schedule for a little bit longer. And during that period, assess and see whether it's still the right model to go with or whether there's a different model or-- adaptive model that might be more suitable. There is no decision on that, so what this paper does, we're following those discussions. What this paper does is bring a position back to Council, basically to say that we're going to continue with our existing form and for the next six months, so through to the end of the current calendar year. So we have our current normal schedule. The only change that we are looking to do is to hold our regular ordinary meetings that we have in here, instead of it being 5 o'clock, we're proposing to hold them at 10 o'clock during the day, which would be more supportive through our staff, because we have staff who have to stay late in the evenings. And because it's now recorded, we feel that if people want to be involved and watch the meeting, they can watch it online, or it's recorded and they can watch it at another time, so we feel that 10 o'clock in the morning is more efficient for us as an organisation, so I'm putting that to Council. Adopt the next six months with the order of meeting being obtained. Thank you. Frank Wilkie 01:06:08.912
Have a move on the motion. Councillor Lorentson, have a seconder please. Councillor Nicola Wilson. Councillor Lorentson would you like to speak to the motion? No, I'm happy to support the motion. Any other Councillors wish to speak? The motion goes in favour. That's carried unanimously. Thank you. Make 9.2 overview of community engagement. Program for CEO, summary see how can you give us some of the report latest Larry Sengstock 01:06:37.757
So I think we're going to have Caroline. Oh, Caroline. Are you going to speak to this? I think thank you. Have you speak to it. So Caroline is our responsible officer for our community consultation and engagement and we thought it was an opportunity to bring to you and to get an understanding and we've had various meetings about this but to bring it to you as to show the activities that we've undertaken over the last little while but also the activities that we've got coming forward and it's pretty obvious that we've got a lot on our plate we've got a lot of a lot of decisions that need to be taken in the next while so the consultation is a huge part of that. Carolyn if I can ask you to give us some of them. Caroline 01:07:34.694
Thank you, Through the Chair. So Noosa Council continues to design, plan and deliver an extensive range of community and stakeholder engagement across the Noosa Shire. This includes several major strategic projects that have benefited from community input and insights to inform decision-making together with ongoing targeted engagement and communications projects. So over the last term Council engaged the community on a range of key strategic projects including but not limited to the Waste Strategy 23 to 28, the Corporate Plan, the Housing Strategy, the liveability survey, eastern beaches management plan, Destination Management Plan phase one, Noosa Drive pathways concept designs, Noosaville Foreshore infrastructure master plan and concept for resilience phase one and the Noosa regional gallery future needs and options. This term of Council continues to finalise a significant schedule of engagement for 2024, including but not limited to the Destination Management Plan phase two, Amendment No. 2 to the Noosa Plan 2020, Noosaville Noosaville foreshore infrastructure master plan and concept designs for resilience phase two, and a Council decision on the next steps to take regarding Noosa River Catchment Management Plan. Due to the extensive program of ongoing community engagement and stakeholder communications across it's important that Council strategically conducts community engagement and communications in line with council's community engagement framework and policy. This will ensure that the community is engaged on matters where community interest, impact and influence will meaningfully inform decisions. In matters where community interest, impact and influence are limited, Council will focus on communications approaches to keep stakeholders and the community informed by clearly identifying the level of influence the community will have on a decision, and communicating this accordingly, Council may minimise engagement fatigue within the community. Council also continues to leverage valuable engagement data captured across key strategic projects to inform council's ongoing operational priorities. For example, the quality and extent of information gathered from community engagement in phase one of the Destination Management Plan continues to inform internal engagement and strategic directions such as partner management, event management and infrastructure planning considerations. On major strategic projects Council continues to support approaches to engagement that provide at least one or two opportunities for the community to engage. Where feasible Council also supports co-development opportunities with the local community for example the Pomona placemaking pilot project. In line with our community engagement framework Council will endeavour to close the loop with the community sharing what was heard from the community and how this has informed Council decision-making Frank Wilkie 01:10:51.061
Thank you, I'd like to inform you to make an answer to any questions you need to help happy I'm happy to move it. Second. By Councillor Lorentson. Councillor Stockwell is the speaker. Brian Stockwell 01:11:05.041
I do. So, Karen, thanks for the report. I think it's really important to put the breadth of both what we've done over the last term and what we plan to do in the coming months because we have actually got a very engaged community and it's very clear. That when we open up to the community that we get very high quality feedback and the feedback is fairly consistent on every major theme. Now it was, we just heard a suggestion that we don't of it's ticked the box and we didn't intend to listen. It's something that I vehemently disagree with. We would never get the level of response we've had in the last term if that was the case. So if you look at some of the liveability which it survey, which was a really key input into our budgeting process and our priorities. On that project alone, there was 1655 survey responses, which were statistically relevant in each local area that we broke it up onto. And we saw in on to, the report that listen to listed some other ones, like the eastern beaches foreshore reserve management plan. Over 800 people were engaged in that process, and it resulted in 204 surveys and 93 submissions. Our heritage review, where the heritage staff went out in six different locations and had councils in those locations, engaged 200 people face-to results in 1,200 nominations of heritage. We have the indoor sport and recreation facilities, which had 490 people respond in terms of survey, and the waste planning plan over two phases, which is quite common for the big strategies. You go out and you do the draft and you get that feedback and revise the draft. 828. For the Destination Management Plan we talked about, we had 300 people attend face-to gatherings, and that resulted in 780 surveys and 60 submissions. We had the Noosaville had the Noosaville infrastructure master plan with 400 people attending the pop-ups and 333 surveys. And Noosa Drive, even specific ones, like the Noosa Drive concept plan, 331 submissions. On top of that we had things like the Noosa climate change response plan, the Noosa regional gallery discussion plan. Tree management on public land policy and Council budget priorities and the Waratah reserve. You know, for the Pomona placemaking in phase one in that small village or town.500 people responded in the first and got engaged in the first phase. So contrary to what we heard in just the ones that I found in a half an hour on Have Your Say, over 6,000 submissions and people involved. That's how engaged our community. And I'm not saying we can't improve our consultation. There's not a place for open community forums. We're planning to have the first one, which we traditionally do when we go out to the community. There was a, obviously the pandemic did restrict that, but the coffee cup consultation that we've done, and that is important, but they tend to focus in on the operational. Issues and council's role is around that strategic. And the quality of the process of engaging over the last term. When we had Carolyn who came in as our specialist in the area, and the consultants we engaged that had quite innovative approaches. People who might want to express themselves more creatively. So to me, we are on a really good path with community consultation. The schedule in front of us is quite a demanding one on our staff, perhaps the best thing in this report was the advice around setting up the ambassadors or a community of practice and building the capacity within our staff it's something that I've been advocating for since 2016 because of previously a lot of community engagement expertise and experience and to me that is going to be the key for this organisation it's going to be more effective if we have staff in the organisation not just working in the area but perhaps providing facilitation support across the organisation so they have a broader understanding and I really commend that initiative to build the capacity to engage in a meaningful way because it is a important element of what we do and it does drive our priorities and our investment. Amelia Lorentson 01:15:49.227
Speakers to the motion I question. First, I do want to acknowledge the great work that Council does in this space and Councillor Stockwell has just quoted some really great stats. That aside, we've just heard from a resident who has just asked whether there are better ways that Council can collaborate with residents to address local issues and matters that are important to them. Question to you Caroline. Have we ever actually gone out to community and residents and asked the question, do you feel heard? Yeah, do you feel heard through Caroline 01:16:33.893
Thank you Amelia you Councillor Amelia for your question. Kerri Contini 01:16:37.123
So I've been with Council for a little think a year and a half now. I'm pretty sure the liveability survey was one of those incidents where we might have gone out and asked people's broader view around how they feel around aspects of liveability. We tend to go out and ask when we're looking at operational strategic projects quite project specific to try and get people's views on matters where we can gather their feedback in a meaningful way with a clear scope so we can tell them what kind of level of influence they have on a decision and then we can show them how their feedback can help to influence decision making. So we do, we look at quite specific project examples in the operational work that we do to get community input to help enhance council's decision-making capabilities and we continue to find ways to improve that and we'll continue to do so to Councillor O 'Brien's point. There are other ways I understand Council is looking to engage more broadly with the community so we discussed and mentioned things like coffee chats in the community and other initiatives that are looking to have Council meetings the community to give greater access to the community and for Councillors to talk to members of the community as well and understand how they feel about certain matters in their locality and their Shire. Sorry to but we're still at end of that. Thank you, Through the Chair. Also our previous community satisfaction surveys do particularly ask questions around councils engagement with the community and communication with them. We haven't undertaken a Community Satisfaction Survey for a couple of years, but the next one that we do we will also include that as well. Frank Wilkie 01:18:30.834
Thank you. Any further questions or anyone speaking to motion? Councillor Lorentson. Amelia Lorentson 01:18:36.957
I have a question. Unlike previous years, there seems to be no community consultation scheduled in relation to the 2024-25 budget consultation. My question is will there be an opportunity for residents or business chambers to provide any feedback on our budget? Or draft banshees. Larry Sengstock 01:18:59.334
I'm happy to take that one. The decision on going up and doing consultation is difficult this year. We're still working through what that will look like but the fact that we've had, because this is an election year, the budget has been screened of the budget has to be squeezed into a much tighter time frame so we're still working on that and as you know we're in budget session number two on Monday with the councillors. We've done a whole lot of work so it's prepared now we need to work through it. It's a matter of how long that takes and then what opportunities we have. Obviously we need to have the budget completed and agreed by the agenda. So it's something that we still have to work through. It's not a compulsory thing in terms of legislation. It is something that we have done in the past. And we'll look to do what we can in the time frame that we have. Thank you. Jessica Phillips 01:19:56.864
Thank you. I also want to acknowledge all of the consultation Councillor the consultation and Councillor Stockwell listed how many has been done. So then I hear potentially too much or not enough consultation. So I guess my query is, it not effective consultation? So we talked about meaningful consultation, and then I guess to put it bluntly, are we, is the community getting consulted, but there's not the action that they're, we're not following through with it, I guess is my query. Larry Sengstock 01:20:31.830
Thank you. The difficulty is, consultation is such a broad thing, and to get to the whole community or to get to the community, and we do, as we've said, we do general consultation across the community and try to gauge in various ways, strategically, but then there are specific consultations when it comes to projects or programs. So to do it all, but you know, some of the feedback is, you can solve it too much, or there's too much, just, get on and do some, of these things that we've already, you've already asked us about. So it's, you know, it's a balance, it's a really difficult balance, and it's, you know, again, it's one of the most difficult things because of the, as a local government, we are so diverse in what we do, so, so many things are being consulted, so many things are being asked. It's difficult then, I'm sure. As community members, being able to, hear all of that and be part of all that consultation is not, possible anyway. So how, far? So we, do what we can. We have a whole lot of regular, you know, Caroline is an expert. She's a PhD expert in this area. And, we follow. In and we the guidelines, you know, the best practice guidelines. And that's the best we can do, to be honest. We follow that and do what we can. And I think we do a great job. At the post. Count, keep your hands up. Karen Finzel 01:21:56.780
Thank you, chief. You Through the Chair. Yes, thank you everyone for your contribution tonight. Just a question for the CEO Through the Chair. Given all the great expertise we have around the table, we've got facilitated training for community engagement and obviously robust processes. Through the Chair to the CEO, what is the process. What do we have in place when there's conflict that comes up quite substantially through the community when they feel that the engagement hasn't provided them with the outcomes that they were seeking and how do they go about having their voice. Heard. In a meaningful way? Larry Sengstock 01:22:40.226
Through the Chair, that's a difficult question because, again, not everyone's going to agree with the position and that's our job, is to consult and then it comes to the table as elected members to make decisions. So, again, not always are you going to get absolute agreement with everything that we do, but we try to do and do the best for the majority of the community that's at stake in a particular instance. There are opportunities and there are avenues if community members, residents are happy with a particular direction or a particular decision being taken and they're legislated and we're quite open, you know, let's come to Council and come to our front desk and we can give you the opportunity or the methodology to provide your feedback or complain or whatever they may be. It the other day. But, you know, in general it's, as we said, it's a very difficult thing. Not everyone's going to agree on everything and at times we need to take a stance and take a position based on the information and the best information we have. That's what consultation is all about, is getting that information, bringing it to the. Elected members and making decisions and moving forward and that's the model that we work with. Is an interesting does that answer your question, Councillor? Karen Finzel 01:23:56.799
Thank you. Callan. Frank Wilkie 01:24:00.965
Thank you, Carolyn, for the report. I can attest to the efficacy of Noosa Council's community engagement process. The Noosa planning schemes a prime example of that. You see around noosa's look and feel is based on the community's aspirations captured in the Noosa planning scheme. That's their aspirations put into practice. Through the corporate planning process. There are pop-ups and forums across the Shire. I attended almost all of them. It was a very robust process where everyone was heard, all the feedback was noted. Also, in the liveability survey, they told us very clearly what things were important to them, and that's reflected in the Corporate Plan. When it comes to consultation it's usually on strategies and policies which means make strategies help guide us make decisions in the best long-term interest of the Shire. So that's certain things like short-term personal private short-term interests may not always be reflected. In the outcomes they're always the people who want things that are contrary to the best long-term interests of the Shire but their feedback is always noted and recorded and I can guarantee they're listened to and their feedback is recorded but that doesn't when it comes to assessing the feedback around this table when we come to deciding what is in the best long-term interests of the Shire that the policy reflects that direction. Apart from the formal community engagement, Councillors in this Shire are Councillors show regularly receive large quantities of emails and phone calls from very interested residents, and we're always meeting with, having coffee with, talking to, taking phone calls from very interested residents. So there's that opportunity for formal engagement as well. All Councillors around this table are also committed to taking this meeting, the Ordinary Meeting, out to hinterland villages. Next month's Ordinary Meeting. Won't be in these chambers here, it will be out in Pomona at 5pm, but prior to that there will be consultation opportunities for planning scheme amendments which have been ratified tonight to go out for public consultation and also the feedback. From the Pomona placemaking scheme so you'll be able to see reflected back to you what you told us during that process. We want to make sure that we heard you correctly and we want to make sure that we proceed on the things that. Valuable to you and that we are correct in our assessment. And there's. Councillors will be there for. To also. To be engaged on any topic of interest to you on a personal level as well. So. Thank you for the report on community engagement. It is. A hallmark of Noosa Council. We pride ourselves on community engagement. We can always do it better. We're always open to areas of. To improving where we can. Okay, thank you. Karen Finzel 01:27:07.912
Just thank you. With regard to the table, the overview of the community engagement program for 2024, and I'm going to direct this question to the Mayor if that's okay. Applicable. There's some items on there. The Noosa River Catchment Management Plan and the Destination Management Plan phase two with TBD Council decision. For the benefit of those living. Listening at home in their lounge rooms or. They are this evening, can you give us a quick overview as to why that's left to a Council decision. Because we haven't. Frank Wilkie 01:27:40.294
We haven't decided yet when it's going to happen. We need to have. The council's. My understanding is the council's need to have a workshop on what's included in the destination management planning phase two before we can set a date. And there's a heavy consultation schedule already there, so we have to think very carefully about if we want to have meaningful consultation, where are we going to find the time to schedule this? And did you ask about the new certification? Um what news with the catchment plan as well there was a resolution made last year that required full and meaningful consultation on the new certification management plan. Again, the new councils are yet to be brought up to speed with that. This consultation on it was basically unplanned, unscheduled, and it's unbudgeted for. So we're going to have some serious discussions about that. But it may need to be a budget item about putting money aside to be able to conduct meaningful consultation on the Noosa River Plan. If that's the case, it's not likely to happen until after June 30. So there's a lot of variables about when the consultation for the Noosa River management plan is going to occur. As we heard in the answer to the question earlier, Councillors have got to be brought up to speed, especially the new Councillors, about where we're at with the Noosa River Plan, what it is, and why it's important. I hope that answers your question. Karen Finzel 01:29:03.245
Thank you. Amelia Lorentson 01:29:05.880
Through the Chair, just clarification, the procedural motion in October 2023 requested a final and fully costed roosa river catchment management plan. Following a review of the feedback by John, by July 2024, you mentioned June 2024, can I ask whether. July, sorry. July not June, yep. And can I just ask, my understanding is there will be a report of some sort coming to the next meeting which will indicate what we're doing in that space is that correct, through the CEO? Larry Sengstock 01:29:41.803
That's still up for discussion. So we've got a meeting tomorrow afternoon with all councils to further discuss this and that will help us to provide. Have a good direction and come back to you with how Amelia Lorentson 01:29:59.198
In terms of risk, which is, we're risking public trust, what are we doing in terms of mitigating potential risk if we don't deliver on a promise that we made in October 2023? Larry Sengstock 01:30:14.096
I necessarily can't necessarily answer that right now, Councillor, until we have our discussion as we sit in our answer to the question earlier. Answer to the question earlier was that we still are in the process of informing the Council and getting everybody up to speed so we can make decisions on how we address some of these big issues that we have in front of us and the fact that we've already got a number of other projects on the go in terms consultation with of consultation with the community engagement so we need to work out where that fits and what it actually physically looks like and that's part of our discussion and then we'll certainly bring that to the table. Amelia Lorentson 01:30:50.700
Last question to the CEO. So when a decision is ratified by Council as it was in October 2023. Is there a mandatory obligation? For Council to deliver upon that decision or not? Larry Sengstock 01:31:05.602
There's a. Israeel? An interesting question, Councillor. There's an obligation for us to address. That motion, which we fully intend to do. Frank Wilkie 01:31:21.426
Can we just close, Councillor Stockwell? Brian Stockwell 01:31:23.428
Yeah, we'll close. I think Councillor Phillips raised a really good point in what we should always ask. We are enough consulting or are we consulting enough or are we consulting too much? Way that we and are we responding in a way? And I think the best way to answer that is to look at today. And one of the consultations I didn't list or include the numbers in last term was the Housing Strategy and when we started that process I had to guess that most people thought that housing was a state government issue through the process we engaged a very knowledgeable reference group from industry from community from welfare organisations as well as staff we engaged and developed a set of priorities to improve the delivery of affordable social community housing in this Shire. A few minutes ago we just agreed to sell a block of land at Cooroy to a community housing co-op to develop excuse point of order. The previous motion in General Committee that was confidential but the report that says what we're doing the recommendation is not confidential okay keep going yeah we also just after that or before that just agreed to go out to community on a suite of planning scheme amendments which were foreshadowed in that Housing Strategy the community because had really clear desire and expectations to address what was a critical issue. Expectations to address what was a critical issue and that issue was not just expressed when we went out specifically on the Housing Strategy, when we went out to on the Corporate Plan and we had a thousand submissions the number one priority that they nominated was the environment which is pretty typical but when we did the qualitative analysis the number two most commonly identified issue raised in those submissions was housing and we've deliverability talked about the liveability survey and whether we've responded to that and if you look at the feedback we got from the community on the liveability survey and on the from memory of the Corporate Plan when asked what is the thing we need to improve the most? The answer was the same it's about our footpaths their pathways their trails and while we can't say what we did we know today we had gone for a big grant from the Federal government for just that infrastructure and received it so there is no doubt in my mind that this Council has been responsive to the input we've received from community consultation there is no doubt that the priorities for investment and action do reflect our community thank you Frank Wilkie 01:34:31.006
That's carried unanimously now move to 9.3 adoption of amended consolidated version of support local law number one administration 2015 to rectify a formatting error to see how can you Larry Sengstock 01:34:43.811
What this error is I'll read this so that I make sure I get it all correct on the 21st of October 2021 Council adopted a consolidated version of the subordinate local law number one administration 2015 sll1 in brackets at the to subordinate time amendments were made subordinate local law one relating to short stay accommodation on this date Council also adopted a consolidated version of the subordinate law local war one which incorporated these amendments and the included and the formatting area error it's which a is subsection of schedule 10 temporary advertising devices was missing the law states consolidated version of a Local Law must accurately combine a local government's local law as it was originally made with all the amendments made to the local law since the law was originally made importantly when Council adopts a consolidated version this is taken to be the local law the absence of evidence to the contrary. Upon review we have located the formatting error where a section of the temporary advertising devices was omitted we need to rectify we've also investigated whether there were any enforcement consequences due to this formatting error. Been advised by the development and regulation department that during the period of February 2022 to now, Council has not issued any infringements nor dealt with any complaints relating to this section of the law, resulting in a low risk outcome for Council. And finally, we don't specifically know how this occurred. It's a human error. However, to reduce future risks in this area, we will be updating the review process prior to any local law amendments going to the Council for adoption. Frank Wilkie 01:36:44.264
Sorry, someone can't care to move this? I have a question Through the Chair. We're informed of that now, so we need to move and check that before we have questions. I'm going to do it. To move, Councillor Wegener, seconded by Councillor Lorentson. Sorry, Councillor Wegener, would you wish to speak? No. Would you like to speak? Okay. Councillor Lorentson. Amelia Lorentson 01:37:04.048
Just one question. Were there any infringements issued during this period of omission? Larry Sengstock 01:37:11.097
No. That's my understanding is that did not happen. So that section wasn't utilised during that period. Frank Wilkie 01:37:18.766
Thank you. Any further questions? Put the voters in favour. That's carried. Next we have a confidential item. So we've got contract number CN00319B Upper Pinbarren Creek Road landslides. Councillor Phillips. Jessica Phillips 01:37:38.690
I would just like to declare I, Councillor Phillips, inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter as I have become aware that the company my husband works for is associated with a company that tendered an application for confidential contract number CN00319B. Has however he had no involvement in any construction of the tender and although I have a declarable conflict of interest I do not believe a reasonable person could have a perception of bias because I'm not closely related to the applicant and they are not recommended for the tender therefore I choose to remain in the meeting room however I respect the decision of the meeting and whether I can remain in this decision. Amelia Lorentson 01:38:26.239
Questions? Jess, your husband is an employee or does he have interests in the company? An employee. Thank you. Brian Stockwell 01:38:39.338
And just to follow up he's position not in an executive management role in that company Frank Wilkie 01:38:47.629
Project coordinator the question would he benefit financially the tender was to be awarded through discussions in confidential session to the company that he works for Jessica Phillips 01:39:08.024
Don't think I can answer that well he's on a salary so no it wouldn't matter Brian Stockwell 01:39:15.679
Okay so I'm happy to cancel I'm happy that Councillor Phillips participates and votes on this matter because Council believes that a reasonable person would trust the final decision is made in the public interest. Frank Wilkie 01:39:30.853
Do we have a seconder for that? Councillor Wilson, thank you. Would you like to speak to the motion? Brian Stockwell 01:39:38.880
I do so I think there's a range of considerations here but the fact is that being an employee and not benefiting directly either if the award of the contract was to or not to the company I think is the major consideration having no financial interest in the company. Is to me an ability, it gives us the ability to allow Councillor Phillips to stay in the room and the fact that she's declared it makes it public information. Frank Wilkie 01:40:12.984
I agree the important fact is that the potential conflict is to gain, it's on the level and it's important. I'll be supporting the motion. Anyone else wish to speak? If the motion goes in favour, that's carried unanimously. Okay, I didn't know that. This I know this is a confidential commercial and confidence matter I move that the meeting be closed to public a section 254J3G of the Local Government Regulation 2012 purpose of discussing item 10.1 confidential contract number CN00319B Upper Pinbarren Creek Road landslides. Can I have a seconder please? Yes you can. Councillor Jess Phillips. All in favour? That's unanimous. Thank you. Members of the public, thank you coming, for we'll leave you to close the meeting. I haven't closed the meeting yet, I was just going to shut the door. Thank you can go out and do this. Much. We're back home. Welcome back everyone. May I have a move for a seconder for the recommendation in the report? Brian Stockwell 01:41:52.427
I'm happy to move. I'll just speak to say that this particular tender appears from the map we've been given to be the second last of the recovery projects amongst a quite a large volume that were done post the floods in 2022 and it will provide stability for those. Residents who live in the Upper Pinbarren Creek Road. Frank Wilkie 01:42:26.244
Thank you Councillor Stockwell. We have the Councillors wish to speak to motion. All in favour? That's carried unanimously. Brings us to the end of the agenda. The next Ordinary Meeting will be at 5pm on Thursday 20th of June. We propose to hold this in Pomona. I declare the meeting closed at 7:07pm. Thank you everybody for attending. Related Noosa Council Meetings
← Browse all Noosa Shire Council meeting transcripts
