Ordinary Meeting - 19 June 2025
Date: Thursday, 19 June 2025 at 10:00AM
Location: Noosa Shire Council Chambers , 9 Pelican Street , Tewantin , QLD 4565 , Australia
Organiser: Noosa Shire Council
Duration: 04:57:40
Synopsis: Noosaville Foreshore Plan adopted: data-led widths, carpark totals, Council defends two appeals, Fees updated cutting NFP consent fee, Parking audit, Cup phaseout, Strong finances.
Meeting Attendees
Councillors
Frank Wilkie Karen Finzel Jessica Phillips Amelia Lorentson Brian Stockwell Tom Wegener Nicola Wilson Executive Officers
Chief Executive Officer Larry Sengstock Director Community Services Kerri Contini Acting Director Corporate Services Margaret Gatt Director Development & Regulation Richard MacGillivray Director Strategy And Environment Kim Rawlings Director Infrastructure Services Shaun Walsh Deputations
Katrina Bodycote Steven Bodycote Rod Mulder Ross Muller Neil Bale Anne Budd Ross Ward Jennifer Finlay Public Question Time
Brian O'Connor Debra Walz Pat Spicer Paul Noonan AI-Generated Meeting Insight
Key Decisions & Discussions Frank Wilkie: Noosaville Foreshore Infrastructure Master Plan adopted with amendments: revert Massouds Slipway/Ely Park to Nov 6, 2024 consultation design; quarterly transparency reporting; publish total carparks; stage designs with ongoing engagement; pathway widths to be set using monitoring data and relevant authority guidance (11.3.9; 02:50:30–03:06:26). Jessica Phillips: Secured amendment requiring data-led pathway width decisions guided by appropriate authority, after debate on accessibility, safety, and visual amenity (11.3.9; 02:50:30–03:05:27). Amelia Lorentson: Motion passed to scope an audit of all Council-owned accessible parking across Shire for budget consideration (10.1; 33:51–48:22). Amelia Lorentson: Motion passed to support an industry-led transition from single-use coffee cups with Plastic Free Noosa; Council to lead internally and receive cost report (10.2; 48:45–01:26:52). Jessica Phillips: Motion passed to waive dog registration fees for approved foster carers via a controlled approval system; estimated admin cost well under $10k (10.3; 01:27:36–01:38:52). Council: Will defend P&E Court Appeal D44/2025 (Food & Drink Outlet + Short-term Accommodation, 203–207 Gympie Tce, Noosaville) (11.1.1; 01:38:52). Council: Will defend P&E Court Appeal 1391/2025 (Function Facility, 658 Louis Bazzo Dr, Ringtail Creek); hours/noise conditions at issue (12.3; 03:43:43–03:50:57). Council: Approved revised lease renewal to Sunrise Dental Care (Shop 4, Sunrise Shops) for 5+5 years; applied tender exception s236(1)(c)(iii) LGR 2012 (11.2.1). Council: Adopted 2025–26 Fees & Charges (with corrections); deleted the not‑for‑profit “owner’s consent” $50 fee (page 8) after amendment; kept library meeting room fees (12.6; 04:12:24–04:55:05). Council: Approved ROPS Contract RP00440 (Environmental Services) to 16 suppliers with options to 2031 (12.1). Council: Executed new Partnership Agreement with Noosa Biosphere Reserve Foundation; requested constitution change to allow Council nominee to be Director or Observer (12.2; 03:25:51–03:41:27). Council: Extended Audit & Risk Committee independent member Ian Rushworth to 26 June 2028 (12.4). Finance: YTD May 2025 operating revenue +$2.2m, operating expenditure −$1.0m vs budget; forecast FY surplus; cash $111m; noted depreciation governance and asset capitalisation lag under control and audited by QAO (12.5; 03:54:01–04:07:14). Contentious / Transparency Matters Amelia Lorentson: Sought to retain all on‑street parking and current path width at boat ramp/Ely Park; lost 2–5 amid claims data lacking; later data-led width amendment from Phillips carried (11.3.9; 02:05:54–02:31:24; 02:50:30). Brian Stockwell: Warned against statements implying lack of research on path widths; cited extensive expert input and safety rationale (11.3.9; 02:23:08–02:24:11). Jessica Phillips: Moved to remove NFP $50 owner’s consent fee; carried unanimously, citing red‑tape burden on volunteers (12.6; 04:23:49–04:31:40). Jessica Phillips: Attempt to remove NFP library room hire fees failed 2–4; officers noted fairness to community-run halls and no‑show risks; revenue impact ~$10–12k (12.6; 04:33:11–04:53:18). Public Q&A: Kerri Contini clarified no secret 2032 Olympics Plan exists; only situational analysis and alignment with Elevate 2042; future engagement planned (8.1 Q2; 26:13–27:31). Public Q&A: On Noosaville Foreshore, Shaun Walsh defended 10-space repurpose near boat ramp for safer 3.5m path; 404 total spaces; 20‑year plan with future engagement (8.2 Q2; 29:26–30:20; 11.3.9). Legal / Risk Appeals posture: Council to defend two P&E Court appeals (Gympie Tce STA/Food & Drink; Ringtail Creek Function Facility), maintaining conditions on amenity, hours, and noise management (11.1.1; 12.3; 03:43:43–03:49:34). Statutory bases: Sunrise lease relied on LGR 2012 s236(1)(c)(iii); Fees & Charges adopted under LGA 2009 ss97, 98, 262(3)(c) (11.2.1; 12.6). Financial controls: QAO audits, IAS compliance, rolling revaluations, and depreciation estimation processes affirmed; asset capitalisation backlog being addressed; no material misstatements identified (12.5; 04:00:54–04:06:17). Funding risk: Lake Macdonald Dr remediation advancing via QTC loan while pursuing grants; tender process live so estimates undisclosed (8.3; 30:36–31:46). Master Plan risk: Data-led pathway widths and staged designs reduce exposure to challenge on accessibility and safety grounds; explicit carpark count disclosure improves transparency (11.3.9). Procurement probity: ROPS established via strategic procurement plan and probity plan; inclusion confers no guaranteed work (12.1; 03:12:11–03:16:33). Conflicts of Interest Jessica Phillips: Prescribed COI re Hastings St Association grant (sister‑in‑law on committee); left room and did not vote (11.3.2; 01:40:45–01:41:26). Tom Wegener: Prescribed COIs re Pomona Arts Inc. (committee member) for Equipment Grants and Alliance Agreements; left room, did not vote (11.3.5–11.3.6; 01:42:15–01:44:36). Nicola Wilson: Prescribed COIs re Noosa Arts Theatre (SVP) and Cooroy Chamber of Commerce (partner on exec); left room, did not vote (11.3.6–11.3.7; 01:43:35–01:46:06). Frank Wilkie: Declarable COI re Noosa Alive! (donations from a patron); left room; Deputy Mayor chaired (11.3.7; 01:46:06–01:48:27). Environmental Concerns & Community Infrastructure Public Deputations: Noosa Glades residents cited blocked waterway to river causing flooding, health risks (mosquitoes, E. coli), and maintenance lapses; seeking urgent remediation (7.3; 18:39–20:20). Public Deputations: Men’s Shed Pomona sought secure tenure and zoning change to Community Facilities to enable growth and funding; Council to meet promptly (7.2; 07:22–18:12). Public Deputations: Charles Bennett Park residents objected to noise/anti‑social impacts of basketball court and any added facilities; requested relocation/mitigation (7.1; 01:38–07:05). Council: Approved Environment & Climate Change grants: $23,832 (Env Projects) and $50,000 (Climate Response) (11.3.8). ZEN Inc.: Annual report noted; compliance with Funding Agreement confirmed (11.1.3). Short Term Accommodation / STA Council: Resolved to defend appeal D44/2025 concerning STA + Food & Drink Outlet at 203–207 Gympie Terrace (11.1.1; 01:38:52). Discussion: Officers confirmed submitters had right to join appeal; mediation updates are confidential and not routinely public (12.3; 03:47:19–03:49:34). Community Grants & Governance Council: Approved multiple 2025–26 Community Project Grants (Events/Programs/Infrastructure/Equipment) and Three‑Year Alliance and Signature Event grants, subject to budget (11.3.1–11.3.7). Process Integrity: Multiple COIs handled per Chapter 5B LGA 2009 with councillors leaving room; voting records clarify who abstained (11.3.2, 11.3.5–7). Audit & Risk: Committee composition reaffirmed; external member extended; cyber expertise noted (12.4; 03:51:13–03:53:36). Parks, Access & Mobility Kerri Contini: Hinterland Heritage Brand not in draft Cultural Plan 2025–30; future Heritage Plan may consider it (8.1 Q1; 24:13–25:49). Kim Rawlings: Charles Bennett Park likely district‑level; no upgrades planned; pedestrian refuge with Dianella Ct works; Coast2Bay still must meet open space standards on Lot 1 (8.4; 32:09–33:37). Shaun Walsh: New Noosaville amenities to include Changing Places facility; grant funded; local architect engaged (8.2 Q1; 28:17–29:07).
Official Meeting Minutes
MINUTES Ordinary Meeting Thursday, 19 June 2025 10:00 AM Council Chambers, 9 Pelican Street, Tewantin Cr Frank Wilkie (Chair), Karen Finzel, Amelia Lorentson, Jessica Phillips, Brian Stockwell, Tom Wegener, Nicola Wilson “Noosa Shire – different by nature” ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 19 JUNE 2025 1. DECLARATION OF OPENING The meeting was declared open at 10.01am 2. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY Noosa Council respectfully acknowledges the Traditional Custodians of the lands and waters of the Noosa area, the Kabi Kabi people, and pays respect to their Elders, past, present and emerging. 3. ATTENDANCE & APOLOGIES COUNCILLORS Cr Frank Wilkie (Chair) Cr Karen Finzel Cr Jessica Phillips Cr Amelia Lorentson Cr Brian Stockwell Cr Tom Wegener Cr Nicola Wilson EXECUTIVE Chief Executive Officer Larry Sengstock Director Community Services Kerri Contini Acting Director Corporate Services Margaret Gatt Director Development & Regulation Richard MacGillivray Director Strategy and Environment Kim Rawlings Director Infrastructure Services Shaun Walsh APOLOGIES Nil. 4. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES 4.1. ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES DATED 15 MAY 2025 Council Resolution Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Karen Finzel The Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting held on 15 May 2025 be received and confirmed. Carried. Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr For: Amelia Lorentson, Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 19 JUNE 2025 4.2. SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES DATED 21 MAY 2025 Council Resolution Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Brian Stockwell The Minutes of the Special Meeting held on dated 21 May 2025 be received and confirmed. Carried. Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr For: Amelia Lorentson, Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None 5. PETITIONS Nil. 6. PRESENTATIONS Nil. 7. DEPUTATIONS 7.1 Topic: Charles Bennett Park Applicant: Katrina Bodycote Speakers: Katrina Bodycote & Steven Bodycote 7.2 Topic: Tenure Issue - Men's Shed Pomona Applicant: Rod Mulder on behalf of Men's Shed Pomona Inc. Speakers: Rod Mulder, Ross Muller & Neil Bale 7.3 Topic: Noosa Glades - Drainage Concerns Applicant: Anne Budd, Ross Ward, Jennifer Finlay on behalf of the Residents of Noosa Glades Speakers: Anne Budd, Ross Ward, Jennifer Finlay ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 19 JUNE 2025 8. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME 8.1 Brian O'Connor QUESTION 1 Has Noosa Council developed a Hinterland Heritage Brand, as was a heritage action aspiration contained in the Noosa Council Cultural Strategy 2019-23 and, if not, will such an action be carried forward into the new cultural strategy now under development? Response provided by Kerri Contini, Director Community Services Thank-you Mr O‘Connor for your question and your ongoing interest in the Noosa Council Cultural Strategy 2019-23. The final report on the Cultural Strategy 2019-2023 was endorsed at the September 2024 Ordinary meeting. This report showed that at the end of 2023, over 92% of Plan actions were completed or underway. This was a major achievement for Council’s Arts & Culture team, our valued volunteers and the community groups that partner with Council to provide cultural experiences. Of the 69 Actions in the Plan, only 3 were not addressed, one of which was ‘Explore the potential of creating a Hinterland Heritage Brand’. The Cultural Plan was developed and adopted prior to Covid and spanned a period of significant change and challenge. Prior to Covid the concept of a hinterland heritage brand was proposed by stakeholders as a way of celebrating our heritage and using it to attract tourists beyond the coast and into hinterland areas. However, through Covid and beyond, hinterland tourism grew considerably on its own and the priority for hinterland communities is maintaining village character and lifestyle. Because of these changes a hinterland heritage brand has not been included in the draft Cultural Plan 2025-30. We are planning to develop a Noosa Heritage Plan over the next five years and if stakeholders are interested in a hinterland heritage brand then they could raise it as part of this project. QUESTION 2 Noosa Council papers indicate that an undisclosed 2032 Olympics Plan has been developed, with the intention of creating ‘legacy projects’ for the shire beyond the Games proper, so can the council indicate when it will be released and will ratepayers have an opportunity to provide input before it is adopted formally? Response provided by Kerri Contini, Director Community Services Thank-you Mr O’Connor for your question in relation to Noosa Council’s plans for the 2032 Olympics. Noosa Council has been actively preparing for the Brisbane 2032 Games over the past year, noting that we are not a host Local Government. Our focus as a starting point has included aligning where relevant with the Brisbane Elevate 2042 Legacy Plan, collaborating with SEQ Councils through the SEQIN2032 Working Group, and establishing connections with organising bodies. To be clear, a 2032 Olympics Plan has not been developed. A situational analysis has begun, focusing on facilities, demographics, tourism, transport, and waste infrastructure, while identifying potential legacy opportunities such as infrastructure improvements, strategic partnerships, sports development, and volunteering. Mayor Wilkie has also been involved in engaging with SEQ mayors regarding regional planning as well as learning from international Olympics experiences. Over the coming year Council will continue to work with key stakeholders in early planning to maximise community and regional benefits. ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 19 JUNE 2025 8.2 Debra Walz QUESTION 1 Although the proposed Noosaville Foreshore Infrastructure Master Plan articulates a largescale complex amenities facility near the Big Pelican, can these amenities be downsized and scaled back in complexity to include a more simple version of a toilet block to allow for maximum use of green space? Response provided by Shaun Walsh, Director Infrastructure Services Thankyou for your question and appreciate your support for an additional amenities block on the Noosaville Foreshore. A key component of the new amenities block is a changing places facility, which are specialised accessible toilets designed to meet the needs of individuals who cannot use standard accessible toilets independently. They provide sufficient space and equipment, such as hoists and changing benches to assist those with severe disabilities which requires more space than a standard amenities block. A facility of this calibre is very welcome by stakeholders using the Noosaville foreshore. Council has fortunately received grant funding to design and build the facility and has appointed a local architect to design a building of a high quality that befits the Noosaville Foreshore and the Noosa Design Principles. QUESTION 2 In relation to the Noosaville Foreshore Infrastructure Master Plan, what is the justification and evidence used by consultants to remove parking spaces and broaden the walking pathway near the boat ramp in Gympie Terrace? Response provided by Shaun Walsh, Director Infrastructure Services Thankyou for your question. Key feedback that has been received about the Noosaville Foreshore concerning both the need for retention of carparking spaces as well as the need for improved pathways to accommodate recreational use. To provide perspective there are currently 404 carparking spaces along the Noosaville Foreshore and 10 carparking spaces are proposed to be repurposed to a wider pathway around the boat ramp. The wider pathway is recommended to provide a safer width to better accommodate all recreational users, along with shade tree planting to provide a more attractive and comfortable route around the boat ramp, avoiding traffic and pedestrian conflicts in the carpark. Also as outlined in the document, it is a 20 year Master Plan, and any changes in this location are dependent on future funding, ongoing design refinement and community engagement. ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 19 JUNE 2025 8.3 Pat Spicer QUESTION 1 Were the tender prices for the remediation work at 62 Lake Macdonald Drive, Cooroy matching the estimates? Response provided by Kim Rawlings, Director Strategy & Environment We are unable to comment on estimates at this time as Remediation and Subdivision Works are currently in a public tender process. QUESTION 2 Is the funding for the remediation of 62 Lake Macdonald Drive, Cooroy coming from a grant, a loan or council reserves? Response provided by Kim Rawlings, Director Strategy & Environment As part of the Council resolution on 20 January 2025, council decided to “Support advancing the subdivision and remediation works subject to securing a loan facility, whilst continuing to actively pursue grant funding opportunities". Both avenues are still being pursued, Council has commenced with Queensland Treasury Corporation (QTC) regarding preparation for establishing a loan for this purpose. Grant applications and Expressions of Interest have been submitted to relevant State and Federal bodies and continue to be advanced as appropriate. We expect to hear a response regarding these applications for grant funding in the next month. ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 19 JUNE 2025 8.4 Paul Noonan QUESTION 1 If Council can please detail what is proposed for the Charles Bennett Park upgrade in Cooroy? Response provided by Kim Rawlings, Director Strategy & Environment Council is currently reviewing the classification all of its parks in the Shire as part of the Local Government Infrastructure Plan review and Charles Bennett Park is likely to be categorised as a district level park as a result of the review. The existing embellishments are of a reasonably high standard, and it is not currently planned to upgrade the facilities or add to them. New development at Lot 1, 62 Lake Macdonald Drive, Cooroy for housing may increase the use of the park, however, to help people cross Lake Macdonald Drive, a new pedestrian refuge is proposed as part of the proposed upgrade to the Dianella Court intersection. QUESTION 2 Can Council assure the Steering Committee that Council's park upgrades do not exempt Coast2Bay from providing good recreational facilities on-site on Lot 1. Response provided by Kim Rawlings, Director Strategy & Environment Any development on Lot 1, 62 Lake Macdonald Drive Cooroy or any development to be determined on Lot's 2 and 3, is required to meet landscaping open space and private open space requirements set out in the Planning Scheme, even though it's in close proximity to Charles Bennett Park these requirements must still be met. The provision of recreation facilities eg park equipment, swings etc is not required to be provided by Coast 2 Bay on Lot 1. There are however a number of public open space areas identified on the site as outlined in the subdivision plan. How these open space areas are used going forward is still to be determined. 9. MAYORAL MINUTES Nil. 10. NOTIFIED MOTIONS 10.1. AUDIT OF ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROVISION IN NOOSA SHIRE Council Resolution Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Nicola Wilson AUDIT OF ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROVISION IN NOOSA SHIRE That Council request the Chief Executive Officer to prepare a report outlining the scope and cost of investigating an audit of all Council-owned (accessible) parking spaces for people with a disability within the Noosa Shire local government area, to be considered by Councillors as part of future budget deliberations. Carried. Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Amelia Lorentson, For: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: Cr Karen Finzel ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 19 JUNE 2025 10.2. ENCOURAGING AN INDUSTRY-LED TRANSITION FROM SINGLE-USE COFFEE CUPS IN PARTNERSHIP WITH PLASTIC FREE NOOSA Council Resolution Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips ENCOURAGING AN INDUSTRY-LED TRANSITION FROM SINGLE-USE COFFEE CUPS IN PARTNERSHIP WITH PLASTIC FREE NOOSA That Council: A. Support Tourism Noosa's Plastic Free Noosa Program and work in close partnership with Plastic Free Noosa to deliver a voluntary, industry-led shift away from single-use coffee cups across the shire; B. Collaboratively develop with Plastic Free Noosa a simple, scalable plan and program, focusing on education, business support, and behaviour change initiatives; C. Demonstrate leadership for this shift away from single-use coffee cups within its own operations; and D. Request a report to Council detailing any costs associated with the implementation of this initiative for Council consideration and endorsement. Carried. Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr For: Amelia Lorentson Against: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson 10.3. PROPOSAL TO WAIVE DOG REGISTRATION FEES FOR APPROVED FOSTER CARERS Council Resolution Moved: Cr Jessica Phillips Seconded: Cr Karen Finzel PROPOSAL TO WAIVE DOG REGISTRATION FEES FOR APPROVED FOSTER CARERS That Council: A. Develop and implement a process to waive dog registration fees for approved foster carers who are affiliated with recognised animal welfare organisations; and B. Prepare a detailed implementation plan for: 1. The establishment of an application and approval process for foster carers; 2. Criteria to ensure carers are affiliated with a recognised animal welfare group; 3. Administrative systems to track and manage waived registrations; and 4. Investigate options to introduce a time-limited exemption (e.g. up to two years per animal) to ensure compliance and regular updates. Carried. Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr For: Amelia Lorentson, Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 19 JUNE 2025 11. CONSIDERATION OF COMMITTEE REPORTS 11.1 PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS - 10 JUNE 2025 11.1.1. PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COURT APPEAL NO. D44 OF 2025 – APPLICATION FOR A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE FOR FOOD AND DRINK OUTLET AND SHORT-TERM ACCOMMODATION AT 203 - 207 GYMPIE TERRACE, NOOSAVILLE That Council note the report by the Manager Development Assessment to the Planning and Environment Committee Meeting dated 10 June 2025 regarding Planning & Environment Court Appeal D44 of 2025 and agree to defend the appeal. 11.1.2. PLANNING APPLICATIONS DECIDED BY DELEGATED AUTHORITY – APRIL 2025 That Council note the report by the Development Assessment Manager to the Planning & Environment Committee Meeting dated 10 June 2025 regarding applications that have been decided by delegated authority for April 2025 as per Attachment 1 to the Report. 11.1.3. ZERO EMISSIONS NOOSA INC. (ZEN INC.) ANNUAL REPORT That Council A. Note the report by the Sustainability and Climate Change Officer to the Planning & Environment Committee dated 10 June 2025 and note Zero Emissions Noosa Inc. Annual Report as provided in Attachment 1; B. Note that Zen Inc has fulfilled its requirements under the Funding Agreement, by providing a strategic plan and annual report including financial reporting and program updates. 11.1.4. PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS EN BLOC Council Resolution Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener That the Recommendations of the Planning and Environment Committee meeting dated 10 June 2025 be received and adopted except where dealt with by separate resolution. Carried Unanimously EN BLOC. ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 19 JUNE 2025 11.2. SERVICES & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS -10 JUNE 2025 11.2.1. SUNRISE SHOPS - SHOP 4 REVISED LEASE RENEWAL That Council note the report by the Commercial Business Advisor to the Services & Organisation Committee dated 10 June 2025; and A. Note that this resolution supersedes the Council resolution at the Ordinary Meeting dated 17 April 2025 regarding the lease renewal term for Shop 4, Sunrise Shops; B. Approve the lease renewal to Sunrise Dental Care Pty Ltd for Shop 4, Sunrise Shops for five (5) years commencing 1 July 2025; C. Authorise the Chief Executive Officer to award a subsequent one (1) by five (5) year extension of the lease subject to the lessee complying with the terms of the lease; and D. Apply the exception to the requirement for tendering of the lease under Section 236 (1) (c) (iii) of the Local Government Regulation 2012 as the renewal is to the existing tenant. 11.2.2. NOOSAVILLE FORESHORE INFRASTRUCTURE MASTERPLAN That Services & Organisation Committee Agenda Item 7.2 be referred to the General Committee due to the significance of the issue. 11.2.3. OPERATIONAL PLAN 2024-25 Q3 QUARTERLY REPORTING That Services & Organisation Committee Agenda Item 8.1 be referred to the General Committee due to the significance of the issue. 11.2.4. SERVICES & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS EN BLOC Council Resolution Moved: Cr Karen Finzel Seconded: Cr Nicola Wilson That the Recommendations of the Services and Organisation Committee meeting dated 10 June 2025 be received and adopted except where dealt with by separate resolution. Carried Unanimously EN BLOC. ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 19 JUNE 2025 11.3 GENERAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS - 16 JUNE 2025 11.3.1. 2025-2026 COMMUNITY GRANTS PROGRAM SUMMARY - COMMUNITY PROJECT GRANTS, THREE-YEAR COMMUNITY ALLIANCE AGREEMENTS AND THREE-YEAR SIGNATURE COMMUNITY EVENTS That Council: A. Note the report by the Community Connection Manager to the General Committee Meeting dated 16 June 2025 outlining the summary of the 2025-26 Community Project Grants, Three-Year Community Alliance Agreements and Three-Year Signature Community Event Grants; and B. Fund the Quick Response Grants and Individual Sports Development Grants categories from the remaining 2025/26 Community Project Grants budget subject to sufficient funds being allocated in Council’s adopted 2025/26 Community Grants Program budget. 11.3.2. 2025-2026 COMMUNITY GRANTS PROGRAM - COMMUNITY PROJECT GRANTS (EVENTS) Cr Jessica Phillips "In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009 - I inform the meeting that I have a prescribed conflict of interest in relation to Item 8.2 - 2025- 2026 COMMUNITY GRANTS PROGRAM - COMMUNITY PROJECT GRANTS (EVENTS) on this agenda because in relation to the funding recommendation to the Hastings St Association as my sister-in-law Joanne Phillips is on the committee of the Hastings St Association. As a result of my conflict of interest, I will now leave the meeting room while the matter is considered and voted on." Cr Phillips left the meeting room Council Resolution Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener That Council A. Note the report by the Community Connection Manager to the General Committee Meeting dated 16 June 2025; and B. Approve the 2025-26 Community Project Grants (Events) as outlined in Attachment 1, subject to sufficient funds totalling $38,168.05 being allocated in Council's adopted 2025-26 Community Grants Program budget. Carried. Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr For: Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None Cr Phillips having declared a conflict of interest was not eligible to vote. Cr Phillips returned to the meeting room ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 19 JUNE 2025 11.3.3. 2025-2026 COMMUNITY GRANTS PROGRAM – COMMUNITY PROJECT GRANTS (PROGRAM/PROJECTS) That Council A. Note the report by the Community Connection Manager to the General Committee Meeting dated 16 June 2025; and B. Approve the 2025-26 Community Project Grants - Programs/Projects as outlined in Attachment 1, subject to sufficient funds totalling $20,404 being allocated in Council's adopted 2025-26 Community Grants Program budget. 11.3.4. 2025-2026 COMMUNITY GRANTS PROGRAM - COMMUNITY PROJECT GRANTS (INFRASTRUCTURE) That Council A. Note the report by the Community Connection Manager to the General Committee Meeting dated 16 June 2025; and B. Approve the 2025-26 Community Project Grants (Infrastructure) as outlined in Attachment 1, subject to sufficient funds totalling $149,926.54 being allocated in Council's adopted 2025-26 Community Grants Program budget. 11.3.5. 2025-2026 COMMUNITY GRANTS PROGRAM - COMMUNITY PROJECT GRANTS (EQUIPMENT) Cr Tom Wegener "In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009 - I inform the meeting that I have a prescribed conflict of interest in relation to Item 8.5 - 2025- 2026 COMMUNITY GRANTS PROGRAM - COMMUNITY PROJECT GRANTS (EQUIPMENT) in relation to the funding application to Pomona Arts Inc. (Majestic Theatre) on this agenda as I am a committee member of Pomona Arts Inc. As a result of my conflict of interest, I will now leave the meeting room while the matter is considered and voted on." Cr Tom Wegener left the meeting. Council Resolution Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That Council A. Note the report by the Community Connection Manager to the General Committee Meeting dated 16 June 2025; and B. Approve the 2025-2026 Community Project Grants (Equipment) as outlined in Attachment 1, subject to sufficient funds totalling $43,034.94 being allocated in Council’s adopted 2025/26 Community Grants Program budget. Carried. Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr For: Amelia Lorentson, Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None Cr Wegener having declared a conflict of interest was not eligible to vote. Cr Wegener returned to the meeting room. ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 19 JUNE 2025 11.3.6. 2025-2026 COMMUNITY GRANTS PROGRAM - THREE-YEAR COMMUNITY ALLIANCE AGREEMENTS Cr Nicola Wilson "In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009 - I inform the meeting that I have a prescribed conflict of interest in relation to Item 8.6 - 2025- 2026 COMMUNITY GRANTS PROGRAM - THREE-YEAR COMMUNITY ALLIANCE AGREEMENTS on this agenda in relation to the funding recommendation to Noosa Arts Theatre as I am the Senior Vice President. As a result of my conflict of interest, I will now leave the meeting room while the matter is considered and voted on." Cr Nicola Wilson left the meeting. Cr Tom Wegener "In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009 - I inform the meeting that I have a prescribed conflict of interest in relation to Item 8.6 - 20252026 COMMUNITY GRANTS PROGRAM - Three-Year Community Alliance Agreements in relation to the funding application to Pomona Arts Inc. (Majestic Theatre) on this agenda as I am a committee member of Pomona Arts Inc. As a result of my conflict of interest, I will now leave the meeting room while the matter is considered and voted on." Cr Tom Wegener left the meeting. Cr Frank Wilkie I, Cr Wilkie, inform the meeting that I no longer have a prescribed conflict of interest in this matter as I have resigned from my position as committee member of the Noosa Arts Theatre, one of the recommended recipients of an Alliance Grant. I am now a general member (life member) and volunteer of the theatre. Council Resolution Moved: Cr Karen Finzel Seconded: Cr Brian Stockwell That Council A. Note the report by the Community Connection Manager to the General Committee Meeting dated 16 June 2025; and B. Approve the 2025-26 Community Grants for Three-Year Community Alliance Agreements as outlined in Attachment 1, subject to sufficient funds totalling $135,370.11 being allocated in Council’s adopted 2025-26 Community Grants Program budget. Carried. Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr For: Amelia Lorentson, Cr Brian Stockwell Against: None Crs Wegener & Wilson having declared a conflict of interest were not eligible to vote. Cr Tom Wegener returned to the meeting. Cr Nicola Wilson returned to the meeting. ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 19 JUNE 2025 11.3.7. 2025-2026 COMMUNITY GRANTS PROGRAM - THREE-YEAR SIGNATURE COMMUNITY EVENT GRANTS Cr Nicola Wilson "In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009 I inform the meeting that I have a prescribed conflict of interest for Item 8.7 - 2025-2026 COMMUNITY GRANTS PROGRAM - THREE-YEAR SIGNATURE COMMUNITY EVENT GRANTS on this matter in relation to the funding recommendation to the Cooroy Chamber of Commerce as my partner (Roy Vanderberg) is on the executive committee. As a result of my conflict of interest I will now leave the meeting room while the matter is considered and voted on." Cr Wilson left the meeting. Cr Frank Wilkie "In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009 I inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest for Item 8.7 - 2025-2026 COMMUNITY GRANTS PROGRAM - THREE-YEAR SIGNATURE COMMUNITY EVENT GRANTS in relation to the funding recommendation to Noosa Alive!. According to the Queensland Government’s Guide to Conflicts of Interests dated April 2025, being solely a Patron of an organisation does not in itself constitute a declarable conflict of interest. However, I would like to declare as a precautionary measure that I have a link to one of Noosa Alive’s patrons David Williamson in that Mr Williamson has contributed to my previous and current election campaigns to a value of more than $2000 which is considered a prescribed conflict if Mr Williamson or a group he was an executive committee member of were to be the recipient of council funding. As a result of this electoral donation link and potential conflict of interest, for full disclosure and to avoid any perceptions of bias regarding my consideration of Noosa Alive’s grant submission, I choose to leave the meeting room in accordance with my legislative obligations." Cr Wilkie left the meeting. Cr Stockwell assumed the Chair. Council Resolution Moved: Cr Tom Wegener Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That Council A. Note the report by the Community Connection Manager to the General Committee Meeting dated 16 June 2025; and B. Approve the 2025-26 Three-Year Signature Community Event Grants as outlined in Attachment 1, subject to sufficient funds totalling $55,500 being allocated in the adopted 2025-26 Council budget. Carried. Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr For: Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener Against: None Crs Wilkie & Wilson having declared a conflict of interest were not eligible to vote. Cr Frank Wilkie returned to the meeting. Cr Nicola Wilson returned to the meeting. ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 19 JUNE 2025 Cr Frank Wilkie resumed the Chair. 11.3.8. ENVIRONMENT & CLIMATE CHANGE RESILIENCE GRANTS - ENVIRONMENT PROJECT GRANTS (ROUND 20), CLIMATE CHANGE RESPONSE GRANTS (ROUND 5) That Council note the report by the Environmental Services Manager to the General Committee Meeting dated 16 June 2025 regarding applications for the Environment Project Grants (Round 20) and Climate Change Resilience Grants (Round 5), and approve the recommendations to fund projects totalling the amounts below: A. Environment Project Grants (Attachment 1) - $23,832 B. Climate Change Response Grants (Attachment 2) - $50,000 11.3.9. NOOSAVILLE FORESHORE INFRASTRUCTURE MASTERPLAN (REFERRED FROM SERVICES AND ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING DATED 10 JUNE 2025 - ITEM 7.2) Meeting adjourned at 11.50am Meeting resumed at 12.03pm Motion Moved: Cr Frank Wilkie Seconded: Cr Brian Stockwell That Council note the report by the Director Infrastructure Services to the Services & Organisation Committee dated 10 June 2025 and A. Approve the final Noosaville Foreshore Infrastructure Master Plan, provided at Attachment 1; subject to 1. Reverting the design approach for the Massouds Slipway and Jetty in Ely Park to that as shown on the consultation version endorsed by Council at its meeting of the 6 November 2024. B. Authorise the CEO to implement the final Master Plan in order to enhance and protect Noosaville foreshore for both current and future generations including using the document as a key support document to attract grant funding for infrastructure renewal C. Note that each stage of subsequent delivery of the master plan will be subject to detailed design refinement, taking guidance from the endorsed master plan, and will be subject to ongoing community consultation including key stakeholders to ensure the most appropriate detailed design response as the community evolves over the next 20 years. D. Continue to provide quarterly progress or status reports as part of the Operational Plan reporting regime on the implementation of the Noosaville Foreshore Infrastructure Master Plan, to ensure transparency and keep the community informed of key milestones, timelines, and any changes to project delivery. E. Amend the Noosaville Foreshore Infrastructure Masterplan to include a clear, publicly accessible statement showing the total number of carparks currently available and outline the intended approach to designating vehicle parks across the precinct into the future. ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 19 JUNE 2025 Amendment No. 1 Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That item F be added to read: F. That all existing on-street carparking spaces within the Noosaville Boat Ramp and Ely Park precinct be retained, and that the current pathway width also be retained. Lost. For: Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Amelia Lorentson Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Against: Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson The meeting adjourned at 12.35pm The meeting resumed at 12.42pm Amendment No. 2 Moved: Cr Jessica Phillips Seconded: Cr Amelia Lorentson That Item F be added to read: F. The future shared pathway width for each precinct along the foreshore is established once Council staff have the monitoring data showing the number of pedestrians and cyclists per hour that are currently using the path. The future shared pathway width be guided by the appropriate governing authority. Carried. Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr For: Amelia Lorentson Against: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Council Resolution Moved: Cr Frank Wilkie Seconded: Cr Brian Stockwell That Council note the report by the Director Infrastructure Services to the Services & Organisation Committee dated 10 June 2025 and A. Approve the final Noosaville Foreshore Infrastructure Master Plan, provided at Attachment 1; subject to 1. Reverting the design approach for the Massouds Slipway and Jetty in Ely Park to that as shown on the consultation version endorsed by Council at its meeting of the 6 November 2024. B. Authorise the CEO to implement the final Master Plan in order to enhance and protect Noosaville foreshore for both current and future generations including using the document as a key support document to attract grant funding for infrastructure renewal C. Note that each stage of subsequent delivery of the master plan will be subject to detailed design refinement, taking guidance from the endorsed master plan, and will be subject to ongoing community consultation including key stakeholders ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 19 JUNE 2025 to ensure the most appropriate detailed design response as the community evolves over the next 20 years. D. Continue to provide quarterly progress or status reports as part of the Operational Plan reporting regime on the implementation of the Noosaville Foreshore Infrastructure Master Plan, to ensure transparency and keep the community informed of key milestones, timelines, and any changes to project delivery. E. Amend the Noosaville Foreshore Infrastructure Masterplan to include a clear, publicly accessible statement showing the total number of carparks currently available and outline the intended approach to designating vehicle parks across the precinct into the future. F. The future shared pathway width for each precinct along the foreshore is established once Council staff have the monitoring data showing the number of pedestrians and cyclists per hour that are currently using the path. The future shared pathway width be guided by the appropriate governing authority. Carried. Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr For: Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Amelia Lorentson 11.3.10. OPERATIONAL PLAN 2024-25 Q3 QUARTERLY REPORTING (REFERRED FROM SERVICES AND ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING DATED 10 JUNE 2025 - ITEM 8.1) That Council note the report by the Executive Officer to the Services & Organisation Committee dated 10 June 2025 regarding the 2024-25 Operational Plan and: A. Note the progress report for Q3 2024-25 Operational Plan to 31 March 2025 provided as Attachment 1; B. Note the status of Council's Operational Key Performance Indicators provided as Attachment 2. 11.3.11. GENERAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS EN BLOC Council Resolution Moved: Cr Nicola Wilson Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener That the Recommendations of the General Committee meeting dated 16 June 2025 be received and adopted except where dealt with by separate resolution. Carried Unanimously EN BLOC. ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 19 JUNE 2025 12. ORDINARY MEETING REPORTS 12.1. CONTRACT NO. RP00440 – REGISTER OF PRE-QUALIFIED SUPPLIERS FOR PROVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES (DEFERRED FROM THE GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING DATED 16 JUNE 2025 ITEM 8.9) Council Resolution Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener That Council note the report by the Environmental Services Manager to the General Committee Meeting dated 16 June 2025 and A. Approve the award of Contract No. RP00440 for the Register of Prequalified Suppliers for the Provision of Environmental Services for a period of two (2) years commencing 1 July 2025 to the following suppliers: Australian Wetlands Landscapes QLD Pty Ltd Barung Landcare Association Inc Biodiverse Environmental ATF Enviro Steward Trust t/as Biodiverse Bushland Conservation Management Pty Ltd ATF Bushland Conservation Management Trust Michelle Newall t/as Bush Renewalls Dean Roper t/as Complete Weed Management Ecollaboration Ltd Ecosure Pty Ltd Evolve Environmental Solutions Pty Ltd Future-Plus Environmental Pty Ltd Simon Frederick McVerry t/as Native Foresters NGH Pty Ltd Noosa and District Landcare Group Inc Plant Management Horticultural Services Pty Ltd t/as Palmwoods Revegetation Tim Spring Transport & Enviro Solutions ATF Spring Family Trust Toolijooa (QLD) Pty Ltd B. Delegates to the Chief Executive Officer the power to negotiate, finalise, execute and do all things necessary to administer the Contract on behalf of Council. C. Subject to satisfactory performance of the suppliers, authorise the CEO to approve the option to extend the contract at the expiry of initial term for a further two (2) terms of up to twenty-four (24) months each ending on 30 June 2031. D. Authorise the CEO to approve the addition of new suppliers to Contract No. RP00440 – Register of Pre-Qualified Suppliers (ROPS) for Provision of Environmental Services as a result of an advertised refresh at the expiry of the initial term and term extensions. Carried. Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr For: Amelia Lorentson, Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 19 JUNE 2025 Against: None 12.2. NOOSA BIOSPHERE RESERVE FOUNDATION LTD. PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT (DEFERRED FROM GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING DATED 16 JUNE 2025 ITEM 8.10) Meeting adjourned 1.20pm Meeting resumed at 1.30pm Council Resolution Moved: Cr Tom Wegener Seconded: Cr Brian Stockwell That Council note the report by the Environmental Services Manager to the General Committee dated June 16 2025, and: A. Authorise the CEO to execute the presented Partnership Agreement between the Noosa Council and the Noosa Biosphere Reserve Foundation as the trustee for the Noosa Biosphere Reserve Trust, and B. Authorise the CEO to make minor changes/amendments/corrections if required prior to executing the Partnership Agreement, and C. Request the Noosa Biosphere Reserve Foundation Board to consider amending the Constitution of the Noosa Biosphere Reserve Foundation Ltd. to change the role of the Council nominated member to the Board to either Director or Observer, giving Council the option to decide. Carried. Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr For: Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: Cr Jessica Phillips 12.3. PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COURT APPEAL NO. 1391 OF 2025 - APPLICATION FOR A MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE FOR A FUNCTION FACILITY AT 658 LOUIS BAZZO DRIVE, RINGTAIL CREEK (DEFERRED FROM GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING DATED 16 JUNE 2025 ITEM 8.11) Council Resolution Moved: Cr Tom Wegener Seconded: Cr Karen Finzel That Council note the report by the Manager Development Assessment to the General Committee Meeting dated 16 June 2025 regarding Planning & Environment Court Appeal 1391 of 2025 and agree to defend the appeal. Carried. Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr For: Amelia Lorentson, Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 19 JUNE 2025 12.4. AUDIT AND RISK COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP (DEFERRED FROM GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING DATED 16 JUNE 2025 ITEM 8.12) Council Resolution Moved: Cr Nicola Wilson Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That Council note the report by the Executive Officer to the General Committee meeting dated 16 June 2025 and extend the appointment of Mr Ian Rushworth as independent external member of the Audit and Risk Committee to 26 June 2028. Carried. Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr For: Amelia Lorentson, Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None 12.5. FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE REPORT – MAY 2025 (DEFERRED FROM GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING DATED 16 JUNE 2025 ITEM 8.13) Council Resolution Moved: Cr Nicola Wilson Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That Council note the report by the Financial Services Manager to the General Committee Meeting dated 16 June 2025 outlining the May 2025 year to date financial performance against budget, including changes to the financial performance report with the inclusion of key financial sustainability indicators. Carried. Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr For: Amelia Lorentson, Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None 2025-2026 FEES AND CHARGES 12.6. (DEFERRED FROM GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING DATED 16 JUNE 2025 ITEM 8.14) The following material was presented to the meeting in relation to this item: Staff presented the following attachment – refer to Attachment 1 to the Ordinary Meeting Minutes 19 June 2025 - Revised Fees & Charges 2025-2026 Motion Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Nicola Wilson ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 19 JUNE 2025 That Council note the report by the Manager Financial Services to the General Meeting dated 16 June 2025 and pursuant to sections 97, 98 and 262(3)(c) of the Local Government Act 2009, for the 2025-26 financial year the cost-recovery fees and commercial charges provided in Attachment 1 to the report Attachment 1 to the Ordinary Meeting Minutes 19 June 2025 - Revised Fees & Charges 2025-2026. Amendment No. 1 Moved: Cr Jessica Phillips Seconded: Cr Amelia Lorentson That Item A be added to read: A. with a further change to the Fees and Charges attachment 1 under the heading of Community Leasing (page 8), delete the following: Carried. Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr For: Amelia Lorentson, Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None Amendment No. 2 Moved: Cr Jessica Phillips Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener That Item B added to read: B. with a further change to the Fees and Charges attachment 1 under the heading of Libraries (page 29), delete the following: and Lost. For: Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Amelia Lorentson Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Against: Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Council Resolution Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Nicola Wilson That Council note the report by the Manager Financial Services to the General Meeting dated 16 June 2025 and pursuant to sections 97, 98 and 262(3)(c) of the Local Government Act 2009, for the 2025-26 financial year the cost-recovery fees and commercial charges provided in Attachment 1 to the report Attachment 1 to ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 19 JUNE 2025 the Ordinary Meeting Minutes 19 June 2025 - Revised Fees & Charges 20252026 with a further change to the Revised Fees & Charges attachment 1 under the heading of Community Leasing (page 8), delete the following: Carried. Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr For: Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: Cr Jessica Phillips 13. CONFIDENTIAL SESSION Nil. 14. NEXT MEETING The next Ordinary Meeting will be held at Council Chambers, 9 Pelican St, Tewantin on 17 July 2025 at 10.00am. 15. MEETING CLOSURE The meeting closed at 03:01 PM.
Meeting Transcript
SPEAKER_17 00:00.180
Good morning Frank Wilkie 00:03.500
Well good morning everybody. Welcome to the Ordinary Meeting of Thursday 19th of June. Declare the meeting open at 10:01am. I'd like to acknowledge we're meeting on the traditional lands of the Kabi cubby Kabi cubby people, and I pay respect to elders past, present and emerging, and also repeat their invitation for us to join them as joint custodians, respecting and caring for this beautiful place that we all love, respecting and caring for each other. I know that all councillors are in attendance. Next item is confirmation of the minutes. Can I have a move and a seconder for the minutes of the Ordinary Meeting held at 15 May 2025 at Cooroy, Councillor Lorentson, and a seconder, Councillor Finzel. All in favour? That's unanimous. May the minutes of the Special Meeting held on the 21st of May 2025. Thank you, Councillor Lorentson. A seconder, Councillor Stockwell. All in favour? There are no petitions. There are no presentations. We have three deputations this morning with 15 minutes allocated for each deputation. First we have Katrina Bodycote and Steven Bodycote. Topic is the Charles Bennett Park applicant from Katrina Bodycote. Katrina, would you like to come to the lectern to present your deputation, please? Pat Spicer 01:26.560
Through is not able to attend this meeting and she did put that on her form. So she's asked me to present this on her behalf. Thank you, Pat. My name is Pat Spicer. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today on behalf of. Bodycote. Kate is a long-term resident of Forest Oak Court. Kate speaks on behalf of not just her household but also for many of her neighbours who are increasingly impacted by the current and potential future use of Charles Bennett Park. When Kate and her husband purchased their block nearly ten years ago, they specifically chose their location for its proximity to the park. Expecting it to provide a peaceful, family-friendly space for children. At the time of purchase, the park design was incomplete and there was no mention of a basketball court. Since the basketball court was installed, it has become a constant source of noise and disruption. On many days, the sound of bouncing basketballs starts as early as 6:00am. And continues into the evening. Even with homes closed, the noise is persistent and invasive. The court is the only one in the area and is drawing increasing crowds. Given the surrounding residential setting, this level of use is not with the development of 62 Lake Macdonald Drive site on Lake Macdonald Drive, residents are very concerned that pressure on the parks will increase even more. In recent years, there have been multiple incidents of late-night activity involving large groups of youths arriving in cars, driving on public land and playing basketball well past midnight and leaving behind litter and alcohol bottles. Incidents have both the council and the police. While council staff did visit the site and express support for escalation, residents have had no follow-up since March. As older residents, they feel intimidated and unsafe confronting such behaviour. Directly. Residents understand council may be considering additional amenities as part of park remediation. Does this include barbecues, toilets, shade sails and lighting? Residents respectfully but strongly oppose these proposals. Such additions would only intensify use extend park activity late into the evening and bring even more visitors into what is the cul-de-sacs surrounding the park, Forest Oak Court and Red Ash Court, have extremely limited parking and are not equipped to handle large levels of traffic. Residents are not against public spaces. Community or recreation. What they ask is that Charles benner park be managed and developed in a way that respects the amenity, privacy and safety of the residents who live around it. These could include.removing the basket. The or hoop and relocating the facility to a more suitable site, such as the existing slag near the skate park in town, or replacing the shooting area with astroturf to deaden the noise while preserving open space. Avoiding any additions such as toilets, barbecues or lighting which would turn the park into a destination facility rather than a local green space. Ensuring that recreation more recreational facilities, play equipment is allocated within the Lake Macdonald Drive development to reduce pressure on existing parks. Kate wants to preserve the peaceful lifestyle. And her husband moved here for and they trust that council will consider the impact of these issues not just on future residents but on existing ratepayers and long-standing members of this community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Why this issue is relevant to council? This issue is directly relevant to council because it involves the management and development of council owned public land, specifically Charles Bennett Park, and how this space is being used in a residential setting. It also raises concerns about public safety, amenity and compliance with community planning principles. The current and future views use of the park, including the placement facilities, like the basketball court, potential additions such as barbecues, toilets, lighting, and the increase in antisocial behaviour, all fall under council's responsibility for urban planning, community wellbeing, infrastructure, and public safety. Frank Wilkie 07:01.120
Thank you. Pat. Thank you, Pat. Second deputation, we have Mr Rod Mulder, Mr Ross Muller, and Neil Bale. The topic is the tenure issue at the Men's Shed, Pomona. Gentlemen, would you like to come to the lectern? We have 15 minutes for you. SPEAKER_24 07:22.898
Mayor, councillors, our representative. Ross Muller will speak on our behalf. Ross Muller 07:34.080
Good A little bit of background first. The Men's Shed at Pomona, it is a community-based organisation and we do serve the community of Pomona, Cooroy, Kin Kin, Cooran, the area in the hinterland right there. What we provide is a place and a service for men to attend, to be physically and mentally active, really concentrating on the mental activity. The environment of the shed, it's a friendly environment and it's a safe environment. What are our goals? Our goals are to provide a safe place where men can gather and where they actually want to be, to in. To produce goods for sale that represent value for money. I mean, we are running a small business, so we actually need to have some cash coming in. To provide a cost-effective restoration service. Members of the community bring things can you fix this for me? Can you do this? Can you do that? Yes we can, and we love doing that. And we also provide community services. So what are our problems? The problems are that we are running out of space on the existing site. We do have workshops and they're well equipped but they're very crowded. You can walk around like that in there. What that does is it limits the number of people who can attend and it also limits the opening times that we have. Let me now run through a timeline. How did we get to where we are today? MENSHIB was formed in 2012 at that time it was operating by the auspices of tamona and community house and it stayed that way until 2007.2017. In 2014, and at that time they were also operating out of walson shed attached to Pomona community house, 2014 Men's Shed Pomona moved to our current site at 1 school Street Pomona, and we occupied what was a disused and machinery shed tractor that had been abandoned by parks and wildlife. At that stage it was part of the national park. We did get an occupation permit that was valid for three years and that was issued under the forestry act. In 2015 we wanted to expand and so we submitted a DA to council. That was approved and a new shed was built adjacent to and abutting the existing shed. Are now starting the existing shed and we moved in there. The tenure for the land was changed from the forestry act to the nature conservation act at some stage. I don't know when. What that did was it immediately created inconsistent. Use issues and it prevented further authorisation for tenure on the land. Effectively, at that stage, the Men's Shed became squatters. Responsible squatters, I might add, but squatters nonetheless. In 2017, we incorporated. We incorporated, so we're now an incorporated association. Are registered as, a charity. Our tenure on the land was un, it was unpermitted for a number of years. The solution to that problem eventually was to revoke the land from park and put it under freehold title. That was done, that revocation went through parliament in November 1922. And in May 1918, sorry, 20, 22. We'll get there. In May '23, the title was given to the Department of Environment, tourism, science and innovation and it is managed by Queensland parks and wildlife. So parks and wildlife are effectively our landlords. Issued, we discussed the terms of and finally were issued with a licence to occupy and that was issued on the 29th of February 2024. It was valid for 12 months with a 12 month extension. The first 12 months have gone, the 12 month option to extend has been exercised and there will be no further extensions issued, no further options to occupy the land granted by the department. After we were issued the licence to occupy, we began negotiations with the department for a long-term lease. In late 2024, we were advised by the department, by parks and wildlife, that they had been told to get rid of any land that they have tenants on. And it includes not just us, it's the likes of the land where the Gympie Muster is, part woodford folk festival is. Parks and wildlife are landlords on those lands. For us the issue is where we are. They've been told get back to conservation, do not be a landlord. About two weeks ago there was a letter sent from the Director-General of the department to the CEO asking council to reconsider its position vis-a-vis the land. Council position as I understand it since 2020 when a letter was sent from the department to the then Mayor Clive Stewart, council has said thanks but no thanks. We're not interested in owning or managing the land. So that's where we are at the moment. Well what is tenure? What does it mean to us and why do we need it? We've got a strategic plan that was developed in 2024. We have a site master plan that will be published in six to eight weeks. But we don't have a hold on the land that we've got. Next I'll just read the sentence, the next couple of sentences. Security of tenure is absolutely essential for any community-based organisation. Men's shared Pomona does not security. Without the security, existence on the site can only be viewed as temporary at best. The lack of a permanent home plays on the minds of any organisation. And diminishes the concept of a safe place where people can gather. You can't be safe if you're going to be kicked out. That's at odds with our vision and our values and everything else. So what are the issues? We're unable do any development. To we're unable to raise any funds. We're self-supporting in terms of our operating budget. If we need to do any capital works or to do any extensions or any major maintenance on there, we need to get funding, whether it's from council or state government. Anybody else. It is a condition precedent of any funding application that you either own the land that you're on or you've got secure tenure over it and you have permission from your landlord to do those things. We've got none of that, so we can't raise any money. But we're walking around like penguins in the workshops. The land that we're on is currently zoned environmental management and conservation. Right next door to us, abutting us, is the land that Pomona Lions Club and the scout group are on. That block of dirt is zoned community facilities. To our southern border, the land is zoned medium density residential. Across on the road on the other side of School Street, it's low density, residential. Anything that we do because of our zoning is immediately designated immediately designated an inconsistent use, an inconsistent development. And it's problematic, we've already had one pre-lodgement meeting with the planning and development group about what we can do. We are space constrained and therefore we are membership capped. If we have space we can more space we can offer suitable spaces for other community groups to use the facilities. If we grow we can support more members of the community. We have been approached by medical and health organisations who have referred their clients to MENSHED. Is good for you. Should go and talk to them. Social prescription I think is the wonderful phrase that's used. Our capacity to accept such people is exceptionally limited because we do not have. The facilities. That's where we are, that's how we got here. What do we want? We want clarification and we want some decisions. We know the council, we know the department wants to offload. Clarification on council's position. Has council's position changed since 2020? If yes, we would like to sit down at the table and negotiate a long-term lease. If no, we've actually put our hand up to the department and said pick me, pick me, we would like to take over the land. At the moment it's. I said, well, I'm not sure about that. But if we do that, if you don't want it, we do. We would like your support in whatever form to assist us to get our hands on it. Our ability to add infrastructure is exceptionally limited. By the zoning that we have at the moment. Environmental management and conservation is exceptionally problematic for what we want to do. You can't do anything on the site. We would like the zoning changed to community facilities, same as it is next door. The community facilities next we're a community facility, why not have the same zoning on the bank? Open invitation, come and have a chat with us at any time, sit down, have a coffee, we'll show you around. Thank you for listening. Frank Wilkie 18:03.881
You, Mr. Marlowe. Yeah. We'll be organising a meeting with your group as quickly as possible, Mr. Marlowe. There's a lot to talk about. Thank you. We'll help where we can. Next up we have Noosa Glades speakers, Anne Budd, Ross Ward and Jennifer Finlay. We have 15 minutes set aside for your representatives. Ross Ward 18:39.320
Good morning Mr. Mayor, councillors and council staff. I am Ross Ward, disposer for Noosa Glades, representing the Noosa Glades community complex. There are 78 rate paying residences providing approximately 125,000 per year revenue to the council. We maintain our own roads, train pipes, Street lighting etc. We all have a problem with the waterway that runs through our property which should be eventually going into Noosa River. This waterway banks up causing flooding in parts of the glades after a normal rain event. Around 15 years ago, Noosa Council put in a concrete culvert in the open waterway through the glades. This really hasn't made any difference as the culvert runs down to the river and gets blocked full of slime, waterweeds, bulrushes, etc. This waterway always had its problems even before a previous council gave developers of Eagle Rise subdivision permission to divert their stormwater runoff into this waterway. Our Noosa glades committee along management of the rindle Street caravan park at the time protested Noosa Council and we all met with council staff and we were informed Eagle Rise stormwater runoff would not affect Noosa glades or make any difference. Residents' focus is exaggerated. The problem causing water to bank up the waterway and back up into our drain pipes causing flooding to properties. Flood insurance is a cost residents cannot afford. Most insurance companies will not insure homes here for flood. One quote recently was $8,000 a year. The major problem is that the waterway between the glades and Noosa River is blocked by fallen trees, overgrown vegetation and unauthorised earthworks, blocking water flow and lack of maintenance has caused unnecessary flooding. Our residents are well aware we live in a flood area, a flood zone area. However, now have a bigger worry due to legalised runoff being directed into the easement plus the blockages between us and the river. The water does not flow away and has created a swamp. We, the residents, strongly believe that county council a duty of care to fix the problem before any more rain events occur. Noosa glades residents have an understanding there are more drains from Tate Street and cambridge court that funnel storm water in this waterway. Let's see this impacts and affects us also. As the water is unable to get away to the river, it then flows back down towards Marindah Street, flooding the area known as Duke Street, which then floods the backs of houses in the glades. Independent water tests indicate a high level of eukaryote in the waterway /swamp. Given these test results naturally, residents are concerned about health and safety aspects. Mosquitoes, water rats, snakes, cane toads, and whatever else, all coming from the swamp /waterway. Residents have complained that mosquitoes are out at 4pm in the afternoon when they sit in the veranda decks, and this is in winter, the mountains. Over the years we have written and voiced our concerns to council about this situation, but nothing has been done for our Noosa glades community. Residents have become sad, disheartened and frustrated from the lack of results and inactions from our previous corresponds correspondents to council about this problem. It took immediate exposure for us to get where we are now. The problem has been allowed to deteriorate by a lack of proper maintenance to the drains /waterway over the years. Has now become a major problem and needs immediate attention before some or all of our homes get flood damaged. We have some photos and test results available for your files. We are appealing to you and the Noosa Council for action to be taken as soon as possible. Has been made in this year's budget to rectify the problem? And will it be possible for council to give a timeframe for works to be done? We appreciate your time, Mr. Council, and thank you for listening to the presidents of the glades. Frank Wilkie 23:12.141
You, Mr. Ward. I understand there's been three meetings. There'll be more. To I'll help sort this one out. Thank you. Next up, we have four submissions for public question time. The first is an application from Mr. Brian O'Connor. Mr. O'Connor, would come to the lectern and read your questions, which will be answered by Kerri Contini, Director Community Services. Welcome, Brian. Brian O'Connor 23:35.260
Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. The first question is this: has Noosa Council hinterland heritage brand, as was a heritage action aspiration contained in the Noosa Council cultural strategy 2019-2023? And if not, will such an action be carried forward into the new cultural culture? Frank Wilkie 24:01.374
Strategy now under development? Ms Nicola Wilson 24:05.395
Thank EASTMAN thank you, Mr O'Connor, for your question and your ongoing interest in the Noosa cultural plan 2019-2023. Report on the cultural plan 2019-2023 was endorsed at the September 2024 Ordinary Meeting. Karen Finzel 24:22.045
This report showed that at the end of 2023, over 92% of plan actions were completed or unawaited. Kim Rawlings 24:30.370
This was a major achievement for council's arts and culture team, our valued volunteers and the community groups that partner with council to provide cultural experiences. Of the 69 actions in the plan, only three were not addressed, one of which was explore the potential of creating an interlaced heritage brand. Nicola Wilson 24:51.143
The cultural plan was developed and adopted prior to COVID and spanned a period of considerable change and challenge. Prior to COVID, the concept of a hinterland heritage brand was proposed by stakeholders as a way of celebrating our heritage and using it to attract tourists beyond the Coast and into hinterland areas. However, through COVID and. Beyond, hinterland tourism grew considerably on its own and the priority for hinterland communities is maintaining village character and lifestyle. Because of these changes, a hinterland heritage brand not been included in the draft cocton plan 2025-30. We are planning to develop a Noosa heritage plan over the next five years. And if stakeholders are interested in a hinterland need to land heritage brand, then they could rise it as part of this project Brian O'Connor 25:47.132
You. Our second question is: Noosa Council papers indicate that an undisclosed 2032 Olympics plan Frank Wilkie 25:57.793
Has been developed with the intention of creating legacy projects for the Shire beyond the games proper. So can the council. Indicate when it will be released and will ratepayers have an opportunity to provide input before it is adopted formally? Karen Finzel 26:13.841
Thank you again Mr O'Connor for your question in relation to Noosa Council's plans for the 2032 Olympics. Noosa Council has been actively preparing for the 2032 games over the past year, noting though that we are not a host local government. Kim Rawlings 26:30.559
Our focus as a starting point has included aligning where relevant with the Brisbane elevate 2042 legacy plan, collaborating councils through the relevant working group and establishing connections with organising bodies. Nicola Wilson 26:49.057
To be clear, a 2032 plan has not been developed. A situation analysis has begun focusing on facilities, demographics, tourism, transport and waste infrastructure while also identifying potential legacy opportunities such as infrastructure improvements, strategic partnerships.sports development and volunteering. Mayor Wilkie has also been involved in engaging with South East Queensland mayors regarding regional planning as well as learning from international Olympics experiences. Over the coming year council will continue to work with key stakeholders in early planning to maximise community and regional benefits. Frank Wilkie 27:30.664
Thank you Mr O'Connor. The next application for two questions is from Mrs Debra walz. Mr Walsh would you like to come to the lectern and read your two questions please, which will be answered by Shaun Walsh, Director Infrastructure Services. Debra Walz 27:44.063
Good morning everybody, thank you for giving me this opportunity. Foreshore infrastructure Master Plan. So the proposed Noosaville foreshore infrastructure Master Plan articulates a large-scale, complex amenities facility near the big pelican. Can these amenities be downsized and scaled back in complexity to include a more simple version of the toilet block to allow for maximum use of green space? Shaun Walsh 28:18.085
Thank you for your question and appreciate the support for additional amenities block on the Noosaville foreshore. A key component of the new amenities block is a changing places facility which are specialised accessible toilets designed to meet the needs of individuals who cannot use standard accessible toilets independently. They provide sufficient space and equipment such as hoists and changing benches to assist those with severe disabilities which requires more space than a standard facility A of this caliber is very well by stakeholders using the Noosaville Foreshore. Council has fortunately received grant funding to design and build the facility and has appointed a local architect to design a building of a high quality that befits the Noosaville Foreshore and the Noosa Design Principles. Debra Walz 29:06.288
Thank thanks. You very much. Two, in relation to the Noosaville Foreshore Infrastructure Masterplan, what is the justification and evidence used by consultants to remove parking spaces and broaden the walking pathway near the boat ramp in Gympie Terrace? Shaun Walsh 29:27.043
Thank you again for your question. Key feedback has been received about the Noosaville Foreshore Infrastructure Management Plan concerning both the need for retention of car parking spaces as well as the need for improved pathways to accommodate recreational use. To provide perspective there are 404 car parking spaces along the Noosaville Foreshore and 10 car parking spaces are proposed to be repurposed to provide a wider pathway around the program. The wider pathway is recommended to provide a safer width to better accommodate all recreational users, along with to provide a more attractive and comfortable route around the program, avoiding traffic and pedestrian conflicts in the car park. Also, as outlined in it is a 20 year master plan and any changes in this location are dependent upon future funding, ongoing design refinement and community engagement. Frank Wilkie 30:21.850
Thank you, Mr Walsh. The next application is from Mrs Pat Spicer. Welcome back Pat. Your two questions will be answered by Kim Rawlings, Director Strategy & Environment. Pat Spicer 30:34.290
Thank you. Through the Chair. Were the tender prices for the remediation work at 62 Lake Macdonald Drive, Cooroy, matching the estimates? Of apartheid Pat. Kim Rawlings 30:47.635
Thanks for your question. Unfortunately, we're unable to comment on the estimates at this time, as the remediation and subdivision works are still currently subject to the tender process. Questions? Question two. Is the funding for the remediation of 62 Lake Macdonald Drive, Cooroy, coming from a grant, a loan, or council reserves? As part of the council resolution of the 20th of January 2025, council decided to support advancing the subdivision and remediation work subject to security securing a loan load facility whilst continuing to actively pursue grant funding opportunities. Both avenues are still being pursued. Council has commenced conversations with Queensland Treasury Corporation regarding preparation for establishing a loan for this purpose. Grant applications have also been submitted to relevant state and Federal bodies and continue to be advanced as appropriate. We expect to hear a response regarding these applications for grant funding in the next month. Frank Wilkie 31:48.803
The next application is from Noonan. Mr. Noonan is not in attendance but has requested that the CEO read out the questions which will again be answered by Kim Rawlings, Director Strategy & Environment. Larry Sengstock 32:00.314
Okay, a question from Paul Noonan. If council can please detail what is proposed for the Charles Bennett Park upgrade in Cooroy. Kim Rawlings 32:08.944
Thanks for the question. Council is currently reviewing the classification of all of its parks in the Shire as part of its regular review of the local government infrastructure plan and Charles Bennett Park is likely to be categorised as a district level park as a result of this review. Existing embellishments are of a reasonably high standard and is not currently planned to upgrade the facilities or to add to them. New development at lot 162 Lake Macdonald Drive, Cooroy for housing may increase the use of the park. However to help people cross Lake Macdonald a new pedestrian refuge is proposed as part of Dianella Court intersection. Larry Sengstock 32:46.892
The second question from Paul Noonan. Can council assure the steering committee that council's park upgrades do not exempt Coast2Bay from providing good recreational facilities on site on lot one? Kim Rawlings 33:00.332
Any development on development on lot 162 Lake Macdonald Drive or any development to be determined on lots two and three is required to meet landscaping, open space and private open space requirements set out in the planning scheme. Even though it is in close proximity to Charles Bennett Park, these requirements must still be met. The provision of recreation facilities e.g. park equipment, swings etc. is not required to be provided by Coast2Bay en bloc 1. There are however a number of public open space areas identified on the site as outlined in the subdivision plan. How these open space areas are used going forward is still to be determined. Frank Wilkie 33:40.110
Mayoral minutes. We have three notified motions. The first one Councillor Lorentson would you like to move your motion? Amelia Lorentson 33:50.884
I'd like to move the motion that council request the CEO to prepare a report outlining the scope and cost of investigating and audit of all council owned accessible parking spaces. For people with a disability within the Noosa Shire local government area to be considered by councillors as part of future budget deliberations. Thank you. May we have a second for that? Councillor Wilson? Councillor Lorentson, you wish to speak? I will. As Noosa population continues to age and our community becomes more aware of inclusive design, there's an increasing expectation that mobility infrastructure, particularly accessible parking, is not just compliant but generally fit for purpose. Accessible parking plays a vital role in ensuring people with disability, older residents and those with temporary long-term mobility challenges can participate fully and safely in community life. While the national construction code mandates one accessible parking per 100 standard spaces, compliance with this minimum requirement does not necessarily ensure equitable, safe or adequate access. In practice, many locations such as healthcare facilities, community centres, council-run facilities like the aquatic centre, the Cooroy Library, The J and Leisure Centre and retail precincts may require significantly more mobility parking than the national construction code baseline to accommodate actual user needs. Current feedback from residents highlights practical challenges with the design placement and availability of accessible parking bays across the Shire from the hinterland to the Coast. These include bays that lack sufficient clearance for wheelchair access, are poorly positioned relative kerb ramps or entries, or are consistently occupied in high demand locations. An audit would allow council to assess not only whether the number and placement of accessible bays meets legislative requirements, but also whether it aligns with the real world experiences and expectations of our community, with will provide valuable insights into their experience and needs, consulting with users needs, ensuring that the audit reflects the actual requirements of those who rely on accessible parking. The audit would also inform strategic planning for future upgrades and investments, ensuring that mobility infrastructure is placed where it's most needed and designed to a standard that reflects both the dignity and safety. In 2021, 5.6% of Noosa population, more than 3,000 people, were identified as requiring assistance with core daily activities due to disability. Our median age of 50 is significantly higher than the national average, and in some areas, like in our hinterland, more than one in four residents are over the age of 65. These demographic indicators underscore the importance of. A proactive, needs-based approach to mobility planning. This motion's not about ticking boxes. Accessibility isn't a box to check. It's an opportunity for us as councillors to change lives. Small improvements aren't just technical fixes. They can be the difference between exclusion and independence, the difference between frustration and dignity. As councillors, we have the opportunity to make Noosa accessible to everyone. By prioritising voices with lived experience, we can create solutions that truly meet the needs of our community. And the best part is that it just takes doing our job a little bit better with the right insight and commitment. I'm going to. I've got quite a few letters of references across the Shire. I'm just going to highlight a couple of the letters that were submitted in support of the motion. One was from a mother who has a son who is a Noosa resident, both are Noosa residents, and her son is teacher at a local secondary school. He is a wheelchair. And I'm just quoting. He is a wheelchair user who uses a modified vehicle to drive to work and to all other amenities and attractions Noosa Noosa offers. Besides providing essential. Transport, his car gives him independence and a certain level of freedom that is important to him and his young family. Unfortunately, that freedom is too often curtailed by the lack of adequate and safe parking. For instance, what should be a relaxing morning at the beach frequently turns out to be frustrating instead because all the wheelchair accessible parking spaces are occupied. It is not possible for my son to use an ordinary parking space because there's enough space to open car door wide enough to allow for wheelchair access. Parking in some of the wheelchair accessible spaces around the junction too involve unacceptable risk for him because insufficient space has been allocated as a driver he is forced to get out of the car and transfer into his wheelchair in the road. The consequences of this clearly pose an unacceptable hazard for all who may be involved in an accident. The above are just two of. Many examples. I've been able to leave the house, attend school or therapy, participate in community events or simply go to school. Thank you. Too often we're met with parking bays that are poorly designed, inadequately sized or positioned in ways that make safe access impossible. In some cases we've had to turn around and go home. This motion recognises what we experience every day, that meeting the minimum legal standards does not guarantee real accessibility. And finally, I would like to say thank you to all of you who have contributed to this event. I'll just mention something written by Dane cross who's the CEO of sporting wheelies and spinal life Australia. He too is also a resident in the Shire. He says that an audit of existing accessible parking provisions combined with consultation with end users will provide council with a clear evidence based picture of current gaps future and priorities. It will enable targeted improvements that reflect Noosa demographic profile, supporting inclusive planning and demonstrate council's leadership in access and inclusion. Thank you. Councillor Hobbs. Morris. Frank Wilkie 40:57.832
Questions of staff, anyone? Councillor Finzel. Yes, Karen Finzel 41:02.752
Thank you, Through the Chair. Thank you, Councillor Lorentson, for bringing this to attention. First question is for the staff. Has an audit these accessible parking across the Shire already being undertaken? I was of the understanding that has been done. Can I please get some information on that? Frank Wilkie 41:25.730
Yes, Shaun Walsh, Director Infrastructure Services. Shaun Walsh 41:28.950
Thank you, Councillor Finzel, for the question. Has inaudible been an order undertaken for the parking management of the planning areas that we've been working diligently with the councillors on, so that includes Noosa Junction, Noosa Heads and Noosa confucian, but there has not been an order undertaken on the balance of the Shire. So, and it's just a summary of that, as I was saying, that most of our disabled car parking spaces were rolled out more recent design changes that required some. 000 Karen Finzel 41:53.649
Thank you. Through the Chair, I do have a further question. I was of the understanding some of those audits had taken place in the hinterland. Can I please seek clarification. Shaun Walsh 42:06.719
Councillor, I need to take that question one more time. Frank Wilkie 42:15.019
000 Is there the intention to, as part of the Shire-wide parking study, to do audits in all the areas of Shaun Walsh 42:21.096
The so, as we would start to progress parking management plans in other localities, in particular visitor centres such as Cooroy, Pomona and Tewantin, we would undertake take a detailed audit as part of that process in the future. The information we've presented you with the parking management plans is that the three localities we've chosen to use, the first might equal the first stage and then we would need to undertake the more detailed assessment for those other localities in the future. Frank Wilkie 42:54.254
Councillor Wegener. Tom Wegener 43:00.274
This is inconsistent with our park management plan moving forward. Thank you. Shaun Walsh 43:07.405
Certainly, Councillor Wegener, this is not inconsistent with the parking management plans moving forward. It would be useful information to inform bring forward some immediate works, because to roll out the parking management plans in all those other localities, would take a number of years. Frank Wilkie 43:28.103
Councillor's speak to the motion. Councillor Finzel. Karen Finzel 43:29.843
Yeah, I just have one more question please, just to make sure that it's noted that I do get that report back from the staff to answer my question in relation to the audit in the hinterland. Thank you. Frank Wilkie 43:40.723
All alright, right, anyone else wish to speak? Just to close, Councillor Lorentson. Amelia Lorentson 43:45.741
I will. Just to address a couple of things that have been raised in the form of questions. I've been meeting with hinterland residents for some time over the last, over I the will return term to of this over the last 12 months during this term. One incident, and this is probably what provoked me to bring this motion. Two things provoked me. In my last term, about three, four years ago, I made a similar request from the ex-CEO, Scott. Walters, and also with our current CEO, Larry Sengstock, for an audit of accessible parking. For those who know me, this is an area of deep interest for myself. Access and inclusion is a commitment that I made when I put when my I put hand up for hearing Council. The audit was done, but unfortunately, it was only done in the Hastings Street precinct. It was not done across the Shire, nor in the hinterland. I met with a resident about two months ago and she was late for a meeting with me. We were sitting at the FICA cafe, and she kept sending me messages. She was about 25, 30 minutes late. And I knew that was unusual, because she's really, really just diligent. She eventually came to FICA restaurant, and I asked what happened. And she said all the accessibility parking spaces were occupied, and that she had to drive in a circle, and a circle, almost drove back home. I then walked her back to her car space. It took us about 10 minutes from coffee shop to get to her car spaces. That is not okay, and that's why I'm standing here. I've since had so many people from Pomona. I was at the Cooroy scon thyme just recently. I got stopped by so many elderly residents at Cooroy scon thyme, many who live in Pomona, who also expressed the need for fit for purpose accessibility spaces. In terms of audit, whether it's already been done, we need to also reiterate that there is a process with notified motions. Notified motions need to be approved by the CEO. The CEO then goes to the directors and ensures that the I'm excited to hear what notified motions motion hasn't already been raised. So I'm expecting due process, so questions raised today, again, perhaps challenge the integrity of that process, and that's a separate discussion. In terms of conclusion, conducting an audit of accessible car parts is not just a procedural task. Again, it's an opportunity for us to change lives. Plan for infrastructure that is fit for purpose. That's informed by lived experiences of people with disabilities and those who care for them. In Noosa, we have an ageing population and many residents live with disability or mobility change challenges. Access is funding. Fundamental. It affects whether someone can attend appointments, enjoy public spaces, go to a local coffee shop, support local businesses, and most importantly, feel part of their community. People with disabilities are not limited. The limitations lie in the environments we design and the barriers we fail to remove. Inaccessible infrastructure not ability, is what excludes people. If we're committed to building a community for all then we must start with access. An audit is a practical necessary step to identify gaps and ensure that everyone has the opportunity to participate in the life of our Shire. Because true inclusion doesn't happen by accident, it happens by design. And I know you can feel the passion in my voice because this is really important. I've been part of the seahorse NIFA program for 14 years. I advocated for the beach mat, spent the last six months getting a wheelchair, allowing people with disabilities to have access into the ocean. I fight, I fight for these inclusions and I will continue fight because deserves access to every places. Frank Wilkie 48:22.308
Thank you Councillor Lorentson and we'll put the motion those in favour. That's Councillor Phillips, Wilson, Stockwell, Wegener, Wegener. Lawrence and Wilkie against. Councillor Finzel. The second notice of motion, that's carried. Is also from Councillor Lorentson. Councillor Lorentson would you like to move your motion please. Amelia Lorentson 48:45.027
Oh my gosh there's so many things that I'm passionate about and I've got to say it all revolves around Noosa and our community. So this motion again reflects something that I'm very quite passionate about. A voluntary industry-led transition from single-use coffee cups in partnerships with the Tourism Noosa plastic-free Noosa program. That council A: support tourism Noosa plastic-free Noosa program and work in close partnership with plastic-free Noosa to deliver a voluntary industry-led shift away from single-use coffee cups across the Shire. B: collaboratively develop with Plastic Free Noosa a simple scalable plan and program focusing on education business support and behaviour change initiatives. C: that council demonstrate leadership for the shift away from single-use coffee cups within its own operations and D: request a report to council detailing any costs associated with the implementation of this initiative for council consideration. And endorsement. Councillor Lorentson. May we have a Frank Wilkie 49:58.920
Seconder for that, please, for the purpose of debate? Councillor Phillips, thank you. Councillor Lorentson? Amelia Lorentson 50:05.940
The Queensland government at the moment is reviewing Waste Strategy, and single-use coffee cup bans are likely to be part of that conversation. In fact, it was earmarked for 2027 for the ban to be introduced, but that's now been put on pause. Regardless of whether a future ban is introduced, Noosa is Different by Nature, and we have today an opportunity to lead by example, supporting local businesses to explore best practices voluntarily. Motion builds on the work that's already happening in our community. About creating the conditions for change to help cafes, event organisers, and coffee retailers to voluntarily transition confidently and successfully away from single-use cups. It's about supporting local businesses on the ground, many of whom are already ahead of the curve, and ensuring that they have tools, the knowledge and support. To transition from single-use coffee cups. Some facts: there's more than 1.8 billion coffee cups that are discarded each year in Australia, most aligned with plastics and actually can't be recycled through kerbside bins. That means they end up in our landfills, in our waterways or as microplastics on our beaches. In 2023, Noosa Council waste audits along Noosa Main Beach boardwalk and Gympie Terrace identified coffee cups as the most common litter item, 18% and 19.5% respectively. A 2025 audit at this stage of Hastings streets only identified coffee cups as one of the top three waste items. 2023 yorkshire on Noosa waste plan confirmed strong public support for initiatives that protect oceans, reduce plastic pollution and encourage responsible business practices. Respondents called for greater leadership from council in tackling waste at its source. Supporting a voluntary transition away from single-use coffee cups directly responds to this feedback. It also aligns with the sustainable practices actions in our Noosa Destination Management Plan which seeks to reinforce reputation as an environmentally responsible and future-ready destination. There's already other regions that are offering promising examples. In New South Wales, a town called bermangui, became the first Australian town ever where all the cafes voluntarily phased out civil use cups. They saved over 70,000 cups and there was $12,500 in savings for the participating businesses. Byron Shire council has also eliminated single-use plastics from council-run venues and events. Things. Noosa can be the first in Queensland to demonstrate this kind of progress through voluntary, council supported action. Ex-tropical Cyclone Alfred reminded me and the community how vulnerable we are to plastic pollution, but it also revealed our community strength. Our community turned out droves for beach clean-up, kids sifted sand for microplastics, cafes trialled reusable cup systems. The appetite for change is here, we just need to harness it and continue the momentum. Plastic a already laid the groundwork. With many local business members and more than 160,000 kilograms of plastics avoided, their community first model works. This motion strengthens our partnership with them to accelerate local change. Recently, Plastic Free Noosa has demonstrated its leadership in single-use coffee cups. The recent Noosa eat and drink festival was the first single-use coffee cup free event. Held in collaboration with a local business owner, Sunshine Social founder, Mr. Ben Clark. Attendees could grab a coffee, a cup, return it to its designated station, where it was washed and reused up to 1,000 times. Initiative is a prime example of leading the transition and shows the practical steps we can take to reduce plastic waste. This is the kind of innovation that we must encourage. That's why council's role is not to create impose change, the change, but to create the environment where it becomes easier and more attractive for businesses to make that shift on their own terms and timelines. This shift is not just about businesses, it's also about who we are as a community. Inspiring change not just for businesses, but inspiring change amongst residents and our visitors. Programs like this are not only environmentally responsible, they are vital to responsible destinations. Destination management, helping to ensure that Noosa remains a place where people want to live, visit and respect. Working closely with Plastic Free Noosa allows council to build on strong local momentum supporting a trusted community-led initiative already delivering great results across the Shire. Their close relationship with local businesses made them ideally placed to help drive this initiative. While some cafes such as Sunshine Social are already leading the way with low waste cup free models, broader change needs more than encouragement. It requires visible leadership, coordinated support and a commitment to walk alongside businesses by taking practical steps now Councillor Morrison, are you happy for Councillor Morrison to continue to be on top of this? Come. I had one sentence left, thank you. By taking practical steps now to voluntarily phase out single-use coffee cups, we're proving that small communities like NUSA Noosa can voluntarily lead. Big change. When we act early, act together and to act with purpose. Frank Wilkie 56:44.631
Thank you Councillor Lorentson and any questions or discussion councillors? Councillor Wilson. Nicola Wilson 56:48.671
Yeah, just part important what does that level of support look like? Is it financial support or is it resourcing? What level of support would we be giving that we don't already give? Amelia Lorentson 57:05.982
Councillor Lorentson. I might request that Director king-Rawlings can help me, assist me with that question. Nicola Wilson 57:16.892
In part A and B, support and collaboratively develop with torres and Noosa. What level of support would that require? Is that financial support? Is it resourcing? How is that over and above the support that we already give? Kim Rawlings 57:32.746
We currently fund the plastic-free Noosa program through our multi-year environment grants. It's in its third year of funding and it's a three-year program. So the third year of funding is $25,200. So going forward that will need to go through its normal processes. There would be some resource support that would be needed from staff to with, work with, you know, economic development staff, sustainably. Sustainability staff, our waste education staff to work with Tourism Noosa on this initiative. Frank Wilkie 58:13.349
Councillor Stockwell. SPEAKER_08 58:15.049
I think it's probably to the Director Infrastructure Services. Brian Stockwell 58:20.549
Reading that it appears just to be a restatement of our existing waste plan. SPEAKER_10 58:24.889
We've already got an action 1.3 that says continue we'll to continue to work with plastic free pre-Noosa. We've already got an 8.2 investigate a bit reusable schemes, take away cups and containers, preference for a reusable before recyclable, and 9.4 continue to support existing recycling programs and investigate emerging initiatives, for example, Simply Cups. So my question is, this just a statement that we continue to do business as usual, or is it a statement that would require budgetary consideration, and if the latter, would it mean that we'd have to reconsider other priorities in terms of Frank Wilkie 59:04.554
Councillor Walsh. Director Walsh. Shaun Walsh 59:10.294
Trauma Councillor. So, this is consistent with existing initiatives in our Waste Strategy and Environment Strategy. I think that the key distinguishment is that it's clear articulation about how we deliver it, which is about continuing to support the Tourism Noosa program, whereas the current strategies at the moment don't articulate specifically how we deliver it. I say that it's distinction, a that but I take further views from the council environment as we sort of share this space. Kim Rawlings 59:41.265
Yeah, look, just concur that it is consistent. You know, we've had a consistent strategy for a number of years. Noosa was one of the pilot locations, as Councillor Lorentson mentioned, around plastic free. Has been through an evolution of support. So, yes, it aligns with our strategies. This does-- would take, you know, another level. So, like I said before, there would need to be some resource support to work on a particular program. Around this for Tourism Noosa going forward. I can't say exactly what that would be or how much that would cost or anything at this stage. Frank Wilkie 01:00:19.661
Question to Councillor Finzel. Yes, Karen Finzel 01:00:21.381
Thank you, Mr Chair. With regards to are collaboratively developing a Plastic Free Noosa. When we talked about funding Tourism Noosa, there was, you know, robust conversation around KPIs into the future. A question to the staff Through the Chair, does this provide opportunity to ensure that KPIs are met and that it gives us an opportunity to work with Tourism Noosa to, you know, work with the community to ensure that what we work together on delivers exactly what we're asking for with value for money, given we're using ratepayers money to support these opportunities. Do you see this motion, or what's before us, sorry, notice of motion? To enable further rigours around our relationship and collaboration with Tourism Noosa. Kim Rawlings 01:01:27.549
So existing funding agreement already talks to these sorts of programs with Tourism Noosa, so it's already captured in our existing funding agreement which we're still currently operating under. There is absolutely opportunity to reinforce those things in any, in the coming 12 month funding agreement remnant or any future funding agreement. Um, plastic Noosa, Noosa, uh, plastic uh, plastic free. And Tourism Noosa are already working very strongly in this space this as I read this notion of this notice of motion provides you know some more support and strength to that and could be reflected in the upcoming funding agreement yeah so I think there's up there is definitely opportunity it's aligned with and we could continue to strengthen that through current and future funding agreements SPEAKER_15 01:02:19.765
Question Jessica Phillips 01:02:21.865
Thank you could this not support the Roadmap that we talked about in the tourism Noosa funding agreement because it gives a lot of depth and clarity would it could it be used in the Roadmap or is that could that be an intention behind it Kim Rawlings 01:02:35.640
Absolutely it could be the Roadmap that was articulated in the requirement for May report council was very much provides an opportunity and a process over the next six months to be clear about the things that we would like to work with Tourism Noosa on and what that might look like going forward so yes these project these projects that do align to both destination management and Environment Strategy and our base strategy would make sense. Frank Wilkie 01:03:10.240
Any other? Councillor Wegener. Tom Wegener 01:03:13.640
I'll quickly speak to the motion. Because I won't be already is doing what we what we are doing with our Destination Management Plan with the Waste Strategy and so forth. Um, but coffee cup is a thorn in our side. It absolutely is. And when I was in Cooran, in south Cooran, which is so far advanced in the in the waste treatment that it's just so inspiring to me that but you get a takeaway coffee cup and you're stuck with it because there's no trash cans. And so it really made me think about what you do with this coffee cup because it's expected that when you get a coffee, you're going to drink it out of a cup and stay there. And they have coffee cups for tourists, but there's no place to put it because they're waste cycle doesn't actually include you take being able to take something and throw it into a bin. Amazing. This I think there's there are so many things that council with the Waste Strategy with Tourism Noosa can do. There's a concept called the cup of charno where you take your cup and with the cup it becomes a basically sort of a coupon for getting another cup and again coming out of the biochar which is a biochar something we're going we're moving towards. The actual cup could go straight into the biochar facility coming up if it's a paper cup which is something that it's in the progress we're talking about it so I love what it's saying I'm a hundred percent behind all these ideas but I don't think this that the motion actually has meat on the bone that to describe think this bone that to describe how we're actually going to change when we say demonstrate leadership and see demonstrate leadership um for this shift away from single coffee single-use coffee cups well we're already doing that by funding tourism so the plastic free news with our Waste Strategy and I appreciate this but I don't know if it's if it if it's actually going to achieve what we probably wanted to do which is what we're doing thank you Karen Finzel 01:05:15.712
Council concern yes thank you for your input there I'm just wondering, I guess this is to Councillor Lorentson, and in response to what you've said, Councillor Wegener, Tom, you know, you feel as you can't support it because there's not enough meat on it. I'm wondering back to Councillor Phillips' question around the Roadmap. Could we perhaps make an additional point on this that we bring in some meat, as you say, to add a link to this and that Roadmap with the KPI? KPIs to ensure community also that we're not taking our eyes off this funding and we, you know, provided that back to community, you know, with this Roadmap to put some new eyes on it due to our limitations when it came before us. Is there appetite from the councillors around the table to add some further meat, as you say, to support Councillor Lorentson? Lawrence's motion to bring in the Roadmap and ensure community that we will remain, with our eyes focused firmly on this Roadmap to the future. Do I have, is there anyone? Frank Wilkie 01:06:29.817
Are you wishing to move an amendment, Councillor Finzel, to that extent? Karen Finzel 01:06:34.497
Oh, of course, I'm happy to test that. Yes, of course. Wording? Um, do we want to vote, like vote on this and then start again? Or do you want me to put a like a point A on this? Are you happy for that? Frank Wilkie 01:06:56.040
Well, I'll ask a question of you is point B. Is this collaboratively developed with Plastic Free Noosa, a simple scalable plan and program focusing on education, business support and behaviour change initiatives, which does speak to collaboratively working with Plastic Free Noosa. Could be part of the road map, built into the road map, or KPIs. There is, part B does suggest that there will be more work done to put the meat on the bones. Would you that satisfy what you're asking for? Karen Finzel 01:07:31.280
Well, I'm only trying to garner support around the table for the motion. Just trying to, yes, I hear what you say about point B, but adding extra security that we do have, use the terminology Roadmap, which we did, you know, talk about and use around the table in the debate about the TN. So I would like to see that added as either a point or a word within the sentence to actually give us a focal point to ensure community that we are not dropping the ball on this and we will be keeping a tight focus on what our relationship is moving forward with TN. Jessica Phillips 01:08:11.926
I'll just ask a question I'm not sure if we need to add anything more to it as the directors just said that it's pretty clearly I think there's already enough collaboration like I think we understand and Director Rawlings said that it could very much fit in the Roadmap so I'm not sure if we need to make it any it to me it's very clear gives us enough to work with so I'm happy to just put it as is. Nicola Wilson 01:08:38.291
I just want to note that when we get to the grant applications that there was an application for a grant for this project that wasn't supported and so I'm just a bit inconsistent here if we approve a notified motion to progress this initiative when it wasn't for budget just there's a bit of a mixed message the Frank Wilkie 01:09:08.162
Plastic free program it's a plastic free program regarding coffee Amelia Lorentson 01:09:11.699
Yeah can I ask a question to the Director Community Services so in reference to the community grant that wasn't. It's environment. Sorry? It's environment. Kim in reference to the grant application my understanding was that they had made a request for a commercial dishwasher yes Councillor Lorentson and can I just clarify you asked whether it was with regard to a commercial dishwasher? No there was just a question asked by Councillor Phillips in terms of why the grant application that she understood was a rejection of the program and I just requested clarity what was actually refused? It was Councillor Wilson. SPEAKER_17 01:10:17.393
Yes okay Councillor Wilson so from memory I can confirm. The application was around for a grant within the climate change grants programs for $15,000 and that was to support a commercial dishwasher to help establish or get started get the ball rolling with having plastic free. Single-use coffee cup free events for Tourism Noosa and while the evaluation panel thought that there was merit in that application the value for money wasn't well demonstrated it seemed like high amount for what was trying to be initiated as well as we had internal conversations with the economic development team and our own sustainability team that there are efforts to push towards waste free events happening already and that through the Destination Management Plan and through the agreement with Tourism Noosa we would be advancing this initiative separately so that's why it was an advance as a grant thank you. Frank Wilkie 01:11:19.003
Thank you. Councillor Stockwell. Brian Stockwell 01:11:22.863
I think I'm going to talk to a motion. SPEAKER_10 01:11:26.783
The difficulty of raising this through a Noosa motion is what we're just seeing. Brian Stockwell 01:11:32.171
Are we trying to reprioritise the efforts in grants? Are we trying to use this as an opportunity to put one very small piece of the puzzle into the Roadmap? It is totally consistent with business as stated. Usual there is no need, it's a redundant motion from that respect. The space strategy has already identified how we're going to support these initiatives. By putting it in Noosa motion it just says this is the item we want staff to focus on here. With their councils having the ability to say well this might mean this drops off, I think it's important that we don't start putting tiny little bits into a Roadmap or this. We need to say we've got a strategic step forward, path forward, this is consistent with it's business as usual. If more investment was required to heighten it, that was something that we would have been considering in the budget. To ask for a report detailing costs suggested it's above what is business as usual. And I think it's a roundabout way of trying to say we're going to choose this as the winner, whereas I'd like to see waste management, recycling, reuse and avoidance expertly informed about what's best use of our dollars to get the maximum impact. I have no problem with ABC totally consistent with our strategy. Asking for a further report is just adding an administrative step. It's something we should, if it was such a high priority, we should have considered in the budget initiatives. Karen Finzel 01:13:20.201
A question then Through the Chair to the CEO. Can you please, in response to Councillor stockwell's final comment around capabilities of staff to prioritise in our report to council, can you please let us know in your opinion. I know that, from my opinion, staff is pressed to capacity. I'm just seeking your input on that. SPEAKER_08 01:13:47.940
Thank you, Councillor. I think Larry Sengstock 01:13:52.460
That's a good point, and I think that's a good point as it as well. There will be some level of oversight from us as staff. I think what this is really doing is just trying to highlight the idea of plastic cuts. Yes, we are already doing a lot of this, but it's just bringing it to the high higher profile and surface. So on. I think we do have a mechanism with plastic for Noosa to look at a program that we can utilise, an existing to highlight this. So that's what this is about really. In terms of reports, really any costs associated, that would come back if we have to then look at how do we fund that in a budget BID going forward, either in a VR1, VR2 or future budget cycle. So that's what that's about. So I'm comfortable with the way that it is in terms of just bringing a focus to the plastic free and we know that that's something that the State and Federal governments are working towards. All I think Councillor Amelia is talking about in my conversations with her is just bringing it to the fore a bit better and getting ahead of the game, which Noosa hasn't had to do in any way in terms of environmental go in and he's talking. Point yes. Brian Stockwell 01:15:02.532
I think the CEO has left into a debate. He was asked a very specific question. Jessica Phillips 01:15:08.832
Great question, please. Probably back to Director Walsh. Just for clarification, because what I understood when you answered. Yes, it sort of sat in that Waste Strategy, but gave us real clarity on. Like, it wasn't imposing more. It was actually just sort of expanding on what's there, which is quite beneficial, is what I got from you. But maybe just clarify for me how you'd answered before. Thanks. Shaun Walsh 01:15:38.822
Thank you. As I thought was the question. It provides clarity of the way we would deliver this particular initiative under the WAI strategy, you know, to focus on our relationship with Tourism Noosa and our plastic-free Noosa program. So it requires. A bit of collaboration because the Director Strategy & Environment had the record look after the relationship with Tourism Noosa. But they have provided valuable leadership in this space today. Thank you. Councillor Finzel. Karen Finzel 01:16:06.954
I have a question. Yeah, we all agree, you know, that this aligns where we're going and what we want to do. We come from a strategic perspective. Yes, I have a question. I would like to ask the question, how do we measure this benefit that arises from the collaboration? Kim Rawlings 01:16:31.621
What I can say is, Plastic Free Noosa program is measured, has raft of measures and they report on them regularly. Councillor Lorentson, I think, may have mentioned a number of the statistics that come from the regular reporting that Plastic Free Noosa do. They do fabulous reporting and have for a number of years. Can't reiterate the stats, but it's, significant, so there are, there are established measurement and monitoring programs that already exist and they report and they're publicly available to demonstrate the benefit of these sorts of programs. Karen Finzel 01:17:22.395
The first thing. Councillor Finzel. So that leads me to the question then, and I guess that's count, directed to perhaps to Councillor Lorentson then. What is your goal for raising this today when it fit, it seems from the questions asked around the table and have been clarified and answered that we already seem to have those things in place. Can you just tell us what your intention here today with the motion, please? Amelia Lorentson 01:17:53.433
Intention? I think I thought I articulated that really quite well in the opening and in the report, if you read the report. The objective today is to lead. No one in Queensland is leading this transition. I started in this space because in 2027 before the David percivali government came in place that the Queensland government had set a date. 2027 all coffee cups, single-use coffee cups were to be banned. So I started in this space with let's voluntarily transition into that. We don't we need a mandate, we need to be a place where people come for solutions. We don't wait for everyone else. This is our opportunity to lead. On the ground and again I've been very active in the space of microplastics during ex-tropical Cyclone Alfred, I mean, okay, so back to your question. It's about leadership Karen. It's about leadership. It's about scaling up good stuff that is happening in our community and it's not resource intensive. It's already happening. We've got leading in this space and we've got waste and economic department, our economic development team, our Waste Strategy, our Destination Management Plan. This aligns with those strategies. It just allows us the opportunity to make big changes with we've got small steps. Swings. With smaller programs and small initiatives. Part of my notice of motion again, if you've read it, there's also letters of support. Karen Finzel 01:19:36.630
I don't know. I take offence that you keep going referencing have I read it. Yes, I have read my reports. I'd ask you to withdraw that statement. Amelia Lorentson 01:19:45.190
Thank you. I apologise if you've taken personal offence to that. Part of the reporting, there are letters of support. From the Noosa World Surfing Reserve, from Plastic Free Noosa. There's a specific question that appears to be just talking about processes. Frank Wilkie 01:20:03.127
We'll take the question as being answered. Thank you. I have a question of probably the Director Community Services. In our, in council's facilities, what is the current approach to simply use coffee cups within, say, the Leisure Centre and the aquatic centre? Kim Rawlings 01:20:23.940
Thank you, Through the Chair. So, since 2018, we have been progressively moving. Away from the plastic coffee cups of the time to those that are more sustainable. Certainly, we have had challenges through the time over the quality of cups that can be effectively recycled. But that's getting those Nicola Wilson 01:20:51.518
Qualities improving considerably. So, some of the initiatives that we have in place are being able to bring keep cups, et cetera, as well as selling keep cups so that. Turn up and they can buy keep cups so that they can come backwards and forwards and use the same cup. So, we certainly encourage that through all three facilities that are selling coffee and we progressively continue to look at the market to improve the cups that we're using so that they can be as sustainable as possible in terms of the take away coffee cups. SPEAKER_12 01:21:30.635
Thank you. Frank Wilkie 01:21:34.035
Do the councillors wish to speak to the motion or ask any further questions? Amelia Lorentson 01:21:41.855
I will. Yesterday morning, seven o'clock in the morning, I attended the green horizons breakfast that was hosted by Tourism Noosa. The attendees, everyone there heard from professor Ian Lowe of the Noosa Biosphere Reserve Foundation. I sat next to him. He's written me an email as has Fiona birkin applauding the motion that's in front of us. Professor Ian Lowe yesterday reminded us that we are not the of this planet, that we're tenants. His words, we lease it, and it's our moral responsibility not to leave it worse than where we found it. Brian Stockwell 01:22:30.018
Yeah, as much as I love the words of professor Ian Lowe the purpose of closing is to respond the matters raised in the debate. It appears to be a very long new contribution to the debate rather than responding to items, so the purpose of closing should not be to introduce new material. Frank Wilkie 01:22:50.959
Councillor Stockwell, you're quite right because it doesn't give other councillors would like to respond, Councillor Lorentson, if you'd like to close responding to anything you may have heard around the table and reiterating your initial arguments, please. Amelia Lorentson 01:23:04.296
Okay. Right now, we're failing in our responsibility to leave this place better than we found it. I mentioned stats before, data, 1.8 billion coffee cups that are discarded across Australia. I'm going to just add a little bit of more data. Plastic production has surged from just 2 million tonnes in 1950. Again, to 460 million tonnes in 2019. If current trends continue by 2050, the plastic in our oceans could outweigh the fish. When you look at those numbers, the scale of the problem can feel overwhelming. It's easy to ask, how do we stop this? The answer is, one action at a time. Small actions like the action of small actions have been taken together create big change supporting a voluntary, industry-led shift away from single-use plastic is a yet powerful step. Change. It shows leadership, empowers local businesses, and helps build a culture of responsibility. The appetite to change is clearly growing as I've mentioned after ex-Cyclone Alfred saw hundreds and hundreds of residents out on our beaches from Teewah the North Shore all along our coastal eastern beaches. Kids were picking up plastic, kids were learning about microplastics. Adults were in droves picking up the microplastics. We had local cafes experimenting with reusable cup systems. This is something really important to this community. That momentum deserves support and that's why I'm here today. Let's build on the support, build on through heavy mandates. The ban on coffee cups will be coming. So let's, with leadership, partnership and encouragement, voluntarily transition into single-use coffee cups. Solutions exist. Our job is to make them more accessible, more. And more widely adopted, starting here in Noosa. Let's send a clear message today that Noosa will voluntarily lead Queensland's transition away from single-use coffee cups, not because we're told but because it's who we are and because our and their kids are counting on it and because there is no planet to beat. If we can lead on coffee cups, councillors, then maybe we can do the same with plastic bottles. Takeaway packaging. Even fast fashion. Voluntary, industry led action supported by council and grounded in community values can become a model for broader change. If we think it's impossible, it will be. But if we believe we can, we will. Hope is all we have, and the end is near. Of good people who refuse to give up. We are Different by Nature. So let's lead with purpose. And I'm going to leave you with a couple of quotes. One's my favourite, the greatest threat to our planet is the belief that someone else will save it. And the other quote which I wrote just listening to the conversation around this table today is, let's not go finding problems or solutions. Frank Wilkie 01:26:52.516
Thank you. I'll put the motion notes in favour. Councillor Phillips, Finzel, Lawrence and Wilkie. Those against? Wilson, Stockwell and Wegener. The motion's carried. We now have another notice of motion from Councillor, this time from Councillor time Jessica Phillips. Jessica Phillips, would Phillips, you like to move your motion, please? Jessica Phillips 01:27:36.760
Okay, thank you. So my notice of motion today is a proposal to waive dog registration fees for approved foster carers and so my recommendation is that council a develop and implement a process carers who are affiliated with recognised animal welfare organisations and b prepare a detailed implementation plan for 1 the establishment of application and approval process for foster carers, two criteria to ensure carers are affiliated with a recognised animal welfare group, three administrative systems to track and manage waived to introduce a new animal welfare registrations system, and six, investigate options investigate to introduce a time-limited exception example up to two years per animal to ensure compliance and regular uptakes. Frank Wilkie 01:28:38.490
We have a seconder for that, please. Finsale. Karen Finzel 01:28:42.253
To second for the debate. Thank you. Mr Chair. Councillor Phillips. Jessica Phillips 01:28:47.413
Thank you. I just want to start by saying a house is not a home without a dog. And every time I looked for a quote, there were so many, but I am get here home at the most because I've rescued dogs my whole life and my youngest, whenever she's having a messy day, the dog is there to comfort her. So I want to start by saying I have been a Councillor Councillor for a year but I've been a local for 39 years and a police officer for 15 years so my experience has actually taught me the weight of responsibility and the power of practical compassionate governance. I feel I was elected to advocate on community values and this motion does just that. My notified motion for us is quite clear to waive dog registration fees for approved foster carers affiliated with recognised animal welfare organisations. It's a targeted and sensible initiative that supports those who are actually already doing a lot of work, that benefits our entire region. These foster carers are not asking for recognition, they're asking for relief. From a system that while well intended can unintentionally penalise those who are helping the most vulnerable animals in our community. Foster care reduces shelter overcrowding, lowers euthanasia rates and improves animal welfare outcomes. The RSPCA estimates that foster programs save councils thousands annually in operational costs. Registration fees, whilst modest, can also can often deter, especially for carers with multiple foster animals or possible fixed living incomes. And now with the closure of the RSPCA of Noosa shelter, our community has lost, in my opinion, a critical support system. That facility was more than just a shelter, it was a lifeline. Its absence has left a gap that we must now fill through stronger partnerships with the Sunshine Coast Council, organisations and by empowering locals to step up. So this motion is not just about waiving a fee, it's actually about recognising the shift in responsibility and responding with leadership. This motion includes a robust application and approval process. It's clear criteria for affiliation with recognised welfare groups, the administrative systems to ensure transparency and compliance, and a time limitation exemption to keep records current and accountable. I believe this is actually a smart motion because it's compassionate, it's cost effective, and it's exactly the kind of initiative that our community expects from its leaders. Frank Wilkie 01:31:46.630
Question from the Director Development & Regulation, could you to us the current regime regarding fees charged to foster care dogs, I don't know if there are any? Is that correct? And what would be the cost of implementing this regulatory system which currently there is none? Correct. Richard MacGillivray 01:32:11.030
Through the Chair, thank you for the questions. So at the moment there is no specified fee for foster animals at all in the Fees and Charges. There are fee waivers in place for support dogs, so guide dogs and the like, so there is no fee for that, but nothing specific for foster dogs at this point in time. There is also no fee for pensioners that have de-sexed dogs as well, so this motion potentially could link to a similar arrangement to a support dog, for example, and there would need to be a bit of a process around evidencing that and the process involved. In terms of cost, we've done some initial investigation to date already around the situation with numbers of foster dogs. We believe it would be well within the $10,000 threshold to be able to occur determine without the need for a further report. We understand, speaking with a number of foster care groups, that on average the dogs, you know, some foster dogs are very short-term. Some are as little as 14 up to 21 days, which you don't need to register if it's less than 14 days under the act, but there are many that for health issues and for a number of other issues may need to foster those animals for a bit longer and therefore to be registered as well. So the dollars we estimate, and again we haven't done a full investigations date, would be well within the $10,000 threshold. Frank Wilkie 01:33:47.967
So this idea, if it was implemented, would it require foster carers to make an application? Pat on I'm full Council, cancellability, which doesn't want work it to be an a non onerous-nurse process. Could as well. You just explain how it would work? And hopefully there would you find out it who needs to apply? Fee. We don't want there to be a fine for not applying. Could Correct. Richard MacGillivray 01:34:15.128
So at the moment there's an obligation for all people with dogs to register 14 days. So once they have ownership of a dog, after 14 days they're required under law to register that animal. What this would look to do is, you know, within that 14 day period for them to apply to us with a copy of the foster care documentation, confirm that they are fostering for a period of time, that would be processed and they would receive the registration. Without any fee imposed. So we obviously need to work out the process to do that as part of this proposed motion, but we believe it should be relatively streamlined given we have some similar categories already that exist for support dogs. Thank you hopefully that's helpful. Questions? Frank Wilkie 01:35:05.372
Any discussion? Amelia Lorentson 01:35:11.752
Councillor Lorentson? I'm happy just a to quickly question. Speak to this. I really love this notified motion quite a bit. It's a. Really meaningful gesture, and it's a really good message coming out of council that we recognise the important role that foster carers have, and as Councillor Phillips mentioned with no longer having its own animal shelter, encouraging and supporting foster care also helps take pressure off the surrounding facilities. It's just a simple, low-cost way for council to do our bit and contribute to the broader animal welfare network and also it speaks volumes of who we are as a community, that we care and these are really important issues to thank so thank you Councillor Phillips for bringing this to us. Karen Finzel 01:36:13.901
Councillor Finlay yeah, I'd just like to take this opportunity to firstly thank Councillor Phillips for the time and the effort she has taken to bring that before us here today. I think it truly reflects feels how she about her dogs and our community, so I think it's a great way to show leadership, that's what we're all around the table for, and being able to ensure that our beneficiaries do, you the benefits of our leadership focus on the needs of our community which we're here to serve. The staff have told us that it seems like a pretty easy administrative thing to move forward with. It's cost effective, it looks like. And the main thing is we can measure the care and the love in our community that people have for their dogs and the idea that they'd like to rescue them and rehome them. I think it's a it's a beautiful gesture. Thank you. Council, for those. Frank Wilkie 01:37:11.765
Yes, like the last notice of motion, this is something that occurs already. We've heard that it is another level of bureaucracy, but it won't be too onerous and will help us have better information about the practice. So, happy can I suppose you just close? Jessica Phillips 01:37:29.738
Very quickly, thank you. The intention behind it is really just to send a very clear message. This community felt, it hit hard when the RSPCA closed. And I know so many residents, it's not just my rescued dogs, that have put RSPCA in their will. You know, they are committed. To rescuing and fostering animals. It's loud and clear. And I think that, you know, I look at the fact that a PTSD dog or the dogs we see that are already meet this criteria, I see a lot I see a foster animal just the same you know we're waiting for them to be rehomed and I want to encourage I want it to be an encouragement to people that if they thought you know that it may be onerous or it's difficult that this is actually makes it really clear I've included the fact that it has to be recognised and animal welfare groups I've made sure that I've looked into making sure that it doesn't start opening the doors to you know people doing looking at for a different way I've spoken to something many residents around this topic just to make sure that it loud and clear that they feel that this would be something that they recognise as a is a great leadership from council so Frank Wilkie 01:38:52.626
Thank you put the motion those in favour that's unanimous that brings us to consideration of committee reports 11.1 the Planning & Environment Committee report. 1. Planning and Environment Court appeal number d44 of 2025 application for Material Change of Use for Food & Drink Outlet short-term accommodation at 203 207 giga Terrace Noosaville 11.1.2 planning application decided by delegated authority April 2025 11.1.3 Zero Emissions Noosa ZEN Inc. Annual report 11.1.4 is a new item due to the new system which is all the planning and committee recommendations in en bloc I have a mover and seconder for the Planning & Environment Committee recommendations Councillor Stockwell we'll have a second please Councillor Wegener any discussion all in favour that's unanimous 11.2 Services & Organisation Committee report 11.2.1 Sunrise Shops shop for revised lease renewal 11.2. Was referred to the General Committee commingles the news of your partial management plan can I pull that out please that's been moved to the General Committee 11.2.3 committee which was the operational plan quarterly report 11.2.4 Services & Organisation Committee Recommendations remembrance en bloc we have a move and a seconder for the Happy to move. Councillor Finzel. I'll second. Seconded Councillor Wilson. Any discussion? None. All in favour? That's unanimous. 11.3.1 was community grants program summary, community project grants, three year community alliance agreements and three year signature community events. 11.3.2 community grants program, community program grants events and Councillor Phillips has a conflict of interest. Jessica Phillips 01:40:44.907
Thank you. In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009 I informed the meeting that I have a prescribed conflict of interest in relation to item 8.2 2025-26 community grants program community project grants events on this agenda because relation to the funding recommended recommendation to the Hastings Street Association as my sister-in-law Joanne Phillips is on the committee of a result of my conflict of interest I will now leave meeting room while the matter is considered and voted on Frank Wilkie 01:41:18.248
Thank you Councillor Phillips now we have a by the committee recommendation move Councillor Stockwell seconded Councillor Wegener any discussion all in favour that's carried unanimously may we have Councillor Phillips back in the meeting please 11.3. Is the community grants program community program grants program and projects 11.3.4 community grants program community project grants infrastructure 11.3.5 equipment Wegener you Councillor Wegener, if have you have a conflict, you'd if like to declare Tom Wegener 01:42:14.977
Yes in accordance with Chapter 5B of the local government acts 2009 I informed the meeting that I have a prescribed conflict of interest in relation to item 8.5-2526 community grants community project grants equipment in relation to the funding application to Pomona Arts Inc. (Majestic Theatre) on this agenda as I am a committee member of the Pomona arts incorporation as a result of my conflict of interest I will now leave the meeting room while the matter is considered thank you Councillor wigina Frank Wilkie 01:42:53.640
Right can I move and second it for the committee recommendation please thank you Councillor Lorentson and secondly Councillor Phillips any discussion all in favour that's unanimous maybe have council we're going to back in the meeting please next item we have community grants program the three-year community alliance agreements page 3 of 262 Ordinary Meeting 19th of June Councillor Wilson we're gonna have topics to declare first is Councillor Nicola first Wilson Nicola Wilson 01:43:34.211
In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009 I informed the meeting that I have a prescribed conflict of interest in relation to item 8.6 2025 to 26 community grants program three-year Community Alliance Agreement this agenda in relation to the funding recommendation to Noosa Arts Theatre as I am the senior vice president as a result of my conflict of interest I will now leave the meeting room while the matter is considered and voted on. Soon cast a record Tom Wegener 01:44:06.136
In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009 I inform the meeting that I have a prescribed conflict of interest in relation to item 8.6 25-26 community grants program three-year the three-year Community Alliance Agreement in reference to the funding application to Pomona arts incorporation the majestic theatre. On this agenda as I am a committee member of the Pomona arts as a result of my conflict of interest I will now leave the meeting room while the matter is considered and voted on. Frank Wilkie 01:44:36.766
Thank you Councillor Wegener. Informed the meeting that I no longer have a prescribed conflict of interest in this matter as I have resigned from my position as committee member of the Noosa Arts Theatre, one of the recommended recipients of an alliance grant. I am now a general member, life member and volunteer of the theatre and that is my undeclared statement. Can I have a move and a seconder for the committee recommendation please. Happy to second. Seconded Councillor Stockwell. Any discussion? All in favour? That's unanimous. May we have Councillor Wilson and Councillor Wegener back in the meeting please. Community grants program, three-year signature community events grants. Councillor Wilson, again. SPEAKER_15 01:45:37.420
Signature community events. Nicola Wilson 01:45:42.345
With Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009 and former meeting that I have prescribed conflict of interest for item 8.7 2025 to 26 community grants program, three-year signature community event grants. This matter in relation to the funding recommendation to the Cooroy Chamber of Commerce as my partner Roy vanderberg is on the executive committee. As a result of my conflict of interest I will now leave the meeting room while the matter is considered. Thank you Councillor Wilson. Frank Wilkie 01:46:08.280
In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009 I inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest for item 8.7 community grants program 3 signature community event grants on this in relation to the funding recommendation to Noosa Alive! according to the Queensland government's to conflicts of interest dated data April 2025, being solely a patron of an organisation does not in itself constitute a declarable conflict of interest. However, I would like to declare as a precautionary measure that I have a link to one of Noosa Alive!'s patrons, David Williamson, and that Mr Williamson has to my previous and current election campaigns to the value of more than $2,000, which is considered a prescribed conflict of interest. If Mr Williamson or a group he was an executive committee member of were where to be the recipient of council funding. As a result of this electoral donation link and potential conflict of interest for full disclosure, to avoid any perceptions of bias regarding my consideration of Noosa reliance grant submission, I choose to leave the meeting room in accordance with my legislative obligations. Brian Stockwell 01:47:12.373
Just before you do, Councillor Wilkie, I think there is a up there. Typo the first two words on the second line don't seem to three years signature of community events grants. Thank on this agenda. Three or you just take it. Frank Wilkie 01:47:34.678
In relation to the funding, is that better Councillor Stockwell? Of course it is. Thank you. That's fine. Yeah, thank you. Yeah. Brian Stockwell 01:47:53.439
So I'll take over the Chair for this council. So council, just wait. Would someone like to move the recommendation? Move Councillor Wegener and a seconder? I have a second. Councillor Finzel, no discussion? I'll put the motion. Those in favour. That's unanimous. Amelia Lorentson 01:48:14.072
Can we invite-- the press sorry, just a question Through the Chair. There was no motion that moved that yourself was going to take over the Chair. Have we actually followed your process? Question to the CEO. SPEAKER_08 01:48:27.008
I don't believe we need to because it's an automatic-- when the Chair leaves, the Deputy Mayor takes over. Brian Stockwell 01:48:36.480
When the Mayor is not available, the deputy-- I think the words are in the-- that you just take over. Amelia Lorentson 01:48:42.245
Thank you. If it's all right, otherwise SPEAKER_08 01:48:47.525
Otherwise, in other meetings-- other meetings when we're in the summaries of this-- will be a little different because it's not the word I wrote to myself, to the Deputy Mayor. Thank you. SPEAKER_12 01:48:59.566
Can I please request a two-minute break? Frank Wilkie 01:49:02.046
Can I talk to my Chair? Yes, I agree. Thank you. I think it's time. Jessica Phillips 01:49:07.626
Mr Chair, can I please ask for a two-minute break when we-- I think Frank Wilkie 01:49:12.346
Okay. Yes, after we finish the grants. Yes, thank you. Before we get to the infrastructure portion. Thank you. Environment-- 11.3.8, environment, climate change, resilience grants, environment project grants, round 20, climate change response grants, round 5. Now Councillor Lorentson would like to pull out the Noosa foreshore infrastructure master plan. Before we do that I'd like to propose a five minute break. We've been going for close to two hours. Everyone in favour? Yes. Okay, thank you. See you in five minutes. Frank Wilkie 02:02:45.065
All right. The next item is, are we back here? You'll say NUSA Noosa surveys help shape and refine this plan. More than 2,000 residents provided a variety of input, with many kindly thanking council after seeing their ideas reflected in the revised draft. The intention was always to conduct a genuine process. To co-create-. A shared space that everyone could enjoy for years to come. The 20-year plan's key features include retention of existing parking and loading zones based on feedback from disability advocates and elderly residents who provided wider shared pathways have they've been being been provided for improved improvement. Safety and listening to and acting on the feedback from disability advocates is something dear to the heart of everyone around this table two swimming areas where boats are restricted upgrades to parkland facilities and retention of existing recreational facilities the boat ramp area remains most mostly in its original state in and response was to the feedback received except for that wider pathway in front of the boat ramp necessitated by the feedback from disability advocates those with mobility problems and we all understand that that's the area where two shared pathways converge into one it is a pinch point in order for everyone all users to safely traverse that area been proposed to increase it from 2.8 to 3.5 metres and include shade and that will include impinging upon roadside car parks 10 spaces their cast faces will be translated into 18 motor scooter places there'll be further consultation about that when it comes to individual precinct design and may be other solutions that we can come up with the tennis court is also being kept as a revered part of the force rules heritage after discussions with the tennis club future tennis court upgrades will enable a more diverse range of sports council also committed to existing 404 car parking spaces in the precinct are clearly recognised from the plan and any future changes are subject to thoughtful design and community engagement the master plan also addresses various challenges including ageing infrastructure river flooding and erosion the master plan allows council to apply for external a student grant funding so we spare ratepayers the upgrade costs estimated to be a minimum of 10 million dollars over the next 20 years key aspects will undergo detailed design and ongoing community consultation to ensure residents are kept informed and that what's delivered continues to reflect our community's collective and involving aspirations together council and our community have helped shape the future of the Noosaville foreshore and I thank everyone who've played a role in this milestone project and acted in good faith. Amelia Lorentson 02:05:54.691
I'd like to try an amendment please. That all existing on-Street car parking spaces within the Noosaville Boat Ramp and Ely Park precinct be retained and that the current pathway also Frank Wilkie 02:06:20.659
Councillor Lorentson this is similar to an amendment that we already tried. The current path, the current pathway with we've already approved an amendment that sorry a motion that pathways being expanded to 3.5. So we've already tested different pathway widths. So for that reason I'm saying it's a it's something that's already been tested. And what's your response? Amelia Lorentson 02:06:57.889
Can I argue that this is precinct specific? So the original pathway width was for precinct wide as was the no net loss amendment which was precinct wide. This one is-specific, and as you just mentioned in your opening statement that it is still open to community feedback. It is a living document and it can be, as we get into detailed design, changed. We would look at precinct by precinct so thank you Karen Finzel 02:07:58.728
I just have a question Through the Chair and possibly at the CEO. I don't pertain to know everything unfortunately. I'd like to. Just a question because from my understanding. Councillor Phillips the other day tried to bring something to the table and then she tried to then move another like amend that and it was from my memory and I could have it wrong was then you know couldn't come back to the table because we had already been to debate and tried so I'm seeking clarification because I don't think there's equity here and there seems to be then a discord around how this is moving so I'm not comfortable with where we're going out of you know respect to Councillor to Councillor Phillips and also to our decision-making table in terms of you know our Standing Orders and what is applicable. Frank Wilkie 02:09:00.180
The difference is I have accepted the argument that this is about a public pathways Councillor and specific precincts only rather than Councillor Phillips' motion which was all pathways be 3 metres. So I do see a difference and I've ruled that it will be allowed. Yes? Karen Finzel 02:09:18.367
Yeah so for clarification we've got a matter before us and maybe that was the adjustment council wish to make, I don't know, but we're arguing I would consider if it's in the agenda item that is what we're arguing. So can you, can we allow Councillor Phillips to allow space to give us her intention on that motion in order to help us seek clarification as to what she was really trying to say in that because I'm not comfortable that I want to make sure that we've got correct process. Frank Wilkie 02:09:55.651
Councillor Finzel, you can dissent from my ruling if you'd like to move a motion dissenting from my ruling but I'm allowing this amendment to be debated and it will rise and fall on its own merits. And further to that Councillor Phillips Councillor Phillips amendment that she that tried and she tried to move and failed with on Monday on Monday is no longer relevant Jessica Phillips 02:10:24.062
So yes um one of the issues that I'd like clarifying was the there was a question around that Director Walsh put up around if it included TMR which was thought about on the floor and the issue I have with Monday was that actually. We. Frank Wilkie 02:10:45.939
We're getting off track. We're talking about this motion in front of us here. Can we just deal with this amendment and there's time for questions as part of the discussion. Karen Finzel 02:10:57.950
Yes, question to the Chair. I would like to kindly request that Councillor Phillips raises that to help inform our decision where we're going. Can we please allow her to speak? Frank Wilkie 02:11:12.070
Not now because we have a motion before us which needs to be seconded. We have an amendment This is the business we're dealing with at the moment. There are questions that could be asked of Councillor Phillips or any staff once we get into the debate about the motion itself. Okay, do we have a seconder for the motion please, the amendment? I'm happy to second. Thank you Councillor Phillips. Councillor Lorentson. Amelia Lorentson 02:11:43.408
Okay, so this amendment is simply to the strong and consistent feedback that we've received from community, the residents, local businesses, the boaties and our recreational fishermen who have made it clear that they don't support the removal of car parking near the Noosaville boat ramp. The proposed loss of 10 spaces currently used for overflow float trailer parking will have direct and negative consequences. These include displacement of trailer parking into Mary Street, George Street and surrounding residential areas potentially creating congestion, access issues and increased safety risk. The justification for footpath widening in this location remains unclear and in my opinion unsupported by any meaningful data or demonstrated needs. Administrative needs. Residents, and I've been meeting up with lots of residents over the last, since our meeting on Monday, have expressed that this particular part is not a place for people to linger. There's been no pedestrian congestion study, there's been no usage audit, and there's been no accessibility assessment presented to suggest that the current two point eight metre path is inadequate. In fact, the existing path already meets national and state accessibility standards at two and a half metres. It's accessible, it's safe, it's mix use we see here, mainly walkers, families, and recreational cyclists. Again, residents and boaties and Fisher people that I met over the last few days have also this is a bottle that this is a bottle this is not a bottleneck and doesn't reflect their feedback or on-ground reality. It's well used and it's functional and it doesn't need to be interfered with moreover bike parking facilities to the east and west of the boat ramp are often as observed again by the our residents. They've observed that those bike parking facilities are under utilised which to me further challenges the narrative that we require more space for personal for motorbikes. Again the question that's been asked through community is where is the data that support these changes. Again the residents in particular our boaties and fishermen have clearly expressed that they want this area left alone. As locals have stated the proposed pathway expansion provides in their opinion no real benefit to and work there. On the contrary introduces new challenges and removes scarce and essential car parks and potentially undermines the very character and functionality of the foreshore. People I've been speaking to, again, a lot of boaties and a lot of fishermen and local business people, they're not incidental users of this precinct. They are core to the identity, culture and daily activities activity of the nusselville foreshore, in favour of a marginally wider footpath signals, to me, a disconnect between policy and real world use. This is not just a design question, it's also a question of values. Noosa is not an inner city precinct it's a community with deeply held connections to place to river and rhythm. Planning decisions should enhance access not restricted and they should be evidence-based. If we can't show clear, transparent and justification for removing essential parking then in my opinion we shouldn't proceed we should maintain the status quo. If we have no data no demand for increased two-wheeled vehicle parking at this location or modelling to show the impact of such a shift again then we must not proceed until that information comes to us. We owe our residents, our visitors and our future generations a commitment to practicality over aesthetics and access over obstruction. I hope you support this amendment and give opportunity for that have been quite vocal and have expressed their concerns in this precinct. This is an opportunity for us to let them know that we're listening. Can I just have a yes, Councillor Finzel. Karen Finzel 02:16:25.345
Just a question to the staff around when we talk about data and data informed decision making. Just a comment please regarding the process around the walking and cycling meetings that had where we engage with broader community around where we wanted to go as a collective, just to show evidence that this has been broadly put out to community through other processes, not just what's before us here today. Frank Wilkie 02:16:59.798
Director Walsh, are you able question? Shaun Walsh 02:17:11.404
Terms of that previous work about Walking and Cycling Strategy, would be the first thing. And then I can provide some views about, you know, the different views we've had about the pathways of this location from the more recent. Kim Rawlings 02:17:24.259
Thank you. SPEAKER_17 02:17:26.159
So as part of the walking strategy, there was workshops with the Project Reference Group, and there was also a Your Say consultation done with the wider community. The Walking and Cycling Strategy identified a hierarchy for our pathways for walking and for cycling. The terrorists. It's identified as a principal recreational route for cycling and also a principal, recreational walking route as well. So within the Walking and Cycling Strategy, there is defined minimum and desirable for pathways for different hierarchies. And that also is guided by other guidelines as well. So we also have TMR guidelines, Australia guidelines, our Noosa Plan, the desirable level of service. The LGIP as well. So it all comes together. And the, I suppose the recommendation for this was 3.5 metres. Karen Finzel 02:18:28.322
Does that answer your question? Yeah, thank you. Just one more question Through the Chair. That was from memory it was a Project Control Group, how many groups were identified around the table, if you can remember? Like, I'm just trying to illustrate that this is not just, that we have engaged our broader community, and I'm just trying to give voice to the people that have also how many groups you're asking us how were are involved? Yes, how broad was that? SPEAKER_17 02:18:55.930
So there was more than ten groups on the walking and cycling and HPR Project Reference Group, and that included members from community. Associations, from walking and cycling advocacy groups, from businesses and also from tourism providers. Yes. Karen Finzel 02:19:16.241
And was there opportunity for business people along the river and the boating and fishing community to have a voice in that space? SPEAKER_17 02:19:25.612
I believe the reference group was voted on and nominated by the councillors at the time. Jessica Phillips 02:19:32.312
Thank you. Quick question please, aiden. In relation to the principal recreation hierarchy, when that was considered, was there also consideration to that there will be on-road upgrade to the existing cycle path along the foreshore when that was taken into consideration? SPEAKER_17 02:19:52.357
That's correct so there's both off-road and on-road recommendations as part of that and that was also investigated with the high priority corridor study which extends from Tewantin to Noosa Heads and Noosa Heads to bridgin. We looked at both on-road and off as part of that. Jessica Phillips 02:20:10.020
Okay so sorry to clarify then that is how the principle that hierarchy then gave us the recommendation to put the on-road cycle lane consistently the whole way along is that what came from that? SPEAKER_17_b 02:20:22.460
I think our desirable service level or desirable guidelines for principal recreational route will be to have on-road cycle lanes for sports cycling and you know fearless of like a crowd cyclist and then on off-road facility as well which in that case I think was either except as part of the HPR it was a separated cycle track in addition to a pathway which I think was in the original draft master plan then we went back to a shared facility so it did include an on-road cycle lane as well yeah consideration for that. Nicola Wilson 02:21:07.711
Another quick question. Were there any disability advocates in those reference groups to ensure accessibility and inclusivity for say wheelchair users or mobility scooter users? SPEAKER_17_b 02:21:19.430
I believe it's part of the Walking and Cycling Strategy there was. I know for the foreshore infrastructure master plan Sunshine butterflies were included in the workshops. Workshop. Karen Finzel 02:21:34.526
Excuse me we were just waiting for the staff member here to also bring further information in relation to my question, thank you. Very much. Shaun Walsh 02:21:42.566
thank in relation to the question we've gone through the feedback from the working cycling strategy. The feedback from the minister for infrastructure and master plan was that there was equally as many people interested in supporting the provider pathways as there are for sure as there was, again, against it. Still in the location of the program. And I recall that in the workshops that we took a consultation with what that's given. And I'll just also note that the submissions are specifically from. Sunshine Butterflies, actually it was from their feedback to me, getting out to stakeholder meetings, they particularly supporting wire pathways and also a reconstruction of the.org community the issue gets back to staff recommendation in terms of that we think are the best for and taking on board, on balance, the feedback that the 3.5 metre pathways and mini-desires we're seeing to achieve the Noosaville foreshore. I think this issue really gets back to I think we've provided more than able information for councillors to make a decision on this issue and it really comes back to Councillor debate over what you think is appropriate or not on the basis of our information that you've learned from all your different sources and what technical information you've been getting from us. So I don't know whether we can sit there and debate. Frank Wilkie 02:23:02.175
Thank you Director Walsh. Thank you. Councillor Stockwell. Yes. The thanks. Brian Stockwell 02:23:08.475
Basis of this amendment was founded in a range of statements which I have really serious concerns about and I will be asking the CEO to review the recording to make sure that it wasn't deliberate a attempt to mislead the public. We've spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on design and as council's heard numerous times, very extensive consideration of the issues being dealt with and expert advice on the need for wider footpaths for safety reasons. It is very clear, it's very transparent. There is a demonstrated need. And it's been prosecuted over and over again to suggest that the decision and the recommendation put forward by staff and eminent consultants in the field wasn't properly researched. Councillor, this should be a 6-1 vote against. Frank Wilkie 02:24:11.058
Mr Stockwell, the councillors wish to speak to the amendment. Amelia Lorentson 02:24:17.000
Can I just ask a couple of questions? Yes. So in terms of data usage, speed usage, pedestrian safety data, where can I- just a- question maybe to Councillor Stockwell. Where can I access that information? Brian Stockwell 02:24:38.631
Councillor, you can listen at workshops. Frank Wilkie 02:24:43.651
Any other councillors wish to speak? Amelia Lorentson 02:24:46.771
Point of order. Through of order. Through the Chair, can I ask whether that comment was necessary? It was personal and attacked the person, being me. I take offence to the comment made by Councillor Stockwell and the way that it was said. Frank Wilkie 02:25:06.936
Any other councillors wish to speak to the amendment? Councillor Wilson. Nicola Wilson 02:25:11.596
I won't support the amendment. We've just had a long discussion about accessibility and inclusivity and making sure that those people who are less and need assistance need to have better access to parking and I would assume also better access to flat wide pathways. So yeah, I won't support it. Councillor Finzel? Karen Finzel 02:25:38.921
Yeah, can I just say I think we've been through it all. I think we've had every voice in the community heard that, you know, for fair and equity moving forward we have had all the data, we have had the information over a long period of time. I think the best interest, in my opinion, for our beneficiaries at this time is not to have this so prescribed that future decisions around the track might be minimised. I much support and prefer the idea that the document remains. Fluid and that along the way we can engage with our community as we heard the other day that they will be further engaged as the recipients and the beneficiaries of our decisions and our extended expenditure moving forward so I won't support it because I feel that we need to keep the document fluid to maintain that our community that we love and value and listen to will have their opportunity to have their say as this progresses over the next 20 years. Thank you. Frank Wilkie 02:26:49.260
Councillors, I won't be supporting the amendment because it does what an outcome might be with this going to be further consultation. We don't want to lock ourselves into any highly restrictive widths of footpaths or shared pathways given the information. Wealth of information we've already received about the reasons for the wider pathways which responds directly to feedback from our community, including disability support workers and Sunshine butterflies, I ask for some information about that feedback and their comments generally in regards to accessibility. As we've heard over and over again, very much in support of wider footpaths to allow for wheelchairs passing during peak times and improved accessibility, this is all about accessibility, for those, as we've heard, who are less fortunate than us, less mobile than us. They believe the footpaths require upgrades. As they're currently not suitable for all abilities. They believe a smooth and even material is required. They were actually disheartened to see the lack of support in the community for accessible outcomes. We've heard earlier today how important it is that we advocate for the disabled in our community, that all abilities access and take every opportunity to listen to and reflect their feedback in what they see on the ground. We've got a lot to do to improve our community to make it more accessible and safer. That's why the wider pathway was proposed on the foreshore generally, but in particular at this pinch point in front of the boat ramp where two paths converge into one. Impingement on the on-road car parking was not done for any ideological reason, but to accommodate a wider footpath in direct response to community feedback, especially by disability advocates, who we all respect and work worship. To ensure that their feedback is reflected on the ground. To suggest that anyone around this table is not listening to community feedback, we're trying to balance. Competing objectives, and not in the best long-term interests of the community in a fair and equitable way, is misleading this council and the community. I'm sure that's not the intention. So, for those reasons, I won't be supporting this amendment, but I'd like to commend the councillors for their work on Monday, which came up with a well-rounded motion that acknowledges that further consultation to refine the plan will be undertaken, because we do want to get it right in the long term. Thank you. Amelia Lorentson 02:29:49.047
Can the councillors to speak to the amendment I won't say much, I just want to just reference a couple of things. Firstly, the current 2.8 metre path meets, in fact it exceeds the national and state accessibility standards. Number one. Secondly, once we introduce a 3.5 metre wide path, what we also introduce is cyclists going at 30 kilometres an hour. At the moment, and this again, conversations and emails received by residents, is that at the moment there's like a courtesy system happening. That residents don't have a speed limit. So once you've got 3.5 k's in, there's a speed limit. You can go up to 30 k's an hour. So in terms of safety, hazards, we've got to, again, think about what is 3.5 metres actually, you know, what are the unintended consequences of having 3.5 metres. So to say that existing 2.8 metres doesn't meet accessibility standards, I don't, well, it's simply not correct. And that, you know, speed usage for 3.5k 30 kilometres makes me a little kilometers bit anxious. Everything else was said on Monday. Like I said, I owe it to the voices of the people that aren't around this table to keep fighting. Frank Wilkie 02:31:25.007
Thank you. Put the amendment those in favour. Councillor Phillips, Councillor Lorentson and those against. Councillor Finzel, Wilson, Stockwell, Wegener and Wilkie. The amendment is lost. It goes back to the original motion. Councillor Phillips. Chair please. Jessica Phillips 02:31:40.230
I would like to propose another amendment in relation to what fell on Monday which I felt was I've seen around the room in the last year where we make sort of everyone agrees and can make small and I felt very much like I couldn't didn't get the opportunity to make those small changes in saying that I'm listening to not only the conversation at the table but the community and I'd like to propose just one more amendment please. It's ready to go with Vicky thanks and hopefully this can find if everyone can listen to my intention maybe we can find some agreement just to please there's a shared pathway with is established once we have the monitoring data showing the number of pedestrians and cyclists are currently using the path and the and that future recommendations are used with TMR or I might just have to have a think on that as it comes up on the screen if I'm allowed just the ability to thrash around a couple of wording please once I see it. A shirt. Thanks, Vicky. Shared pathway which is established once we have the monitoring data showing the number of pedestrians and bicycle bicycles per hour they're currently using the path stop it and establish one and thank you. Perhaps something like um and the future recommendation is guided by yeah sorry she's and talking recommendation the is recommendation is, or we take this away? TMR guidelines. Um guidelines ones I just couldn't make sure that didn't help with this do you want, we might write, we might actually say department of transport I don't know, just in case anyone doesn't know the TMR, yes probably meets more bromacall to spell it out um just your previous no so no, so that no night but it was put under as item A.1 did you want it as it being A.2 or it could be item F.A.T. Yeah just okay or okay sorry that A has already gone through so we're only through we could amend it it's still an overall amendment but I think if you put it as F.A.T. As a separate okay yeah F.A.T. Please Vicky A thank you. Is established once we have the monitoring data showing the number of pedestrians and bicycle schools per hour that are currently using the path and the future recommendation is guided by department of main road's I mean, or guidelines. The pathway is established once we have a future recommendation in each precinct. Let me just have a look at. Can I see the entire motion just to add in. Currently using the path and future recommendation. I'm trying to achieve through the precinct, the original, I think, Mayor wilkie's C, which was actually the wording that I'd got together last Thursday, which was around the detailed design. So maybe we could say. If if I can ask for five minutes, I can probably get this together fairly quickly. Frank Wilkie 02:36:48.525
Sure. Councillor, are you happy to have five minutes off while Councillor Phillips gets her wording wrong right? Karen Finzel 02:36:56.371
Can I just make a comment on that? Just before we do, just to maybe help Councillor Phillips with her wording. When we're looking at, if you're asking monitoring data, the other day we've got Shaun in the room, I could have the figures wrong from memory, but it was raised, I think it was about $150,000 for um something to do with the data, to capture the data through some analysis, and a staff member to capture that data. Can you please refresh our memory, because I think you're going to have to include something around budget to get support. Just to be eligible for grant funding for cycle pathways anyway, you can't apply for a grant until you have the data? Yeah, but I think from memory, can Shaun Through the Chair please. Shaun Walsh 02:37:49.101
Car parking monitoring, not bicycle or shared parking. So that question I raised was about the budget required for significant car park monitoring. Karen Finzel 02:37:59.206
Okay, thank you for the clarification. Through the Chair then one more question. So then what do we need to for bikeways then? Do we have that data or we've got to have further budget or capability and staff to capture that? Shaun Walsh 02:38:15.831
We have some capacity to actually undertake the car park monitoring with traffic counters and the like. So I do note that department transfer of transport may not have already accepted the strategy of this principle and I understand it is that necessary to grant numerous criteria that they assess lots of things on and they don't always tick every box directly on the grant. I do want to in note in that discussion that which I would raise in committee is that we also see the grades from the Australian government, not just from the Queensland government. And as an example, Sunrise Beach retaining wall adjacent pathway that's Federal funded. The upgrades to the visitor trial network and so they have programs as well. So that's been part of the council staff's thought process about making sure that we're consistent across the board with the Australian government as well as the Queensland government. Amelia Lorentson 02:39:08.632
Thank you. Just a quick question Through the Chair. Councillor Stockwell just a couple of minutes ago mentioned that there is data in terms of pedestrian numbers and usage, et cetera, said he that information was made available at a committee, a workshop. Can I ask once again the same question? Where can we access that data, Councillor Stockwell? Brian Stockwell 02:39:32.002
You misread me because I never mentioned data. You were the only one mentioning data. I said we had a lot of expert advice. Okay, so Councillor. Jessica Phillips 02:39:42.616
So I hope that helps with your work. I'm nearly done. Yeah. So two minutes. Frank Wilkie 02:39:46.016
Keen to have a fine. Just before we do, Brian Stockwell 02:39:49.556
I have a question if we're fine-tuning the wording. I noticed the word up there, a shared pathway, and I just want to check the staff that is the correct terminology, because I've just gone on to the Queensland government road rules and it suggests the maximum speed on shared pathways is 12 kilometres an hour, yet Councillor Lorentson informed us we'd be going to 30 kilometres an hour. I just want to make sure it is a shared pathway and it's the right term. Frank Wilkie 02:40:16.143
It's a shared pathway is the correct term? That's correct. In Queensland all pathways are shared and they sign otherwise. Okay. We'll take five minutes councillors. Five minute adjournment please. Until Councillor thorpe's kept the wording right. Frank Wilkie 02:50:19.760
Councillor Phillips has put together the final form of her amendment. Would you care to read it please Councillor Phillips? Yes, Jessica Phillips 02:50:30.700
Thank you Chair. The future shared pathway width for each precinct along the foreshore is established once council staff have the monitoring data showing the number of pedestrians and cyclists per hour that are currently using the path. The future shared pathway would be guided by the appropriate governing authority. Thank you. Do I have a seconder? I think you're second. Can I just have a question? Yes, I'll speak to it. Thank you. Can I ask a question first before I speak? Or do I have to speak to it first? You need to speak first and then you can ask as many questions as you want. Thank you. Alright, so I have, thank you for the time to try and get some wording together. First of all, I'm listening to everyone around the table, I'm listening to community, and I think this probably meets somewhere in the middle to guide us in the shared pathway conversation. The monitoring data will actually inform our decision. So when we go to community and we say this is the final precinct plan for shared we actually have the evidence that supports it could end up being that this pathway needs to be wider I don't know but all I know is from my previous police experience I can't stand here and say yep I vote without some real evidence that supports why we are doing it so this aims to achieve not only some real data about how many are down there how many pedestrians how many cyclists how who's using the path not just based on someone that has said it's busy at nine o'clock on a Saturday morning so hopefully this achieves the ability for us to sit here and say yep we decided based on facts I would like to also point out that I've included the appropriate governing body authority because of the comments that I made on Monday around the TMR and AusRoad guidelines that seem to conflict and hopefully this gives confidence in the councillors that this that we will be using the governing authority to guide the recommendation for each precinct thank you Frank Wilkie 02:52:53.140
Question staff the of the wording that we have here it would wouldn't it doesn't prevent the council from choosing to adopt standards presented by either authority regardless of what's considered authority. It says guided not locked in. Shaun Walsh 02:53:17.794
Thank you the Chair. I concur with that. I think this sets up a good practice for us to design in accordance with the needs of the moment and give us an opportunity to gather more data and it will also by gathering that data will also optimise our growth and success. Well. So, and I like the word 'data' because it's still allowed council to make decisions, but we can reference all the appropriate standards. And I've conferred with Adam petteri, so we can pursue that approach as well. Frank Wilkie 02:53:46.693
Did you expand on what you mean by maximise our grants opportunities? Shaun Walsh 02:53:50.396
Well, just before we talked about ticking the box on all the criteria. So one of the criteria is it's already recognised as a principal movement route for pedestrians and cyclists. But if we're able to supply more data to substantiate that, particularly growth it sort of optimises. Our success at grant funding. And meeting applications. And we have technology, you know, in terms of rolling out. The type of movement might need to have something to monitor. For a particular period of time to take a snapshot, but it's fairly straightforward to actually get that type of data. Great, SPEAKER_15 02:54:23.243
Thank you. Councillor Wilson. Nicola Wilson 02:54:28.163
I'll speak too. I do appreciate Councillor Phillips' intention here to reach a compromise and also to be much clearer guided by data and the appropriate authority. Guidelines and data would relate to the volume of users, not necessarily, well it may also capture the types of users that are using that area. In the staff recommendation to make the pathway in excess of guidelines, I don't think that was necessarily intended to accommodate more volume of people, and certainly we don't know what that volume will be in the next 20 years to be able to have data to predict that. I but I think the purpose of that wider path was more to allow for less conflict, slower walkers for people with disability and mobility issues, young kids on bikes and trikes and scooters and dogs stopping have to on sniff and get their leads tangled up and that's the kind of conflicts that we so I understand where the staff recommendation was heading with that and I think this process would already happen in the design phase for each precinct but I appreciate that it's now coming from data and with regard to the governing authority as well. Councillor Finzel. Karen Finzel 02:55:57.120
Yeah just on the back of that we have said a lot I'll be really brief. I thank Councillor Phillips for her tenacity and diligence and her flexibility to be able to apply herself to this wording today which I think hopefully brings us all to the same resolution. I'm not influencing any decisions of course. I'm supporting it because I think it is fair. I think it gives is representation to all the voices at the table and in our community and beyond. I'm supporting it also because it supports the idea of a living document over the next 20 years to guide and inform us. And I do love the idea that it will be data informed for any future decision making. Interview. Into the into the next phase where we're heading. So I'd like to take this opportunity to thank you all to our community that have engaged their enthusiasm, their commitment to the cause and I'd also like to thank our staff. Those around the table for everyone has given a hundred percent and beyond to this very complex layered and colourful engagement with our community. So thank you everyone. Frank Wilkie 02:57:10.354
Any further discussion? Brian Stockwell 02:57:11.863
I want to support the thinking of Councillor Wilson. The amendment as worded restricts us to looking at volumes whereas we know the existing context is about different modes. It's the old people with two dogs coming into conflict with a bicycle rider, it's people on wheelchairs with others. It is in the end a decision. Or existing design is based on an understanding of what's there currently. I have no problem with ongoing monitoring, as Councillor Phillips said. It's possible, if not likely, that we appropriate monitoring with full, you know, mobile transport surveys with someone looking there during peak times, several times a day, et cetera. It would come up with it's currently over capacity at 2.8 and it still would be at 3.5, that you need a separate path to get bikes, et cetera, off it. Maybe we don't, but to me, a motion that just suggests we're going to base it on volume is not reflecting the significant concerns raised by those who use the path currently, so I can't support it. Frank Wilkie 02:58:37.163
Councillor Stockwell, if the amendment read council staff have the monitoring data showing the numbering types of pedestrians and cyclists per hour that are currently using the path, would that be more in line with the information you're seeking? Brian Stockwell 02:58:52.140
It probably could be something to that effect, do with word. Yes. Karen Finzel 02:59:01.400
So I have a question then to Councillor Phillips, if you would be prepared to add some additional information to try and aid the consensus around the table to add volume to this conversation Jessica Phillips 02:59:11.762
I am I just want to point out that the reason why I use that wording is because it's exactly what it asks for in a grant application. So I used the wording from the legislation that says monitoring data showing the number of pedestrians because the definition of pedestrian includes every single person that walks. It includes PMD it uses it actually encompasses everything so I just didn't want to complicate it because I used the exact wording from legislation. I'm happy to add it if it helps Councillor Stockwell, I'm just saying that I didn't just pull that wording from nowhere. Frank Wilkie 02:59:53.700
Is the meeting happy to include the words number and types of pedestrians and so on? SPEAKER_15 03:00:05.249
Okay. We'll leave it at that. Animals. Do you want to put the dogs in there? Jessica Phillips 03:00:11.829
I want to keep it exactly how I had it, which is from the wording of the legislation. Amelia Lorentson 03:00:17.469
Thank you. Could I ask a question to Councillor Phillips whether she would consider adding the words and informed by community feedback to the end of that. So the notion as it reads, the future shared pathway would be guided by the appropriate governing authority. And community feedback. Jessica Phillips 03:00:37.692
Well, I was hoping, Councillor Lorentson, I totally see what you're saying. I was hoping that would be encompassed in C around that the precinct would already have that, but I understand your intention. I just wanted to keep it really simple. No worries. Thank you. Right. Frank Wilkie 03:00:56.369
Any other questions? Councillor Wegener. Tom Wegener 03:00:59.889
I'll speak to it. I appreciate that Councillor Phillips wants to help staff write funding proposals and grant applications. I would suspect and I would hope that our council, our staff would know that if you do in to order get a grant, that this is a key thing that they would go ahead and do this sort of monitoring. So I'm always very cautious of micromanaging and telling staff, you know, this is what you have to do when they already know that. And if this is, if it's absolutely fundamental that they have this information in order to get a grant, I would suspect that they would already be doing it. Also, this is micromanaging a 20 year project. This is, we're going a long ways down the line and this would doesn't, it just, it just gets a little bit of the data that need overall. You to figure out how wide a path should be going forward for the next 20 years. As we've said, there's a lot of people with disabled, a wider path will just common sensely help the disabled people in wheelchairs and myself on crutches for a long time. I was very concerned about people knocking me over. It has to do with. We don't really know what's going to happen in 20 years. So let's we want to keep it fluid and open. And so I can't support this because it's just micromanaging without actually doing much that's not already being done. Karen Finzel 03:02:32.154
Councillor Finzel. I just have a question to Councillor Tom. Thank you for your insight there and your position. Just wondering if you could throw your eyes across it and just maybe have another consideration Councillor Jess Phillips' intent, I think, which was to try and. Point of order. There's a question there. Oh, excuse me, yes. Through the Chair, I have a question. Would you reconsider it from the intent of giving greater voice to community, our beneficiaries? SPEAKER_15 03:03:06.471
My point of yeah, I think Councillor Wegener's made his. I'll withdraw that, thank you. Frank Wilkie 03:03:11.648
His position clear, and councillors are all entitled to have their own positions. Okay, anybody else wish to speak to the amendment? Councillor Phillips, you is wish to close. Jessica Phillips 03:03:29.563
Yes, thank you. The pathway width isn't just about the pedestrians and cyclists, it's actually about the visual amenity of the foreshore. So if I'm going to say, yep, I'm happy with an increase of the width, I want to know that there's data that backs that decision. So it's not about micromanaging, it's actually just about really good management of one of the most iconic places in Noosa. If we metre put a six pathway down the foreshore, it will change the entire look and feel of what we love about it. I can't help but think, where is some common sense? You know, if I'm riding, walking with my kids and they're on a bike and there's someone coming towards me that's on crutches, I teach them to move off the path. I'm like, I can't, I that we are going to not show some common sense, which is exactly what this amendment is trying to achieve. It's going to the data that people want to see. It gives us evidence based decision making. And it also says, hey, this is a place we heard loud and clear, before. The foreshore is loved, it doesn't want urban design, we don't want masses of concrete, unless the data says, hey, there's a conflict down here, is the data that supports it. Otherwise, you are changing what is loved so dearly about the foreshore. And I'm sorry, but let's apply some common sense to this. People love stopping and having a chat to the friends and family and people that they bump into. It will change the entire look and feel if we start micromanaging and saying, "Yep, we've made a decision on this pathway." Based on what? I'm saying let's base it on data. Frank Wilkie 03:05:27.683
Thank you. The amendment goes in favour. Councillor Phillips. Phillips, Finzel, Lawrence and Wilkie against. Stockwell and Wegener. The amendment is carried. Now we go back to the original motion which has this added. Anybody wish to speak to the motion? Question. Staff, we just heard that Councillor Phillips say if we put a six metre wide path down there without data it's not a good move. Is there any suggestion in any document in any discussion that we're looking at anywhere on the foreshore? Shaun Walsh 03:06:15.582
Thank you for the question, there's no suggestion. President: SPEAKER_15 03:06:19.562
Okay. Thank you, just thank you for clarification. Frank Wilkie 03:06:26.303
Any other councillors wish to speak to the motion? I'll close. Thank you, councillors. It's been a long process. And in endorsing this today-- is part F included? There? Um, so, like, it hits, but. I'll drag this one across. So what we're endorsing councillors, is a summation and shows that we have the conviction, the courage of our convictions for every element of this. There have been some amendments moved and vehemently from a point of passion, but these are beliefs that councillors hold dear regarding the vital shape of the motion. We had a good debate around reverting the desired approach from the Massouds Slipway and Jetty and Ely Park, with that shown on the consultation version endorsed by council at its meeting on the 6th of November 2024. And we included that because it respects the feedback from the commercial operators, the people who have this great sense of ownership down there. We heard that there is a conflict down there with vehicles potentially reversing over the pedestrian pathway into the pathway of cyclists and pedestrians, people walking dogs. But we accepted that wanted to respect the views of the commercial operators. By endorsing this motion, we're showing that we were fair dinkum in making F, that by endorsing this motion, we're showing that we really believe that the future of the shared pathway for each of these precincts ought to be based on data. When we put our hands up here this afternoon, we'll be showing we believe in that and that we were fair dinkum when we voted for it or against it, or that if you voted against it, you're acknowledging that we're taking every element on its merits and it's the summation, the motion as a whole that we're endorsing and we're wanting to move forward on. When we vote to endorse this we're showing that we really believe that the Noosaville Foreshore Infrastructure Masterplan ought to include a clear publicly accessible statement showing the total number of car parks currently available and outline the intended approach to designating vehicle parks across the precinct in the future. Very valuable information. It helps give anyone who's interested and feels dearly about that precinct that they ought to have that information and ought to be available for them. We're endorsing the community feedback from disability advocates that the pathways ought to be more accessible and safer. We're endorsing the feedback from the boating and fishing alliance that their boat ramp ought not to be touched and left intact. Tennis club their club ought not to be removed just to provide more green space but it ought to be kept and that we're respecting their heritage and that any new plans could also incorporate a greater a greater range of sports to make it more publicly accessible this has been a great collective effort so by endorsing this plan and its amendments have now passed the motion we're showing that we have the courage of our convictions that the amendments that we moved we really believe in because today when we put our hands up today this is when it counts this is when it shows it's that we believe in what we've argued for and this is when this motion becomes a ratified decision of the local government and this community can move forward so I recommend this motion to the councillors has been a great collective effort and thank you for your input I'll put the motion those in favour? Councillor Finzel, Wilson, Stockwell, Wegener and Wilkie. Those against? Councillor Phillips and Councillor Lorentson. Now come up to the operation 11.3.10 operational plan 2024-25 quarterly reporting and the last one in the section 11.3.11 General Committee recommendations en bloc. I have a mover and a seconder for the General Committee recommendations to be adopted except we're dealt with separately. Thank you Councillor Wilson. Seconded Councillor Wegener. All in favour? That's unanimous. And we now come up to Ordinary Meeting reports. We've deferred six reports from the General Committee Meeting to the Ordinary Meeting. We'll start with 12 item.1, contract number RP00440, Register of Prequalified Suppliers for provision of environmental services, which was deferred We have Brian whitehart, Ben Derrick, here to speak to this report. Ben, can you give us a summary please? Ben Derrick 03:12:11.360
Thank councillors and CEO. This is a quick report for the tender evaluation and summary and recommendations toward the contract of the list of suppliers for inclusion in the register of pre-qualified suppliers or ROPs environmental services. The ROPS is a register of suppliers supplies. That are pre-qualified and capable of responding to council's requirements in a timely manner where the council can either engage and them engage them directly from the ROPS or request a quote from one or more of the ROPS as required on a fixed-term basis. The ROPS is being established in the following four categories: ecological restoration works, weed management, wildlife management and vegetated stormwater asset management, which is also known as bio-retention basins or biobasins. The ROPS is to be awarded to the suppliers listed for an initial two-term period plus two further term extensions of up to 24 months each, subject to satisfactory performance. In terms getting to the stage of making a recommendation for our ROPS suppliers, a strategic procurement plan and probity plan was developed in accordance with council's procurement policy and an invitation to tender was initiated and attracted 24 responses with the compliant responses considered for further assessment. The tender evaluation panel completed the evaluation process and considered the suppliers listed in the recommendation below to the most advantageous council. These tender submissions were assessed against technical understanding and methodology, WHS documentation and procedures, commitment to sustainability and value for money. Each tender panel member assessed the submissions separately and then met as a group to collectively agree to offering 16 supplies for inclusion in the ROPS. Of the 16 recommended supplies, 13 are based in Noosa or the Sunshine Coast local government area and 4 of those Inclusion the ROTS does not provide a guarantee of work during the term of this contract. It merely provides us or merely provides council with a mechanism to quickly select contractors to be able to fill long-term roles or short-term immediate roles. A user point of view in our environmental operations we rely heavily on our ROPS supplies to be able to undertake the works that we do and we establish relationships with our preferred supplies through this mechanism over the course of the tender. SPEAKER_15 03:14:51.600
Thank you Mr Derrick, any questions of Councillor Lorentson. Amelia Lorentson 03:14:57.758
Hi, Ben. Just a quick question. It's just going through the evaluation process and we've got environment sustainability as being an important criteria. Couldn't find anywhere in terms of weed management practices whether we require supplies to avoid chemicals like glyphosate. Are our weed management practices scrutinised in relation to chemical use and should they be? Ben Derrick 03:15:30.608
Thank you for the Chair. The use of non-chemical weed technology isn't assessed as part of the ROPS specifically for weed management. They may be able to pick it up in a sustainability element as one of the components to be put through. We don't require it as a mandate. And when we're selecting ROPS to be able to undertake the works, to my knowledge, it hasn't been considered to pre-select a supplier for a particular contract. Brian Stockwell 03:16:08.940
I'll say just example, and I completely understand the caution around using--- Point of order again. The question was very close to being ahead of order. I think it's okay to ask if it was a criteria for assessment. Talking about the broader practices that may be involved in ecosystem rehabilitation is not relevant to the matter in front of us. Frank Wilkie 03:16:31.397
We'll limit our questions to the--- That's all right. The supplies that have been recommended for approval. Any other questions of staff? Someone care to move the recommendation? Councillor Stockwell. Councillor Stockwell I move it. Councillor Wegener I have a seconder. Councillor Stockwell Tom. Councillor Wegener. Councillor Stockwell wants to speak to the motion. Councillor Wegener no. Councillor Stockwell and the councillors wish If the motion goes in favour? Any other lies that's unanimous. Can we just have a two minute break? Councillor Stockwell we've got a request for another break. Councillors, are you agreeable? Shaun Walsh 03:17:12.547
No, we just had one that I think is inappropriate. Frank Wilkie 03:17:14.667
Stolkway: I think Councillor Phillips missed was out down on that Jessica Phillips 03:17:18.433
Yeah, I did. Yeah. Councillor Stockwell okay, I'll hold. Amelia Lorentson 03:17:21.973
Can I, point of order, can I just say that we may need a comfort break? Councillor Stockwell yes. And to not allow it, I think, is totally, inappropriate. Councillor Stockwell okay, Thank you. Frank Wilkie 03:17:32.753
Councillor Stockwell I was making the point that we have had, two and councillors chose to take advantage of them or not. I'm happy to ask that we allow Councillor Phillips work through the last one. So out of respect for Councillor Phillips, we'll have a five minute break. Thank you, Mr Chair. Thank you. Brian Stockwell 03:17:52.377
Let's have a meeting any time you like. Can we put it this on our legs the Standing Orders or do they have in decision addition-making to dating which them, which is. Frank Wilkie 03:25:33.474
Thank you, Mr. President. I'm Sunday. Okay, welcome back, everybody. We're up to 12.2 Noosa Biosphere Reserve Foundation limited partnership agreement, which was deferred from the General Committee. We have Ben Derrick, manager of environmental services, here to speak to this report. Ben and Director Kim Rawlings, welcome. Ben Derrick 03:25:51.058
Thank you very good afternoon again councillors this agenda item deals with the proposed change to the partnership agreement between Noosa Council and the Noosa Biosphere Reserve Foundation. The current agreement expires on 32nd this year. Council has supported the NBRF since its inception in 2015. This has enabled it to deliver a the core of the objectives. NBRF. Council. To deliver a core of objectives, council has provided an annual financial support. The range of financial support has been between approximately $700,000 and $140,000, where it has sat for the previous two years. The partnership agreement contribution to NBRF is allocated through council's annual budget process from the Environment Levy. The success of the Noosa Biosphere is intrinsically linked to a successful partnership between NBRF, NDRF, council, and a broad spectrum of community groups working together towards common goals. NBRF has played an important role in driving research, creating awareness and supporting initiatives and projects that are aligned with improving the. Noosa YSV credentials. These projects and initiatives fill a vital role in the biosphere community and are beyond the internal resource capacity of council staff to deliver. NBRF has been able to achieve this through drawing on significant in-kind contribution from current and past board directors as well as a large cohort of willing members of the community. The leveraged expertise this has delivered for the NBRF programs has provided genuine value to Noosa brand. NBRF has consistently met the requirements and obligations of the existing agreement and have spent considerable time in the last two years to review and refine their strategy and annual implementation plans, both of which are presented to council each year. Is a genuine desire for from the NBRF to board ensure the organisation remains contemporary and at the cutting edge of innovation for life within a biosphere for all of our community. The proposed partnership agreement has been worked through by council officers and NBRF exec. It is felt to be a balanced supporting agreement that also states a clear expectation that NBRF will endeavour to expand resources for their programs outside of council the proposed changes clean up some referencing and duplicated wording, provide a revised scope and provide a revised scope of operational expenses. Including operational expenses in the agreement will enable NBRF to focus on they were established to achieve and not have to worry about existing from month to month. I'll leave with putting forward that the success of the biosphere is intrinsically linked to the success of the NBRF and council officers believe this is an appropriate agreement to go forward with. SPEAKER_15 03:28:39.360
You, Mr. Derrick. Cancel waiting. I'll move. Thank you Councillor Wegener. Moved Councillor Wegener. We have a seconder. I shall second. Councillor Stockwell. Councillor Wegener used to speak to the motion. Tom Wegener 03:28:51.732
You've all heard me speak extensively on success of them the new using zimbabwe the biosphere reserve foundation last in the year. Last few years. And I think ben's coverage there just sums it up. Thank you. We need to get the recommendation oh, Frank Wilkie 03:29:03.680
Thank you. Yeah. Here we are. Anybody else wish to speak to the motion? Councillor Wilson. Nicola Wilson 03:29:18.840
I will support the motion, and I am very supportive of a funding arrangement for MBRF. But I do have some concerns with some of the wording in this agreement, despite the revisions made so far. With many years of experience in writing and reviewing financial agreements and contracts, I do tend to be a pedant on definitions and clarity. I'd like to see a clearer, simplified agreement that not only protects both parties, but is commercially practical in supporting the foundation's activities. That's not just clear wording of funding provided in exchange for agreed activities, but managing timing of cash flows and budget decisions to give assurance over future operations. Any KPIs need to be relevant to the funding and be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and timely. After meeting with the CEO to discuss further improvements I'm comfortable that some clarity can be dealt with as minor changes under part B so as not to delay this process. SPEAKER_15 03:30:18.084
Thank you Councillor Wilson Amelia Lorentson 03:30:24.244
Avocating. KPIs relevant? I'm just sort of just dissecting a little bit of what Councillor Phillips said. Can I just get some clarity? Willis. Um, Willis. Excuse me. Willis. Correct me if I'm wrong. May want to ask Councillor Wilson specifically what KPIs she considers aren't relevant that might be more appropriate. Yeah, through Councillor Wilson if you can just sort of elaborate. Nicola Wilson 03:30:52.857
Yeah, there aren't really currently KPIs as per the definition of KPIs. There items in part 7.2 that talk about things like project funding which isn't actually relevant to operating expenses and there's a couple of other things. One of them was about styles of communication or forms of communication that I don't think are relevant to funding. What are the reports? Yeah, there was also some unclear definitions around things like financial statements audited financial statements and that type of information that wouldn't actually be reported in financial statements generally. Thank you. Jessica Phillips 03:31:35.105
I'm just going to it. Yes. For most of the people around the room know that I have returned to just fill in from time to time policing outside of the Shire, but on weekends, the. Which isn't impacting council work, but what it's done is it's reaffirmed what I see in that role as just absolute grassroots issues that communities see. And so the reason why I want to speak today on this is it's actually not for me my vote isn't whether I support Noosa Biosphere because I actually do and I think they do an incredible amount of work but I'm going to go out on a limb because I hear so often lately for the greater good for future generations forward-focused really powerful ideas and while I respect the intent behind them I just have to be really honest today because a year ago before I ran for council those phrases used to frustrate me and not because I don't care about the future so because I've spent my whole life around working-class people who absolutely care about what lies ahead but they're also just trying to get through today so when you're running a small business working as a local tradie, juggling kids, sports. Your focus isn't so much around forward focus but what I see today is family struggling to put food on the table. Make ends meet or just surviving the week and these people make up the backbone of our community so again I want to reiterate that my vote for this is not whether I support the Noosa of biosphere. Because they do incredible work and I support them in principle but today I'm just going to stand and vote for the working class we're talking about budget coming we're talking about funding agreement that comes through the Environment Levy which is also comes from ratepayers and so today I'm just going to vote on my principles and those principles are telling me that it's time to pause time to pause and listen to the everyday worker that's been asking when is someone gonna just stand up for me today. Thank you. Frank Wilkie 03:34:14.842
Any other councillors wish to speak to the motion? Brian Stockwell 03:34:19.662
Councillor Stockwell? I will. I always consider myself an ordinary bloke for all my life as well. I have a plan rather than a police officer so I've always looked at the systemic issues that drive future and it'd be really unreasonable to assume that work that we've done over 50 years in Noosa to make what it is today wasn't guided by a strategic foresight. Unfair to say that vast majority of the population don't benefit from it I was just looking at the results when we had a large portion of a large sample from our Shire do the community well-being index it was really clear that the well-being of this community is far above that of the national or regional average because of nature I can understand being at the forefront you want to look at all the small incidental issues but be aware that our level of well-being is as a result of the investment of this community in sustainable mission issues that were kicked off in the 50s. It would be unwise to suggest that moving money out of a body that's aiming to continue to investigate how we can do simple things. For example, the shark program. It doesn't matter what class you are, if you're in the water, a shark's not going to differentiate your different class, your different socio-economic type. These are issues that are real to our community, this is a council that has always invested wise wisely. Across both the on-ground service delivery and the strategic foresight. To lose sight of that will be going the same way as other communities and reducing long-term well-being. Just. Financing immediate response to symptoms will in the long-term cost this community. SPEAKER_15 03:36:21.840
Councillor Lorentson. Amelia Lorentson 03:36:23.250
I I'm will speaking to this. Support the agreement in front of us. The money that we're allocating is essentially administrative funding to allow really good people who give so of their time and serious expertise the ability to do great things for this community. Yesterday I had the pleasure of listening to professor Ian Lowe and I'm a big fan and then and think this just helps enable great ambassadors for Noosa, the opportunity to become great ambassadors for Noosa. When we talk about marketing Noosa, there is no better marketing agency, I think, than our vice-speaker. Know, a little while ago, we just supported, by majority, a voluntary led transition into single-use marketing. Just imagine, if we could get all our coffee shops, and this was supported by the vice-Chair, I was spoken to them about it. Sent me emails, but that's the sort of marketing, and that I would love, you know, to be on the front page of every newspaper in Queensland saying Noosa the first Queensland state to transition to single-use coffee cups. So again, I've had a lot to do with the Noosa Biosphere, so I think I know firsthand some of the really great stuff volunteers do, so really respect Councillor Phillips and so acknowledge what you're saying, so acknowledge that, and I respect that we have the courage, and we all do, to be the voices of those people that need to be represented around the table. Diversity in opinion is critical to proper decision making. So, much respect for your courage, as you know. You know, sometimes I stand up when I know that I won't be supported, but that's the job we signed up for, to have the courage to lead, and leadership means not necessarily winning, it's the ability to rise when we fall. So thank you for your courage, but I will be supporting this, which I think is important. Thank you. Concludes it all. Karen Finzel 03:38:57.266
I do support this today for all the reasons that have been raised. And I think that limiting our visions for the future should not always come down to the bottom line. What I am seeking though is that we do some type of review or put another lens across our step administration around how arrive at we do these funding agreements. I've invited everyone to come along the journey, as people well know, to explore the notion of change within the theme of excellence. With the view of strengthening our ongoing to collaboration, caring for our people, and honouring the story of Noosa, now and into the future. I think we need to explore who sits at the centre of our decision making. Our governance is here to ensure future sustainability, not only of our people, but our environment and our economy. To elevate council beneficiaries celebrating and respecting our connection to each other within our Noosa ecosystem. As the central catalyst as to why, as leaders around the table, we are rigorous in seeking continuous improvement and how we serve our community better now and into the future. I'd like to initiate a review of our current models in the hope of creating a future that is fully celebrated. With a commitment to addressing the challenges and concerns that that's it before us. Identified identify gaps and risks to best inform any future frameworks to provide clear accountability structures, robust government models. Councillor Finzel, you're straying a bit from the motion before us. Okay, I come back to the motion. Thank you. We're all here for the same reasons, but I do think around the table for strong governance and leadership in the future, that it's never too early to commit ourselves to continuous improvement. Thank you, Councillor Finzel. Thank you. Councillor Wegener, do you wish to close? Yes, please. Yes. Tom Wegener 03:41:32.783
Thank and Councillor Finzel. We spoke before. I completely agree with you. It's something we need to look at going forward. Thank you. Our economy, back when the founders of Noosa that made Noosa what it is today through advocacy, which is the large national park. Instead of a road being around with houses, it's a national park out there. The North Shore not being sand mined, but rather it's a beautiful national park over there. All the incredible things that we've done here. And back then, the concept was the economy is leveraged on our environment. It really is. Of course, the tourism economy, but a lot of other things. Now, I spent 21 years in a shed making surfboards with my hands. I am working class through and through. And I can tell you in no uncertain terms how important being in the Noosa Biosphere was to my business, how important having a wonderful environment, how my brand was significantly leveraged off of simply being in Noosa. It's incredibly valuable. So working class people benefit from living in Noosa just by the fact of being in Noosa and the brand. And by the way, they get to live in paradise to boot. So Frank Wilkie 03:42:57.239
Thank you, Councillor Wegener. Wegener. Put we'll the put motion those in place. Favour. That's Councillor Finzel, Wilson, Councillor Stockwell, Councillor Wegener, Councillor Lorentson, Councillor Wilkie against, Councillor Phillips, motions carried. Thank you. Ben. Thank you. Next item we have Planning & Environment Court appeal number 1391 of 2025, application for a Material Change of Use for a function facility at 658 Louis Bazzo Drive, Ringtail Creek. And we have Patrick Murphy, manager of development assessment here to speak to this report. Welcome Patrick, can you give us a quick summary of this? Patrick Murphy 03:43:33.065
Thank you, Through the Chair. Councillors, you may recall in December last year we had a matter come to council for a function facility at 658 Louis Bazzo Drive. There was a lot of discussion at that time regarding the potential impacts of that operation. It was subsequently approved. Again, a lot of discussion around amenity and conditions were applied accordingly around the hours of operation, noise management plans and having the application and the associated material being vetted by relevant experts, including an acoustic expert. In January of this year, representations were made to of approval. They were quite broad ranging. At that time, some minor changes were supported by the officer assessing the representations. There were some grammatical errors. There were some changes to align numbers of the approval with details that were on the plan. But those substantive matters that were impacting the amenity were refused. Since that time, we have received an application, an appeal to the conditions that were not supported by the officers. These relate to the hours of operation. It was conditioned operate till 10:00pm. At night with guests to leave by 10:30. With the representations and through the appeal the appellant is seeking that can go till 10:30 with guests off site by 11:00pm. There's also requirements around if there are complaints there complaints that there may be a need to go back and review noise management plans. They've also appealed that condition and other conditions around the extent of road that needs to be sealed and also extent of covenant areas for vegetation protection and rehabilitation. So the report recommends that it's in order to defend the appeal. Thank you. SPEAKER_15 03:45:32.462
Questions of staff? No. Karen Finzel 03:45:34.177
Anyone care to move the motion? Councillor Wegener? Frank Wilkie 03:45:38.957
Is that the second? No, I was going to just ask a question. Okay, we're moved by Councillor Wegener. Councillor Finzel, you were quick off with your hand, you can ask the question before it's seconded. Sure, thank you. Karen Finzel 03:45:51.009
Thank you, Mr Chair. Just seeking clarification for just my own understanding, this is going to go to the registry. Oh, sorry. It's going to be put on the registry, on the Queensland land title registry. Can you just explain why that happens? Patrick Murphy 03:46:20.530
Sorry, Councillor Finzel, finswell, I don't quite understand the nature of the question. I'm just trying to understand the process as to why council becomes the coven T. Oh, you're talking about specific conditions? Brian Stockwell 03:46:37.430
Yes, it's a point of order then, that's a matter of appeal, it can't be discussed in open council. Karen Finzel 03:46:45.850
Oh, okay, my apologies. May I have a second please? Oh, happy to second. SPEAKER_15 03:46:47.150
Happy to second, Finzel. Parents Councillor wiggin, did you wish to speak? I have some questions. Well, it's been seconded now. Tom Wegener 03:46:56.630
Councillor, would you like to speak? We're a bit limited in what we can talk about, so I will waive my right. SPEAKER_15 03:47:03.670
Okay. Councillor Lorentson, do you have some questions? Amelia Lorentson 03:47:07.710
Just in terms of the affected residents, have they been contacted? And can they join the appeal process as submitters? Patrick Murphy 03:47:19.738
Through the Chair, as you're aware, there were quite a number of submitters to the application. As part of the process, when the appeal has been lodged, the appellant has given to council notice and to those that may have properly made submissions. They have the opportunity to join the appeal. There was a time frame of 10 business days. The time frame would have ended by now. So if those individuals did seek to become a party to the appeal, they had that ability to join. Councillor Finzel? Karen Finzel 03:47:51.879
Yes. Just a question then. Was there a cost related to that? SPEAKER_15 03:47:57.899
For them becoming co-responders? Patrick Murphy 03:47:59.879
Yes. I'm unsure whether there's a fee that they need to pay to the court. I have been part. Of representing council at appeals where there have been co-respondents, being members of our community who have joined the appeal. I don't believe that they've incurred any cost other than their time and travel to Brisbane and they've been able to be part of mediation. I would suggest that if they was to move forward into a trial and they wish their position to be considered as part of the trial that there would be expenses that they would incur in pursuing their position in the court through the use of relevant experts and also legal representatives. Amelia Lorentson 03:48:43.391
And just one further question, will the impacted residents be updated during this process? Patrick Murphy 03:48:52.811
Through the Chair, it's not normal practice that we would provide ongoing communication with residents or council through, there is a monthly, six-weekly session around the case management working with the council. Some of the challenges with appeals is when we go into mediation and then the mediation might be ongoing. The session might finish on that day but the matters of the mediation are ongoing in terms of further evidence and material being provided. That's kept in-house. It's not for public disclosure discussion. Those mediation so it can be a bit difficult to advise the community of what's going on in that regard. Karen Finzel 03:49:40.236
Look from the very beginning as a long-term resident of the Noosa hinterland I did not support this application so I fully support this defend the appeal because the only voice given to our people in the hinterland was through that process to see that fall down now and their voice lost in the minutia of the process I firmly I firmly support this I think that you know as we see our Shire grow we definitely have to take on board and protect at any cost the voice of our people our environment so yeah I really I really wish every success to the rights of our people in this process thank you Amelia Lorentson 03:50:31.648
I just want to add again for the effective residents who may be listening today just give them assurance that council have excellent legal Council and representation Tom Wegener 03:50:50.560
I'd just like to say we have a good track record and we're in good hands with Richard and Patrick so thank you very much that Frank Wilkie 03:50:57.356
Is unanimous. Thank you. Patrick. Next we have the item 12.4 and risk committee membership. We have John C Wolfe, executive officer here to speak to this report. John C can you give us a quick summary please welcome. SPEAKER_08 03:51:15.356
Yeah good afternoon councillors. The report seeks the extension of current appointment for Mr. Ian Rushworth who serves as an independent member on the Audit and Risk Committee. As you are aware council has established an Audit and Risk Committee. The committee's purpose is to strengthen good corporate governance through facilitating independent advice and guidance in Audit and Risk matters across council projects and operations. The committee thereby advises on risk management, risk reduction, and obviously where possible, mitigation. The committee consists of four members, two councillors, Councillor Wilson Councillor and Wegener, and two independent external members, Mr Timothy who is the Chair of the committee, and Mr. Ian Rushworth. Criteria that are considered for the appointment of independent members are expertise in governance, risk management, strong financial literacy, understanding of public sector operations. Ian Rushworth has extensive experience as an auditor. He is currently chief auditor at the Department of Transport and Main Roads. He has previously served as head of internal audit at the department of children youth justice and multicultural and multicultural affairs he's also been appointed initially for his experience and interest in cyber security. Independent members are initially appointed for a minimum of two years with next maximum tenure of six years and this report basing seeks, so his initial appointment comes to an end on 26 June, so in ten days, and this report seeks the appointment of Mr. Iman rushmore for a further three years. Frank Wilkie 03:53:08.990
Councillor Wilson has moved the motion we have a seconder as Nicola Wilson 03:53:12.810
A member of the Audit and Risk Committee I've been working with Ian Rushworth over the last year or so. Yancey's just explained his expertise and experience which is also detailed in the report. It's very relevant to our council and to the committee in general so I fully support his exception. Frank Wilkie 03:53:34.454
Thank you. Further comments? Put the motion those in favour. Is that unanimous. That's carried. Thank you. Next item is 12.5 Financial Performance Report from May. And we have our Finance Manager Ms Pauline Coles here to speak to the report. Welcome Pauline. And we have Acting Director Claire Gatt. SPEAKER_12 03:54:01.798
Afternoon councillors. Welcome. Monthly finance report. Pauline Coles 03:54:09.570
Afternoon councillors. So year to date May reporting shows operating revenues continuing to outperform forecast and operating expenditures are under forecast year to date. Operating revenue is 2. Dollars worth of budget which is being driven by interest income, 2.5 million dollars, sales of goods and services of 531,000 dollars, other revenue of 422,000 dollars and 171,000 dollars from grant programs. This has been offset by lower than forecast revenue from rates and Fees and Charges of 916,000 dollars. The below budget Fees and Charges relate predominantly to development assessment which is about 696 dollars. You should note, 000. That development assessments may fluctuate depending on the volume and timing of applications. So that can explain why there's such a large variance at different times. We also have local losses down on about $230,000. And building and plumbing compliance fees are down $184,000. Some of that relates to some of the protected action and we look to try and regain some of that revenue through to the end of financial year as those staff come back online. Operating expenditure is $1 million underspent with employee costs $1.2 million under budget due to staff vacancies, savings and work cover premiums and forecast salary increases that were to commence in March not taking effect due to the ongoing negotiations of council certified agreement. Once the agreement is finalised, back pay will occur and that saving will be used to fund those back payments. Materials and services expenditure is $436,000 over budget with the largest amount relating to civil operations which is $725,000. Noting that $120,000 of that relates to are under budget due to the referral of waste capital program of $240,000 overall council's year-to-date operating position at May is 3.2 million dollars above budget which will be used to fund emergent expenditure through to June 2025 and operations. Council should note that we have not yet received advice from the Federal government relating to our financial assistance grant for 25-26 which is usually paid in advance. I'm only noting this as it will have an impact on our financial statements if we are to receive that prepayment early again as we did actually receive the 24-25 payment late which could compound our financial position in a positive way this financial year but potentially have a negative impact next financial year but just noting it's a time issue only. Capital revenue is 12.1 million dollars above budget due to the timing of receiving SEQ CSP grant funds, bridge renewal program funds, SEQ liveability grant and QRA funding. Capital expenditures is behind budget 48.1 million dollars year to date, with 16.6 million relating to council's base capital program, and the remainder relating to disaster projects. Variance are you today is driven by budget profiling and the timing of project the process. Delivery. Any projects that remain outstanding at the end of financial year will be carried over into the next financial year for them to be completed. Council's cash holdings at the end of May were 111 million with 25 million of these funds invested in high yielding term deposits. Cash holdings continue to be higher than forecast with the delay in the delivery council's capital program making up a large component of that. Cash balances will continue decline as operational expenses continue to decline as operation expenditure occurs through to 30 June and as the capital works program is delivered. Overall council's financial performance continues to be favourable with 11 minutes of the year complete. We are forecasting that council will end the year with a net operating surplus pending any end of the year adjustment SPEAKER_15 03:58:15.490
Thank you. Questions for this cause? Amelia Lorentson 03:58:20.153
Councillor Lorentson? I've got a couple, Pauline, and thank you for the report. Just in light of what's been happening in our neighbouring councils regarding financial reporting errors, how does Noosa Council ensure accurate depreciation and accordance? Pauline Coles 03:58:42.009
So council undertakes a series of asset management plans that inform our renewal and maintenance program that is currently being renewed at the moment with works being undertaken by the asset management team. That information helps to inform program that we put forward to council to adopt every year and for the next ten years. We also do a revaluation program every year for a particular asset class. So every asset class is reviewed and revalued every three to five years. As part of that program. The assessment of condition of those assets is determined as well as the remaining use for life. That informs our depreciation expense, which we also use then to fund our renewal program for capital. So there's a whole lot of work that goes into that side of things in terms of how we report that through to you. Does that answer your Amelia Lorentson 03:59:31.673
You very much. It really does take schooling. And my other question is just, again, just acknowledging just current geopolitical situations around the world in the united states and iran and iraq. Basically, what risk do these current events pose to council operations, investments or supply chains? How are the risks being monitored and assessed? And specifically, my question, my thought was, my curiosity is who actually has what's the responsibility to for decide? This oversight? Is it the audit of this committee that does this? The CEO or external parties such as LGAQ? Margaret Gatt 04:00:16.642
Through the Chair, thank you for your question, Councillor Lorentson. There's a number of bodies that look after council's interest in this regard in terms of geopolitical instability. So that would be organisations such as Queensland Treasury Corporation, department of local government, I've forgotten the machinery of changed the other voluntary and voluntary so department of local government and also the QAO. So they regularly conduct surveillances and provide advice to local government and as you said local government association of Queensland and also the ALGA as well. Amelia Lorentson 04:00:54.414
Fantastic. Thank you. Karen Karen Finzel 04:00:57.214
Finzel. Yeah, just following on from the. I just have a question. That conversion you know, the asset built and the expenditure expended through the grants, whatever, converting it to an asset register, how. What is the volume and where are we at with that? Is it, like, on track, that conversion, or are we. Where are we sitting with that? Pauline Coles 04:01:23.090
I can answer it. Just to clarify, are you referring to grant funded projects only or all projects? Well, both would be good, if that's okay. Sure. So, we are behind in capitalisation, probably two or three years in terms of capitalisation our program, but also have programs that are multiple years of that, so we do have historical work, what we call work in progress, which is the cost of delivering those construction projects. In terms of our capitalisation, or when we recognise those assets on our books and start depreciating them, there's a whole lot of work in terms of working with finance and the asset management team, and also the project management area. So once a project's completed, we get, the asset management team, get the information from the project managers and the contractors around the actual asset components. Record all of our assets based on the componentised thing, so not just this is a building, it's all the components that make that building up, because that informs how much of a useful life they have, how much it is to replace in conjunction with asset management, the finance team will then also review all of the transactions that have gone through on those construction projects to determine the value of those assets that we capitalise, and that's how they go onto our books. Again, touching on the rebounds, when we do our re-evaluations, that assesses essentially what we've capitalised on the books versus what the actual placement cost is, and you may or may not see through the annual financial report an increase in our revaluation reserves as a result of that. Over time, assets will go up in value in terms of replacement costs, maybe not the actual costs that we're spending. Does that make sense? Karen Finzel 04:02:57.343
Yeah, so just one more question then, probably more from that. When we're looking then at risk mitigation, do you think it's reasonable we've got that two to three year lag? SPEAKER_05_b 04:03:09.347
In context, a lot of councils actually have the same issue that Noosa Council experiences in terms of keeping up with the progress of capitalisation of assets. We have spent the last several years and trying to get a lot of the backlog cleared and updated. However, finding asset accountants across the board, not just Noosa, is a big problem. So there is a lag and there probably will continue to be a like lag for the next few years. We have additional resources that have come on to help us, but there is obviously a large volume of information that has to be worked through. Thank you. Karen Finzel 04:03:43.676
Just a question Through the Chair to the CEO then, are you satisfied with that level of the lag? Larry Sengstock 04:03:49.156
That's a question, what do you say, are you satisfied. Look, that's the situation we're in. It's a situation that many councils as Paul even said, that's just a consequence of the current climate. But yeah, I'm comfortable with it. I think we've got a very good understanding of what our assets are and what our new assets coming on if they're going to if they're going to be of any high risk, then we would certainly know that and deal with it accordingly. So I'm coming to the position we're at right now. Yes, Sir. You're right to go. Margaret Gatt 04:04:28.852
Wanted to make a couple of comments in addition to give councillors confidence around depreciation methodology, etc. All councils are governed and all public sector entities are governed by international accounting standards. And when we through the QAO Q&A physical or their contract analysis auditors, of they any look at all of those financial risks and they look of the at the methodology assets that we are apply. In they will do sample testing of anything our that's in our asset register and even may conduct audits to ensure that all things are done in accordance with those accounting standards. So in my understanding of looking at the last couple of years of closing reports from the QAO for this organisation or for council, there have not been any material. Materiality issues raised through those audit processes. They would pick those up definitely through interim or end of financial year audits, so that hopefully would give you some level of confidence that the way how we apply the depreciation methodology is compliant. SPEAKER_05_b 04:05:34.157
Just to follow on from that in terms of how we record our depreciation through the monthly reporting it is actually based on a forecast which actually includes any work in progress that we had in place at the start of the year so we're taking up depreciation we may not have otherwise reported because assets haven't been capitalised so it is reflected in the financial statements that you do see we also do as part of the end of financial year assessment and preparation of those financial statements a full review of that and a calculation of whether there's a misstatement of depreciation where it's material and materiality for us is 5% we will make an adjustment in the financial statements to take up any shortfall if there is one. To date we haven't had to take up a shortfall so that would indicate that we're not tracking too badly based on our estimates. Thank you. SPEAKER_15 04:06:27.961
Any wish to move for the report? Councillor Wilson? Have a second please? Phillips, Councillor Phillips Councillor Nicola Wilson 04:06:42.354
Um just thank you for the report always thorough and detailed just noting as well that this is a historical report that's to the actual performance up to May 2025 but we're throwing forecasting questions how to put at Pauline the call in here so maybe to be mindful of that this is an awkward looking historical report and obviously we're now almost at the end of the financial year so next month's reports will be the ones that we're all going to focus on about how we end up year but yeah SPEAKER_15 04:07:14.106
Thank you councillors. Anything else to speak? Frank Wilkie 04:07:19.938
Put the motion. Those in favour? That's unanimous. Thank you. Colleen. Up to the next item which is item 12.6, phasing charges. The results of the third also deferred from the General Committee Meeting. We also have Pauline Coles here to speak to SPEAKER_15 04:07:41.550
Give us a quick summary of the report. SPEAKER_05_b 04:07:44.230
Thank you councillors. So the Local Government Act 2009 empowers council to generate revenue from Fees and Charges by fixing a fee by way of a local law resolution. Fees and Charges can be set to recover costs regulatory activities such as planning fees and permits, as well as those based on commercial full cost principles, including a return on assets employed for business activities such as waste and holiday parks. Proposed 25-26 schedule comprises over 1,000 Fees and Charges, which generates approximately $29 million in revenue, both from fees and sales of goods and services, to fund the delivery of council services across the Shire. Some key points to note this year are that some fees may not increase due to regulatory or market demand or rounding variances. Operating margins for each business area have been reviewed to ensure they are maintained and the reliance on general rates operations is managed appropriately. Twice yearly council also reviews and amends its holiday park fees to allow for forward booking at its sites and this review will extend those Fees and Charges to 26 of the 26th of January 2027. Pricing to recover the true cost of service provision is necessary to ensure that council generates sufficient revenues from its activities in line with its financial sustainability policy. It also provides a diversified revenue base and ensures that the cost of services provided are equitably borne by those who fees were reviewed during the development of the 2025-26 budget and increases above standard thresholds were presented to councillors at budget workshops for discussion and agreement. Oh, you should note that our. Errors and omissions have been identified in the 2025-26 Fees and Charges registered document. It was attached and noted as attachment one. A revised attachment one correcting those areas and omissions is tabled for today's meeting. These corrections include the following: so page five of the attachment one. So the entire dog excluding a living dog about six months old is if paid after the due date, currently shows a fee of hundred and twenty $325.50. Due to a transposition error, this fee should actually be $235.50. Page five 325 this is the new one oh is that the new updated one sorry yes so on the one attached to the general committee minutes is actually 325.50. It should be $235.50. Okay, this is the correct one, sorry, yes, so that's the correct version. Next one was page eight of the attachment one to the general committee meeting, which was annual lease, licence, permit to occupy or management agreement fee, non nonprofit organisations with the amount of $400. That's the one just down towards the bottom there. It was missing the words vacant land or land with limited infrastructure, such as storage shed or community garden with no electricity. So it was missing that last sentence. So that's just been updated. Page nine. So some fees relating to just down the bottom there. So relating to The J, event centre, the ticket exchange fee for $6 was omitted as well as ticket collection fee of $3 and the SMS ticket delivery notification charge by SMS is also there at 95 cents per SMS that they've been incorporated. And finally, one last one. On page 29. Can you hear this? It's the red hot read overdue fee. Just down the bottom there, $1. So on the document attached to the general committee minutes, it actually had, it was missing the per day fee, so we've added per day. Okay, there are the amendments that are correcting those errors. The proposed 25, 26 Fees and Charges once adopted by council will come into effect from the 1st of July 2025. So, yes, we're replacing the attachment to the report with attachment Jessica Phillips 04:12:26.080
Someone care to move the notice? Question, please. Just in relation to, on page 8, application for owner's consent, non-for-profit organisations. Just wanting to get some more understanding about please. Richard MacGillivray 04:12:42.990
I'm happy to answer that Through the Chair. So, this fee is essentially a very small portion of cost recovery fee for applications where groups that are wanting to either propose to undertake an activity on council controlled land or looking to amend a facility or building on council controlled land there's a process where they lodge currently a consent for landowners consent and that may assist them to lodge a development application or something of the like that has a series of processes we will do internal engagement consultation review whether or not that request will be supported or not so the fee is essentially very modest fee that does a partial cost recovery for the work undertaken by council staff assess and evaluate whether that consent will be given. It is also consistent with other local governments where they do charge fees for example Moreton Bay charge $222 and ipswich council charges around $200 for that same fee request. Jessica Phillips 04:14:03.167
More questions on this so don't go anywhere. Could the fee, even though it's not getting full cost recovery for us, is there any possibility that it could deter non-for-profit organisations from even going through that process? Has that been assessed or that? Richard MacGillivray 04:14:23.105
Through the Chair, look, in terms of the ability to pay the fee, if there are groups that are unable and don't have sufficient funds to pay the $50 they can request consideration for a fee request reduction that exists under the current Fees and Charges arrangements. I guess given there is a cost of undertaking this work, whether it's borne by the general rate or it's borne by the group applying for the request is a matter for council to decide, but from our perspective, given there is considerable effort involved with evaluating these requests, we're seeking a very modest fee to assist to cover the minimal amount of those costs. Process. If there are groups that are really struggling to afford the $50, we can absolutely evaluate through an email or request for a fee reduction. We can evaluate that on the merits based on the financial capability or the nature of the request from that individual group. Can I start off? Brian Stockwell 04:15:24.840
In terms of the point of clarification, landowners' consent, is this only in relation to development applications people are putting in? Or does it also cover when, say, these groups are applying for council grants, there's also a requirement to get landowners' consent there? Is it meant affect that as well look Richard MacGillivray 04:15:45.682
Look, Through the Chair, yeah, potentially it does involve a range of elements, so if there is, say, a grant to do an alteration to a building, it would potentially relate to that as well. Jessica Phillips 04:15:57.448
Question to clarify, they could potentially be asking for a grant to upgrade a council facility, okay, and have these groups been engaged and notified that this fee is coming? Richard MacGillivray 04:16:12.448
I'm not aware if of all groups have been notified of this fee, I'm not sure. Jessica Phillips 04:16:17.663
I might just stay standing because I've got a few questions about it. And has there been a cost at what it looks like for council if it doesn't cover full costs recovery? Is it imposing another invoicing, receding, chasing up if they don't pay? Is it just adding another layer to not only what's already but on council staff Richard MacGillivray 04:16:47.400
Through the Chair well we already undertake the work at the moment for no fee so we actually are undertaking a very comprehensive process at the moment. Is essentially seeking a partial recovery of the cost to ratepayers to undertake that work. Jessica Phillips 04:17:06.407
Last question I promise what potentially will that look like for revenue? Through whoops, thanks. Richard MacGillivray 04:17:13.354
Chair, look we don't get huge numbers of these requests every year I'd say no more than around 20 per year so around about a thousand dollars worth of revenue. Frank Wilkie 04:17:24.874
Just a question and as an example if when Noosa Heads Surf Club wants to do their $1 million redevelopment they would need to go through this process and pay the $50? Correct. Questions? Amelia Lorentson 04:17:41.193
We've had quite a few deputations by resident suggesting that dog registration be paid every three years instead of annually. Has council seriously considered this proposal? Richard MacGillivray 04:17:58.432
Are you referring to this particular this is a shifting topic. Are you changing? Okay. Sorry. We're shifting subject. Sorry. Are you referring to three year from dog registration? Dog registration instead of annual. Sorry, I was stuck on the previous item there. Through the Chair, at this stage we're only looking at annual, but there we. Will be an opportunity potentially in the future to look at a multi-year. There's just a fair bit of work that needs to be explored, particularly around our systems, to enable that to be considered. Jessica Phillips 04:18:37.790
Just on Mayor wilkie's comment about club. But. Can you tell me another example of the 10 applications? Because if the surf club is obviously, in my mind, one, but all I think of is all the other little guys. So just tell me, are we. A-- are we putting a cost on the little community sports that are upgrading our council facility to do a consent form, which we already do, but it isn't going to recoup costs anyway? I just-- I can't quite work out why it's here. Richard MacGillivray 04:19:19.224
Through the Chair, um, and you probably recall when you had, um, some, um, workshops on land tenure, um, we have a range of community groups that, um, have tenured council, financial capacity through to a range of very financially sustainable, um, entities. I guess what we're seeking to achieve is a, is a balanced outcome with a moderate fee that, um, that outlines that there is substantial effort involved with these requests? Some of them do vary in terms of scale of complexity, and that's taken. Again, there is the ability for council to work with the groups to understand if the $50 fee is not financially viable for them to entertain invest. That. We'll consider that on the merits of it, but overall, we're seeking to, I guess, ensure that there's a user pays element to our Fees and Charges and that the work that we undertake has an appropriate fee, otherwise that ends up being borne by the general rate payer as a cost. Tom Wegener 04:20:30.324
Careful council would. Yeah, so I was with Permaculture Noosa and we did four grants a year, applied for four grants and that we regularly were going to get this and they were small grants and this would really cut into that and if we had to pay that even if it's a question is putting in a new garden bed and we're applying for a grant and they say do you have permission are we going to be charged $50 by garden where we're an element of the grant process is permission Richard MacGillivray 04:21:08.360
Through the Chair currently as it stands there is a fee to undertake that request however as I mentioned earlier there's the ability for a group to apply for a fee request reduction to be considered based on the financial viability of undertaking that request or not so there is the ability to evaluate that on the merits but technically there is a cost of council undertaking that evaluation through the current process. So how do you evaluate whether a group is can it can be waived, the $50 fee? Is there is there a minimum bank balance or something like that? No, there isn't any specific criteria. It comes down to the merits and the facts and circumstances of the request. Whether the fee proposed is unreasonable and not able to be achieved, noting what effort is involved as well. So there's a relevancy to the effort of making that determination. If it's a relatively straightforward request that doesn't require any internal consultation with other parts of the organisation, doesn't require any legal review or evaluation with our governance or legal team, then potentially it's a fairly straightforward request and we can either reduce or even potentially waive potentially waive the fee. As well we do have flexibility there to evaluate the fees in terms of are they relevant to the effort and work involved, from an officer's perspective. SPEAKER_15 04:22:40.209
Councillor Stockwell? Brian Stockwell 04:22:42.349
It's probably a. No, it's probably not. Just the question I have is. Looked through our community grant infrastructure and there's probably four or five there that have got this fee. Will it be a fee that they can claim in their grant and council ends up paying it anyway? Richard MacGillivray 04:22:59.347
Through the Chair, look, potentially they might absorb some of that cost through those grants. Jessica Phillips 04:23:06.617
Can I make an amendment now or would you prefer to keep going with questions? Frank Wilkie 04:23:10.797
You can move a motion which includes what's on the screen plus your change. We haven't moved the motion yet. That includes your amendment and that becomes a motion. Amelia Lorentson 04:23:25.575
Can I just also add it also prohibits you prohibits moving any additional amendments. SPEAKER_12 04:23:31.015
That's right. I'll pause and leave. Brian Stockwell 04:23:32.695
Yes, just to proceed I'll move the recommendation. Okay, thank you Councillor Stockwell. Staff recommendation? SPEAKER_15 04:23:38.395
Yes. This one here with the change, okay. We have a seconder for the motion please. Frank Wilkie 04:23:45.610
Okay. SPEAKER_15 04:23:46.750
I'll second. Jessica Phillips 04:23:47.790
Thank you Councillor Wilson. And can I now make an amendment? Stockwell needs to it. You. Yep, I knew that, I was just waiting for you. Brian Stockwell 04:24:00.065
We'll have a thousand of them and we'll probably be discussing two or three I believe, but I'll wait other than that to say that the increases that we have considered and been shown are well within what I think is a reasonable expectation of the community. Thank you for attending and have a great week. Basically just move so Councillor Phillips can forward her notions on an amendment. Okay, thank you. Jessica Phillips 04:24:27.112
My amendment is just to remove that fee. Thanks for moving that along for me. SPEAKER_12 04:24:31.852
It's alright, we'll get that up. All right. Thank you. Okay, I'm just going to so I can get you to the transfer. So this will go underneath the existing recommendation that was just moved. Yes. Jessica Phillips 04:25:36.000
Thank you. With a further change to the Fees and Charges attachment 1 under the heading of community leasing, 8, delete the following application. Page for owner's consent, not-for-profit organisations of $50. Local Government Act 2009/97 to a. Licence fee. I'm not sure if I had to read all of that. Kim Rawlings 04:25:58.480
Yeah. I did anyway. I'm trying to expand it. It's better on my screen than it is SPEAKER_12 04:26:02.940
There. Is that better? SPEAKER_15 04:26:06.340
Yes, we can see that anyway. Councillor Phillips, would you like to speak to the amendment? Jessica Phillips 04:26:11.680
Thank you. I think my questions have pretty much alluded to why I'm seeking to take this out of the Fees and Charges. Council's partnership with community groups is built on a shared stewardship of public assets. These organisations are not private developers, they're volunteers using their own time and external funding to improve facilities that council owns. Imposing a fee risks sending a message that council views these efforts not contributions, and often these consent applications are a prerequisite for other approvals or grant applications. Community groups may need to apply twice for the same project for grant eligibility and then again for a possible development application. Adding a fee at each touch point multiplies the administrative burden we I think we've I want to finish by I just don't want to create more red tape for volunteers that are already probably saying what we're stretched. Frank Wilkie 04:27:18.193
Just a question of clarification. The community groups already have to go through this application process don't they? It's not creating a new application. Through the yeah Through the Chair absolutely they already need to apply for landowner consent. Did I hear you say you maybe get 10 applications a year? Potentially 20. Okay thank you. SPEAKER_15 04:27:40.101
Sorry councillors just questioning my notes. Who seconded that amendment? Karen Finzel 04:27:46.501
I don't think any councillors did. SPEAKER_15 04:27:48.481
Do we have a seconder? Councillor Wilson. Frank Wilkie 04:27:53.229
Can't be Councillor who seconded the amendment? I spoke to it. Thank you. Okay. Anyone else wish to speak to the amendment? Brian Stockwell 04:28:04.209
Yeah, I will. I think Councillor Phillips has one of the elements of it. It is just a form you fill in and historically before you do grant applications and as time goes on you have to do it a bit earlier depending on the scale of development. It is, as I said, if I was doing the grant and I had to pay $50 I'd include that in the grant application. So it would be a circular thing if it was coming out of council. But as Councillor Phillips mentioned, quite often a community group will go for the same thing in three different times if there's a bit of a gap between the grant funds being available, you might have to go back and get renewed landowners consent. I've got no real problems if it was related to actual development applications, like the bigger ones you're talking about. If they're a sizeable scale there may be more, but in essence it is just saying a landowners consent is do we agree that this is a development that should be on the land so it shouldn't be that complex Frank Wilkie 04:29:05.440
I'm going to speak in favour of it we haven't had it before it's a process that the applicants have to go through already we get 20 but maybe up to 20 a year that is dollars so it's not a huge amount and it sends a good message that the not-for-profit community groups we do understand that they are when they're seeking to improve their premises are making a contribution they are community assets and I could go either way with this but I don't think the bottom line of council will be affected by doing this but there's a strong community message that we send by non-opinioners couple hundred feet. SPEAKER_15 04:29:59.380
To staying accountable to Amelia Lorentson 04:29:59.740
The sorry Tom, you go ahead. Tom Wegener 04:30:02.978
I found that I found this when applying for to grants to be a headache. It set me back. And it wasn't an overnight thing. And imagine right now during the industrial action how long people might be waiting for this. It's just an extra stumbling block to stop or to hinder the from making the community better. Because it's, I think it's a double dipping process. Because we're supported by the community already to provide a service. And all of a sudden you're charging the community a further service for benefiting this service. It's a double up. It's a double charge, I think. So I totally support it. Thank you, Jess. Without repeating what everyone said, firstly, Amelia Lorentson 04:30:53.679
Thanks, Jess, for picking it up. I think it's really important. And we talked a lot about the amount, $50 not being that think it's really got nothing to do with the amount. And it's more about enabling good people to do good things. And our not-for-profit, our volunteers, they're critical to enabling good things to happen in this community and stuff that we can't do internally. Given, again, the impost, 20 by $50, $1,000 is negligible in the scheme of things. Totally support this amendment. Really good act of goodwill, and thank you for the pick-up, Councillor Phillips. Frank Wilkie 04:31:44.683
Council. I'll put the amendment. Those in favour? That is unanimous. That is carried. We now go back to the original motion to which only Councillor Stockwell has spoken. Anybody else wish to speak to the motion? Do you wish to close, Councillor Stockwell? That's it? Yeah. Jessica Phillips 04:32:06.472
Have we gone back to the. If you want to make another amendment, I do. You have the time to do it. Thank you. I I've got rihanna. Thank you. Just in relation. Meeting rooms on page 29 of 80, please. SPEAKER_12 04:32:39.300
Okay, so I'm going to get Paige. Up. Kim Rawlings 04:32:47.460
I'm sorry, I've got page eight of Jessica Phillips 04:32:52.040
I'm 29 of 80. We were on 8 of 80. Thank you. Thank you, just in relation to the meeting room hire charges for the libraries and so my amendment is that item to read B with a further change to the Fees and Charges attachment one under the heading of libraries page 29 delete the following meeting room hire charges small meeting room. Do I need to read every little bit of that? Non-for-profit council per day $37.50 meeting hour $7.50 meeting room. Hire charges large day $100-for-profit council per-for-profit council hour $20. SPEAKER_12 04:34:50.652
Charges on the amendment I didn't know whether you wanted to see the whole Fees and Charges, the table that it was sitting in. Frank Wilkie 04:35:02.432
Just the amendments. Just the amendments, okay. Can you enlarge those a bit, please? They're actually separated, the Fees and Charges. Can everyone see those? Yeah. Okay we have a second for the purpose of the fight I just had a question Karen Finzel 04:35:30.292
Yes just before we go into this, just around the process, I support community and love them and anything to help them, but just for the process, we have a financial sustainability policy and we also have, we've heard today. A process by which a community group can apply to have these fees withdrawn. I'm just thinking, are we inside of, I don't know, the process, are we, I don't what's the risk if we're sitting here now just pulling these out and making these decisions around the table, which I know we can do, but for my own mind, I just want to understand in terms of process and policy, what's the risk? Frank Wilkie 04:36:29.554
Could I help by asking a question? Well, we'll just see if there's an answer to Councillor finzel's question. I can, has it, I guess where Councillor Finzel was is this in breach of the council's financial sustainability policy? In breach of any principles of that? And what's the risk to the bottom line with us withdrawing these fees? SPEAKER_05_b 04:36:52.125
Is that accurate? Did you want to talk to that Kerri or do I you want me to? Larry Sengstock 04:36:55.345
I can talk to you there you go Kim Rawlings 04:36:58.796
I can let you know that this will be a reduction of approximately $10,000 to $12,000 per year in revenue. Those meeting rooms are booked to about, 000 90% capacity and so you know it's a from a lobbyist perspective a revenue stream because they incur charges around things like cleaning costs, staff for example it's after hours and staff have to stay to open the meeting rooms up etc so it will be a loss of revenue between ten and twelve thousand dollars a year. SPEAKER_15 04:37:41.650
Thank you. We have a seconder for our Councillor, second Councillor Wegener. Councillor Phillips? Jessica Phillips 04:37:52.609
Oh thank you. I think this was pretty good that the Fees and Charges came after the most recent financial report when we hear that it's only ten $10 to, 000 twelve $12 thousand.000. I want to talk about probably similar to the last amendment. These are our non-for-profit. These fees are separate to commercial having hiring the facilities. Organisations that either have their, I'm sure everyone around the room has gone to a committee meeting once a month with a sporting group or I met with the rotary at the reef recently because they no longer take up the hire of a council facility and I sat at the room with a group of incredible people that are advocating for domestic violence and community advocacy and they are just doing some incredible work and I said you know they said to me what we can't we don't want to come and pay a fee to hire a room at our own facility and they're all ratepayers and residents and it hit home to me I thought oh I it doesn't feel good to on to charge community with our own facilities when they're already paying through a different means and it again probably harped enough about principal today for me it's just saying hey we see you we hear in workshops every day that volunteers are our the most struggling in our community when it comes when it comes to just finding extra volunteers and the extra layers and layers that they have because it's not just council layers of red tape that are imposed on them it's just so many other things and so to me I'm let's just help them out when and if it requires that one day they need to be reimposed you know reinvestigated or whatever to me hearing ten to twelve thousand is just it's nothing in our in our budget for an act of goodwill Frank Wilkie 04:40:04.621
So question staff um is this the second year we've charged for the higher or how long has this practice been in place Kim Rawlings 04:40:15.281
So these practices in place have been in place for a number of years when we had a practice where some of the smaller spaces we um enabled some community organisations to use for free one of the difficulties that we have when the space is free is that we have groups book it and then they don't turn up um and then we'll have a waiting list of people who want to be able to use it um I would suggest if we go ahead with this there will be a change to the policy um about it because there's a lot of um staff work that goes into booking and managing these facilities uh these rooms so I would be thinking um at Karen Finzel 04:40:56.939
The moment they people pay so that they can guarantee a particular date and time um and I would imagine also that one of the changes will be that library staff who at the moment prioritise community groups will probably then that they'll need to take up some of that space themselves to run fee paid programs given that there's you know constant questions around community facilities and making sure they raise revenue and try to achieve that balance so we'll have to look at how this will actually be able to be implemented Kim Rawlings 04:41:33.535
So yes it's been in charged for several years pre-COVID what happened is that during COVID when we gave relief to a range of fees this was one of the fees that number organisations on. So it's been around for. Would be since pre-demo. Pre-amalgamation pre-amalgamation? Yes, so. The meeting rooms have been at out of feed since yes, so prior to amalgamation we had just the Noosaville library and we had one room there which we used to charge when Cooroy Library was built. It was built specifically with the community rooms there to be able to provide access and the fees went in place there. When we expanded Noosaville library and brought on the two new meeting rooms to that, the fees were applied to that as well. So it's been in place for. A decade and a half don't we have significant demand for these rooms. So even with the fees, the rooms. Frank Wilkie 04:42:55.445
I have another question for Councillor Jess. How many of these amendments do you have? Mr Jessica Phillips 04:43:04.665
This is the last amendment that I'll be moving today unless something comes- If out of the next. SPEAKER_15 04:43:13.365
Councillors, any questions? Frank Wilkie 04:43:16.876
So this is primarily libraries or just libraries? Jessica Phillips 04:43:21.296
Well no, this particular fee is to libraries but the majority of our venues have rooms for hire for community organisations and for commercial organisations. So that's the Leisure Centre, The J has multiple rooms available for hire and then we've got small facilities as well and then obviously you've got things like the halls which are being run by community organisations and they charge fees for that as well. Certainly one of the reasons that we post-COVID introduced a consistent approach to paying fees is because our halls holes know I can understand you saying we're trying to maintain a facility and we want people to use our facility. We need to charge fees. Shouldn't the library also be charging some fee? So we're trying to have an equitable approach. Brian Stockwell 04:44:26.435
That was the point I was going to make. A paying meeting for a meeting room is standard practice for a community room, so I don't think live in for 50 Years I've been involved in one or I've never had to pay. You either pay when you're hiring one or you pay because you've got access to it and you're doing the upkeep, you're paying for the electricity. I think it makes sense for all the reasons outlined. You do want to make sure there's a trigger that has a value so they will put it on and certainly if you're a community group in the local area and you're losing one of your regular hires because all of a sudden the library's free you'll be a bit upset so I think we just have to make it fair and it's fair that there's a reasonable cost of using council facilities and taking council staff time to book it. Frank Wilkie 04:45:16.319
Do still have the capacity to waive the fee for any groups that would like to use the room for free for valid reasons? Karen Finzel 04:45:24.979
We will always work with the community organisation around what their capacity is if it and for example if it's that the room it's booked and it's available and then and it's an of the day thing then we will allow people to use that space without a charge. So the charge is generally applied when it is booked in advance particularly for those regular things so that I say I want it to, every you know, second Monday of the month from now into the future and that guarantees they have a space and the services that go to that but we will always work with the community organisation around its capacity and will provide some option for them. Frank Wilkie 04:46:06.453
How often is staff required to stay after hours to facilitate this hire? Kim Rawlings 04:46:11.233
Weekly. As I said they are booked to pretty much capacity. So in our Noosa library for example it's more weekend bookings but there's generally staff there. Cooroy Library it's running its meeting rooms after hours. Now for some organisations they've got the trusted ability to be able to access it remotely. Some require staffing because they want technology access or catering etc. Thank you. Amelia Lorentson 04:46:49.500
I am going to support the amendment in front of us probably sort of sit I understand all the argument it's a really great argument but I come back to one fundamental which is our rates go to pay for and core council services functions which include libraries and our volunteers pay rates so I feel again back to the previous argument that we need to be enabling community groups to do great things in community given rates pay for local libraries I really feel I don't know I just feel again excellent opportunity to show really great goodwill and acknowledge the excellent work that our not-for-profits are doing Tom Wegener 04:47:48.060
Can I see the window? This is a great a great debate I'm really torn but I understand that the whole cancellation fee kind of thing like you it's very easy to not show up to something and make an appointment if you're not can for it and the second thing is there's a lot of the halls and things actually have places where you can meet as well but they have to charge like the Cooroy hall has to charge well most of the other places have to charge so this warps their ability to actually fund themselves by it by not charging for the library hall usage so I'm just I'm all of support the end the staff recommendation Pat Spicer 04:48:27.736
Well I won't support that one I won't support that I won't support the amendment Larry Sengstock 04:48:32.816
Stuff recommendation of the patient charges is that as Frank Wilkie 04:48:49.540
I it's a wonderful gesture but we do also have a lot of not-for-profit groups working very hard to run community-owned halls and run them as venues and they do charge and I would also be concerned if by you would be council under undercutting those community groups by offering free venue hire at the libraries for example where the community groups do charge other not-for-profit groups to hire their rooms. I to see them deprived of a revenue stream because we're in effect subsidising or undercutting the other community groups. I think next year. I'd like to see we have a broader discussion around our approach to community venues and the Fees and Charges. We had a comprehensive workshop on this. There are over a thousand line items in this document and we were presented in the workshop details on the ones there's been where there's been major much changes. I don't believe there were major changes proposed here. But it is a topic raised from time to time as a matter of principle should council be charging community groups for the hire of their facilities. It's a big discussion and it's a very worthy principle that you've raised here. And I'd like to delve into it further because probably broader Fees and Charges, broader discussion about Fees and Charges that we have that affect not-for-profit groups. Remember the workshop, there was a proposed fee for our H &S environmental health audits of markets and we certainly weren't charge the markets for that. I know it's a lens through which councillors view Fees and Charges and that is respectful not-for-profits and I think it's going to be the start of a broader conversation leading up to the next year's Fees and Charges. Gratification. Thank you. Karen Finzel 04:51:29.587
One can speak to that, or do no, it's going to close. But I'm going to speak to thank you, Councillor Phillips. The principle behind do support. I do have concerns around unintended consequences. I'm satisfied there is a process for community groups to reach out. I understand we have, you know, a policy in place. And again, I've talked about it on more than one occasion, that we explore the notion of change within the theme of excellence with the view of strengthening our ongoing commitments to collaboration, caring for our people and honouring the story of Noosa now and into the future. Think this is really great, Councillor Phillips, because what you've done again is identified where there's current gaps, what could be the risks, and I think for us to inform any future frameworks or policies to provide clear accountability structures, robust governance models, et cetera, into the future. So this is nothing new that I'm raising around this idea of continuous improvement. I think this is a higher order. That we need to then look at policy reviews or further conversations. I feel right now I can't support this today because of those the recent unintended consequences. May ripple out to community but certainly sitting at the centre of my heart around this is to ensure best practice for our community groups. So I look forward to those further conversations as how we can continually bring benefits and our focus for governance back to our community. Thank you. Council president. SPEAKER_15 04:53:16.903
Councillor Finzel should speak for the amendment. Councillor Phillips, you're supposed to close. Jessica Phillips 04:53:20.543
Councillor Phillips yes, thank you. In February, I actually asked at the council if you will remember, that I raised this as a topic to get some data to assist in the Fees and Charges. So I wasn't aware of that because I didn't get the information about how much brings in, but I'll just bring it back to intent. I want to tell you a story. When I was in the role of the crime prevention officer, I had the university reach out to see the increase of fees to a thousand dollars for a mobile phone ticket. Frank Wilkie 04:53:55.328
A point of order being raised, Councillor Phillips. I bought a new. You need to sit down if it's raised. Jessica Phillips 04:54:02.591
Yes. Councillor Stockwell. Councillor Phillips was right. Brian Stockwell 04:54:06.351
She is introducing new content into her clothes. Jessica Phillips 04:54:09.091
Yes, I am. You're right, I'll withdraw that. Thank you, Councillor. I'll tell you the story later, and it'll tell you why, about how I got here, because we should be backing our local in every single way by saying here is your facility, use them, grow your impact, and know that your community stands by you. If there is a concern of misuse of facilities, then let's address that directly. That's my point. If there's people that are applying to hire the room and they're not showing up, let's address that. Let's not impose a cost on the people that are probably doing the right thing. I don't because I don't agree with blanket charges that do then end up punishing everyone and I'll tell you my police story later so that will tie into that. Nothing else to say. Frank Wilkie 04:55:05.530
Well done Councillor the amendment in those in favour. Councillor Phillips, Councillor Lorentson and those against. Councillor Finzel, Wilson, Stockwell, Wegener and Wilkie. The amendment is lost. It goes back to the original motion with the amendment included as part of the motion to which only Councillor Stockwell has spoken. SPEAKER_15 04:55:29.587
Let's just get that up on the screen. Councillor Lorentson. Amelia Lorentson 04:55:36.067
Yeah, just speak just again about, you know, ongoing discussion. Discussions and conversations. Lots of really good stuff have been raised around this table today. And further to just acknowledging and elevating the status of our not-for-profits. Part of the discussions for continuous improvement as Councillor binzel Finzel raised. Need your also acknowledge impacts of cost of living on our residents and also small businesses. I'd love to have further discussions about how our Fees and Charges align with our commitment to working with small businesses to reduce red tape and again in terms of what initiatives or what opportunities are provided in terms of our Fees and Charges to again reflect our commitment or acknowledging the pressures of cost of living and I say that because there are some councils around Australia that waver in Fees and Charges for example going to their aquatic centres. So I'd love some further discussion in that space Robertson. SPEAKER_15 04:56:48.436
Councillor would Stockwell, do you wish to close? No. Okay, I'll put the motion. Those in favour? That's Councillor Finzel, Councillor Wilson, Councillor Stockwell, Councillor Wegener, Councillor Lorentson, Councillor Wilkie. Those against? Councillor Phillips. Frank Wilkie 04:57:05.336
And that brings us to. 13, which is confidential session. There are no confidential sessions. Item 14, the next Ordinary Meeting will be council chambers on Thursday 17th of July 2025 at 10am. I declare the meeting closed at 3:01pm and thank you councillors for your focused contributions. Thank you staff for your advice. Thank you our visitors in the gallery. Related Noosa Council Meetings
← Browse all Noosa Shire Council meeting transcripts
