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 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
Frank Wilkie 00:00.040
Well, good morning everybody. 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 Kabi Kabi 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, and respecting and caring for each other. I know that all councils 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 I have a move and a seconder for 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. The 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 01:27.406
Through the gate Chair, Katrina 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. Incidents of lease 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. These incidents been reported to 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. Local 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 quiet residential a area. 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. Or community recreation. What they ask is that Charles Bennett 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 basketball 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 she 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. 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 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 community for urban well planning, community wellbeing, being, infrastructure, and health. Safety. Frank Wilkie 07:00.932
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. Rod Mulder 07:23.028
Mayor, Councillors, our representative. Ross Muller will speak on our behalf. Ross Muller 07:34.180
Good morning, chairman, Councillors. 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. 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? Are to provide a safe place where men can gather and where they actually want to be, 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 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 at that time, it was operating under the auspices of Pomona and community it stayed that way until 2017. In 2014, and at that time they were also operating at rawson 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. 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 and. We moved in there. The tenure for the land was changed from the FOREST REACT to the NATURE CONSERVATION ACT at some stage, I don't know when. What that it did was 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, so we're now an incorporated association. And we 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 there. In May '23, 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. We were issued with we discussed a licence the terms to occupy, were 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 extension, 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 or 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 of the land where the 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 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 that we've got. I'll just read the next sentence. The next couple of sentences: security of tenure is absolutely essential for any community-based organisation. Men's shared Pomona does not have that 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 to do any development. 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. Or it anybody else. 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. Any funds. 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 by Kris brandhagen. @gmail.com anything that we do because of our zoning is immediately designated an inconsistent use, an inconsistent development and is 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 membership capped. If we have space we can grow. If we have 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. If we grow we can support more members of the community. Brian Stockwell 16:30.174
This 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? Clarification and we want some decisions. We know the Council, we know the department offload. Council on decision. Position is count has council's position changed since 2020 if yes we would like to sit down and negotiate a long-term lease if no we've actually put our hand up to the department and said pick me we would like to take over the at the moment land I said 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 our ability to add infrastructure is exceptionally limited by design. 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. There are community facilities next door. We're a community facility. Why not have the same zoning? 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 18:02.928
Mr. Muller. Thank you very much. We'll be organising a meeting with your group as quickly as possible, Mr. Muller. There's a lot to talk about. Thank you. We'll help where we can. Next up we have Noosa glade speakers Anne Budd, Ross Ward and Jennifer Finlay. We have 15 minutes set aside for your representatives. Ross Ward 18:35.700
Thank you. 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, 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 Moorindil St 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 feel this 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 has 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 stormwater in this waterway. This impacts and affects us also. As the water is unable to get away to the river, it then flows back down towards Moorindil St, flooding the area known as Duke Street, which then floods the backs of houses in glades. Independent water tests indicate a high level of eukaryote in a waterway /swamp. Given these test results naturally, residents are concerned about health and safety aspects. Mosquitoes, sand flies, water rats. Snakes, cane toads and whatever else are 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. Month of June, 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 the 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, the Noosa Council, for action to be taken as soon as possible. Could we assume that an allocation in has this made year s budget to rectify the problem? And would it be possible for Council to give a timeframe for works to be done? We appreciate your time, this Council, and thank you for listening to the presidents of the glades. Frank Wilkie 23:12.547
You, Mr ward. I understand there's been three meetings, there'll be more. Okay, 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. Thank you very much, Mr Mayor. The first question is this: has Noosa Council developed a 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 strategy now under development? Kerri Contini 24:06.198
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. 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 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. 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. 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 heritage brand then they could raise it as part of this project Frank Wilkie 25:47.732
Thank you the second question is: 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? Kerri Contini 26:14.442
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. Our focus as a starting point has included aligning where relevant with the Brisbane elevate 2042 legacy plan, collaborating with south east councils through the relevant working group and establishing connections with organising bodies. To be clear, a 2032 plan has not been developed. Situational 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 27:31.154
Thank you Mr. O'Connor. The next application for two questions is from Mrs. Debra Walz. Ms. Walz, 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 27:49.299
This is mainly about the Noosaville 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 28:17.957
Thank you for your question and appreciate your 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 amenities A facility of this calibre is very well owned 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 29:07.060
Question two, 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? Shaun Walsh 29:27.684
Thank you again for your question. Key feedback has been received about the Noosaville Foreshore Master 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 currently 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 30:21.991
Thank you Ms Walsh. The next application is from Mrs Pat Spicer. Welcome back Pat. Your two questions will be answered by Kim Rawlings, Director Strategy and Environment. Pat Spicer 30:34.862
Thank you. Through the Chair. Were the tender prices for the remediation work at 62 Lake Macdonald Drive, Cooroy, matching the estimates? Kim Rawlings 30:44.600
Estimates of I have a Pat. Pad time here. In the united states. 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. Pat Spicer 30:59.756
Questions? Two. Is the funding for the remediation of 62 Lake Macdonald Drive, Cooroy, coming from a grant, a loan, or Council reserves? Kim Rawlings 31:12.357
As part of the Council resolution of the 20th of January 2025, Council decided to support advancing the subdivision remediation and work subject to security securing a loan 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 31:47.187
Thank you, Ms. Faisal. Paul 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 and Environment. Larry Sengstock 32:00.727
Okay, a question from Paul Noonan. If Council can please detail what is proposed for the Charles Bennett Park upgrade in Cooroy. Kim Rawlings 32:09.725
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 proposed upgrade to the Dianella Court intersection. Larry Sengstock 32:47.638
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 33:02.052
Any development on 62 lot 162 Lake Macdonald? 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. The president Frank Wilkie 33:37.615
Thank you Director Rawlings. There are Mayoral minutes. We have three notified motions. The first this one is from 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 the with disabilities. With a disability within the Noosa Shire local government area to be considered by councils as part of future budget deliberations. Frank Wilkie 34:15.808
Thank you. May we have a second for that? Councillor Wilson? Councillor Lorentson, you wish to speak? Amelia Lorentson 34:20.773
I will. As noosa's 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, consulting with users will provide valuable insights into their experience and needs, consulting ensuring that the audit reflects the actual requirements of those who rely on accessible parking. Ensuring 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 dignity and safety. In 2021, 5.6% of noosa's 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 a 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 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 not enough space open the 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 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. Frank Wilkie 39:54.455
Thank you. Amelia Lorentson 39:56.093
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'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 and future priorities. It will enable targeted improvements that reflect noosa's demographic profile supporting inclusive planning and demonstrate council's leadership in access and inclusion. Frank Wilkie 40:58.412
Questions of staff, anyone? Councillor Finzel. Karen Finzel 41:03.238
Yes, thank you Through the Chair. Thank you, Councillor Lorentson, for bringing this to attention. First question is through the staff, for the staff. Has an audit of 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 41:26.144
Yes, Shaun Walsh, Director of infrastructure. Shaun Walsh 41:28.587
Thank you, Councillor Finzel, for the question. There has been inaudible 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:00.000 out prior to more recent decisions. - 00:00:00.000 thank you. Karen Finzel 41:57.681
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
00:00.000-- Councillor, I need to take that question one more time. 00:00:00.000-- Frank Wilkie 42:11.730
00:00:00.000 Is there the intention to, as part of the Shire-wide parking study, to do audits in all the eventually. Areas of the Shire. Shaun Walsh 42:22.976
00:00.000-- 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 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. Certainly, Councillor Lorentson, this is not inconsistent with the parking management plans moving forward. It would be useful information to inform the parking management plans moving forward, bring forward some immediate works, because to roll out the parking management plans in all those other localities will we've take taken up a number a lot of years. Thank you. Frank Wilkie 43:28.163
Councils wish to speak Council. Karen Finzel 43:30.225
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 43:41.229
Alright, anyone else wish to speak? Just to close, Councillor Lorentson. Amelia Lorentson 43:46.345
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 the term of this. 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 Larry 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 my 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 resident a about two months ago, and she was late for a meeting with me. We were sitting at the viper café, 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 viper 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 express the need for fit for purpose accessibility spaces. In terms of audit whether it's already been done, need to also reiterate that there is a process with notified motions. Need to be approved by the CEO. Then goes to the directors and ensures that the notified motions notified 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 of accessible car parts is not just a procedural task. Again, it's an opportunity for us to change lives. It's an opportunity for us to 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 fully 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, for these inclusions and I will continue fight because everyone deserves access to every places. Frank Wilkie 48:23.197
Thank you Councillor Lorentson and we'll put the motion those in favour. That's Councillor Phillips, Wilson, Stockwell, Wegener. Lorentson, and Lawrence Wilkie. And Wilkie against Councillor Finzel. The second notice of motion that's carried. The second notice of motion is also from Councillor Lorentson. Would you like to move your motion please. Amelia Lorentson 48:45.768
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 the notified motion is to encourage and our community to 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'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 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. Thank you, Councillor Lorentson. Frank Wilkie 49:58.603
May we have a seconder for that, please, for the purpose of debate? Councillor Phillips, thank you. Councillor Lorentson? Amelia Lorentson 50:06.416
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 the 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 Street only identified coffee cups as one of the top three waste items. 2023 yorkshire consultation on noosa's 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 our 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 hundred dollars savings for the Byron Shire Council has also eliminated single-use plastics from Council-run venues and events. Noosa can be the first in Queensland to demonstrate this kind of progress through voluntary, industry-led, community-supported and 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 CPTED 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 Free Noosa 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 removing 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 impose the change but to 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 environmentally are not responsible, only they are vital to responsible 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. Local businesses, make 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 to long has it been? Five thirty 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 Noosa can voluntarily lead. Big change. When we act early, act together, and act with purpose. Frank Wilkie 56:44.763
Thank you Councillor Lorentson. Any questions or discussion Councillors? Councillor Wilson. Nicola Wilson 56:48.731
Yeah, just a and B, 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? Frank Wilkie 57:06.754
Councillor Lorentson. Amelia Lorentson 57:06.754
I might request that Director king-Rawlings can help me, assist me with that question. Nicola Wilson 57:17.994
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 57:33.271
So 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 25-26. So going forward, that will need to go through its normal processes. We. There would be some resource support that would be needed from staff work with, you know, economic development staff, sustainability staff, our waste education staff, to work with Tourism Noosa on this initiative. Frank Wilkie 58:13.429
Councillor Stockwell. Brian Stockwell 58:15.310
I think it's probably to the Director of infrastructure. Reading that, it appears just to be a restatement of our existing waste plan. We've already got an action 1.3 that says continue to work with plastic-free Noosa we've already got an 8.2, investigate 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 inducers, for example, Simply Cups. 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 implementing the waste plan? Plains. Frank Wilkie 59:04.634
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, Plastic Free Noosa program, whereas the current strategies at the moment don't articulate specifically how we deliver it. I say that I put as a distinction, but I'd take further views from the Council environment as we sort of share this space. Kim Rawlings 59:41.685
Yeah, look, I think I 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 so it 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 01:00:20.008
Question to Councillor Finzel. Karen Finzel 01:00:21.109
Yes thank you, Mr Chair. With regards to collaboratively developing a plastic-free Noosa. Noosa, when we talked about funding Tourism Noosa, there was a 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 01:01:28.205
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 or any future funding agreement. Plastic Noosa. Noosa plastic-free Noosa and Tourism Noosa are already working very strongly in this space. This, as I read this notion, this notice of motion, provides, you know, some more support and strength to that and could be reflected in the upcoming funding agreement. And, yeah, so I think there is definitely opportunity. It's aligned with, and we could continue to strengthen that through current and future funding agreements. Frank Wilkie 01:02:21.779
Question. Jessica Phillips 01:02:22.940
Thank you. Could this not support the Roadmap that we talked about in the tourism. Noosa funding agreement that would. 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 01:02:37.313
Absolutely, it could be. The Roadmap that was articulated in the. Requirement for the Roadmap that was articulated in the 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. Projects that do align to both destination management, our Environment Strategy and our base strategy would make sense. Thank you. Tom Wegener 01:03:15.267
Because I won't be supporting it because this already is doing what we are doing with our Destination Management Plan with the Waste Strategy and so forth. 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 waste treatment that it's just so inspiring to be there. 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 them because they're wasted. Cycle doesn't actually include you take being able to take something and throw it into a bin. Amazing. This I think there's are so many things that Council with the Waste Strategy with Tourism Noosa can do. There's a concept called the cup of where you take charno 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 that the motion actually has meat on the bone that to describe think this how we're actually going to change when we say demonstrate leadership and see how we're actually going to change when we say demonstrate leadership and see demonstrate leadership for this shift away from single coffee single-use coffee cups well we're already doing that by funding tourism do so we're already doing that by funding the plastic free news so we're already doing that but with our way strategy and I appreciate this but I don't know if it's work. Good 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 01:05:17.018
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 Tom you know feel as you 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 um 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 uh to support Councillor Lorentson to bring in the Roadmap and ensure community that we will remain um with our eyes focused firmly on this Roadmap to the future do I have is there anyone Frank Wilkie 01:06:30.209
Are you wishing to move an amendment Councillor to that extent to that Karen Finzel 01:06:35.253
Oh of course I'm happy to test that yes of course what's your wording do we want to vote like vote on this and then start again or do you want me to put her like it at point a on this are you happy for that Frank Wilkie 01:06:55.374
Well I'll ask a question of you is b point b this is 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, Noosa this could be part of the Roadmap built into the Roadmap or KPIs there is part B does suggest that there will be more work done to put the meat on the bones would you be satisfied does that satisfy what you're asking for Karen Finzel 01:07:31.802
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 that extra security that we do have use the terminology Roadmap which we did you know talk about and use around the tail in the debate about the TN so I would like to see in the debate about 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 01:08:12.507
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 that and Director has just 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. Frank Wilkie 01:08:39.677
I just Nicola Wilson 01:08:41.091
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 actually approved. For budget just there's a bit of a mixed message the plastic free Amelia Lorentson 01:09:06.621
Sorry Frank Wilkie 01:09:06.821
The program plastic free program it's a plastic free program regarding coffee cups Amelia Lorentson 01:09:12.404
Yeah can I ask a question to the Director Community Services so in reference to the community grant that wasn't sorry sex it's excuse environment sorry me Kim in reference to the grant application my understanding was that they had made a request for a commercial dishwasher Frank Wilkie 01:09:41.001
Shut up-Shall we come up? Yes. Unidentified Speaker 01:09:56.882
Councillor Lorentson and can I just clarify, you asked whether it was with regard to a commercial dishwasher? Amelia Lorentson 01:10:02.443
No, 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. Unidentified Speaker 01:10:17.527
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. 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 had we had internal an conversation. 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 in an advance as a grant. Thank you. Frank Wilkie 01:11:19.496
Thank you. Councillor Stockwell. Brian Stockwell 01:11:23.003
I think I'm going to talk to a motion. The difficulty of raising this through a Noosa motion is what we're just seeing. 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. There 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 without 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, is consistent with this it. 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 the best 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. Frank Wilkie 01:13:20.201
A Karen Finzel 01:13:23.022
Then Through the Chair to seat. 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. Larry Sengstock 01:13:48.366
Thank you, Councillor. I think Rawlings answered 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 higher profile and surface. I think we do have a mechanism with plastic for Noosa to look at a program that we can utilise, an existing program that we can utilise to highlight this. So that's what this is about really. In terms of reports, really any costs associated, that would come back if it's a significant cost. To look at 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 are we know that 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 I'm going to of order. Brian Stockwell 01:15:02.213
Yes. I think the CEO has left into a debate. He was asked a very specific question. Jessica Phillips 01:15:10.623
Great question, please. Probably back to Director Walsh. Just for clarification, because what I understood answered, yes. 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. Before. Thanks. Shaun Walsh 01:15:39.232
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 and Environment had the record look after the relationship with Tourism Noosa. But they have provided valuable leadership in this space today. Thank you. Frank Wilkie 01:16:06.389
Councillor Finzel. Karen Finzel 01:16:07.050
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, 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, established measurement and monitoring programs that already and they report and they're publicly available to demonstrate the benefit of these sorts of programs. Frank Wilkie 01:17:22.896
Councillor Finzel. Karen Finzel 01:17:24.220
So that leads me to the question then, and I guess that's count, directed to perhaps to Councillor Lorentson then. Your, is 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 01:17:50.393
What's my 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 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 win. We? 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. We've got with small steps. 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 01:19:37.294
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 01:19:45.701
Thank you. I apologise if you've taken personal offence to that. Yes. Part of the reporting, there are letters of support. From the Noosa World Surfing Reserve, from Plastic Free Noosa. Brian Stockwell 01:19:58.493
There's a specific question that appears to be Frank Wilkie 01:20:02.097
Just talking about processes. 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? Kerri Contini 01:20:24.654
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. That's getting those 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. That if people turn up and they can buy a KeepCup, 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 we're that using so that they can be as sustainable as possible in terms of the take-away coffee cups. Council. Unidentified Speaker 01:21:30.990
Thank you. Frank Wilkie 01:21:34.678
Do Councillors wish to speak to the motion or ask any further questions? Councillor Lorentson, do you wish to close? Amelia Lorentson 01:21:42.344
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 of the Noosa Biosphere Reserve Foundation, applauding the motion that's in front of us. Professor Ian Lowe yesterday reminded us that we are not the owners 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 01:22:30.689
Yeah, as much as I love the words of Professor Ian Lowe, the purpose of closing is to respond to 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 01:22:51.462
Councillor Stockwell, you're quite right because it doesn't give other Councillors right 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 01:23:07.676
We're failing 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, 2 million tonnes in 1950 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 the snow divide small actions have been taken together create big change. Supporting a voluntary, industry-led shift away from single-use plastic is simple yet powerful step. 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 we saw hundreds and 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 that momentum and not 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. Visible, 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 kids and their kids are counting on it and because there is no planet to be. 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 actions 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 01:26:52.997
Thank you, I'll put the motion notes in favour. Councillor Phillips, Finzel, Lawrence and Wilkie. Those against? Wilson, Stockwell and Wegener. The motion is carried. We now have another notice of motion from Councillor, this time from Councillor Jessica Phillips. Would you like to leave your motion, please? Jessica Phillips 01:27:37.942
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 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, one, the establishment of an 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 registrations. Four, investigate options to introduce a time limited exception. Example, up to two years per animal to ensure compliance and regular uptakes. Regular updates. Frank Wilkie 01:28:37.071
Very good. Do we have a seconder for that please? Councillor Finzel. Karen Finzel 01:28:42.293
Happy to second for the debate. Thank you. Mr Chair. Councillor Phillips. Jessica Phillips 01:28:47.800
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 that hit home 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 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 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 01:31:48.275
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? Richard MacGillivray 01:32:10.449
Correct. Through the Chair, the 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 ten thousand dollar to be able to occur 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 need 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 01:33:48.370
So this idea, if it was implemented, would it require foster carers to make an application? I'm sure Councillor Phillips doesn't want it to be an onerous process as well. And hopefully there would be no penalty. How find would you out who needs to apply? Fee. We don't want there to be a fine for not applying. Could you just explain how it would work? Correct. Richard MacGillivray 01:34:15.632
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 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. Frank Wilkie 01:35:01.346
Thank you hopefully that's helpful. Any questions? Discussion? Councillor Lorentson? Amelia Lorentson 01:35:13.172
I'm happy just to quickly speak to this. I really love this notified motion quite a bit. It's a. Mean. 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 Noosa 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 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 you Councillor Phillips for bringing this to us. Funghild. Yeah, I'd just like to take this opportunity to firstly Karen Finzel 01:36:16.847
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. 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 beautiful gesture. Thank you. Councillor Phillips. Frank Wilkie 01:37:11.685
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. Happy to support it. Can I Councillor, I if a few would these just clothes? Close. Jessica Phillips 01:37:30.181
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, many I know so many residents 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 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 in 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 looking at it for a different way. I've spoken to many residents around this topic to make sure that just it was loud and clear that they feel that this would be something that they recognise is a great leadership from Council. So, thank you. Frank Wilkie 01:38:53.367
We'll put the motion. Those in favour? That's unanimous. That brings us to consideration of committee reports. 11.1, the Planning & Environment Committee report, 11.1.1, Planning & Environment Court appeal number D442025, application for Material Change of Use for food and drink outlet, short-term accommodation at 203207, Gympie Terrace, Noosaville. 11.1.2, planning application decided by delegated authority April 2025.11.1.30. Emissions Noosa inc. ZEN Inc., annual report. 11.1.4 is a new item due to the new system which is all the planning and committee recommendations en bloc. I have a mover and a seconder for the Planning & Environment Committee recommendations. Councillor Stockwell, we'll have a seconder please. Councillor Wegener, any discussion? All in favour? That's unanimous. 11.2, services. And organisation committee report. 11.2.1, Sunrise Shops, floor, revised lease renewal. 11.2.2 was referred to the General Committee. Can I pull that out please? That's been moved to the general. 11.2.3 was referred to the General Committee, which was the operational plan quarterly report. 11.2.4. Services & Organisation Committee Recommendations en bloc. We have a move and a seconder for the Services & Organisation Committee Recommendations. Karen Finzel 01:40:16.424
Happy to move. Frank Wilkie 01:40:17.045
Councillor Finzel. I'll second. 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 01:40:45.584
Thank you. 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, 2025-26 community grants program, community project grants events on this agenda because. Relation to the funding recommendation to the Hastings Street Association, as my sister-in-law Joanne Phillips is on the committee of the Hastings Street Association, 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 01:41:18.472
Thank you Councillor Phillips. Now we have a move from seconded by the committee of recommendation. Moved by Councillor Stockwell. Seconded by Councillor Wegener. Any discussion? All in favour? That's carried unanimously. May we have Councillor Phillips back in the meeting please. 11.3.3 Is the community grants program, community program grants program and projects. 11.3.4 grants program, community grants program, community project grants infrastructure. 11.3.5 community grants program, community project grants equipment. Councillor Wegener, do you have a comment? Conflict you'd like to declare? Unidentified Speaker 01:42:16.362
Yes. Tom Wegener 01:42:17.483
In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act of 2009, I inform the meeting that I have a prescribed conflict of interest in relation to item 8.5-2526 community project grants equipment. In relation to the funding application to Pomona arts, the 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 where all the matter is considered to vote on. Frank Wilkie 01:42:47.003
Thank you, Councillor Wegener. Right, can I have a move and a seconder for the committee recommendation, please? I bid you no. Thank you, Councillor Lorentson. Seconded by Councillor Phillips. Any discussion? All in favour? That's unanimous. May we have Councillor Wegener 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, Wegener up. You have conflicts to declare. Can I have them up, please? First is Councillor Nicola Wilson. Nicola Wilson 01:43:35.633
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, 2025-26 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 you, on. Frank Wilkie 01:44:02.549
Councillor Wilson, Councillor Wegener. Tom Wegener 01:44:05.024
Right now in accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act of 2009, I inform the meeting that I have a prescribed conflict of interest in relation to item 8.6, 25-26 community grants program, the three-year community. Year 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. All that matter is considered and voted on. Frank Wilkie 01:44:37.044
Thank you, Councillor our Wegener. I, Councillor 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'm now a general member, life member and volunteer of the theatre. That is my undeclared statement. Can I have a move and a seconder for the committee recommendation, please? Councillor Finzel. Second. Councillor Stockwell. Any discussion? All in favour? That's unanimous. May we have Councillor Wilson and Councillor Wegener back in the meeting, please. Thank community grants program, three-year signature community events grants. Councillor Wilson, again. Signature community events. Nicola Wilson 01:45:42.194
In accordance 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. Frank Wilkie 01:46:06.357
Thank you Councillor Wilson. In accordance with Chapter 5B 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 guide to conflicts of interest 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 live'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 was member 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, 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 01:47:12.509
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 Frank Wilkie 01:47:24.958
Three-year signature security events grants to anybody on this. Thank you. On this Brian Stockwell 01:47:31.819
Agenda you just take it? Frank Wilkie 01:47:35.221
In relation to the funding. Is that better, Councillor Stockwell? Of course it is. I have a declarable conflict of interest. Three-year signature security events grants in relation to the funding recommendation community to Noosa so life. That's fine. Yeah, thank you. Brian Stockwell 01:47:54.120
So I'll take over the Chair for this, Councillor. So, Councillor, just wait. Would someone like to move the recommendation? We'll move Councillor Wegener and a seconder? I'll move a seconder. Councillor Phillips, no discussion? I'll put the motion. Those in favour? That's unanimous. Can we invite? Amelia Lorentson 01:48:15.720
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? You process questions to the CEO? Larry Sengstock 01:48:27.975
Yeah, I don't believe we need to because it's an automatic, when the Chair leaves, the Deputy Mayor takes over. Brian Stockwell 01:48:36.626
When the Mayor when the Mayor is not available the deputy, I think the words are in there, that you just take over. Amelia Lorentson 01:48:42.432
Thank you. If it's all right, Larry Sengstock 01:48:47.629
Otherwise, in other meetings, when we're in the summaries of this is a little different because it's like we're about to do the Deputy Mayor. Thank you. Unidentified Speaker 01:49:00.051
Can I please request a two-minute break? Frank Wilkie 01:49:02.106
Yes, I can talk to my Chair. Thanks. I agree. Thank you. Jessica Phillips 01:49:09.029
Mr Chair, can I please ask for a two-minute break? Frank Wilkie 01:49:11.828
I think we 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 02:02:45.788
All right. The next item is. Are we back here? And your saying say 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 pathways that shared are being provided for improved 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 mostly in its original state in response 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 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 there may be other solutions that we can up with. Come up with. 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 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 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 02:05:55.246
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 be retained. Frank Wilkie 02:06:21.300
Councillor Lorentson this is similar to an amendment that we already tried. The current path, the current pathway with already approved an amendment that sorry a motion that has the pathways being expanded to 3.5. So we've already tested different pathway widths. So for that reason I'm saying it's a something that's already been tested. And what's your response? Amelia Lorentson 02:06:58.693
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 precinct-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. Accept further feedback. But in terms, can I, sorry, Mayor Wilkie, can I also just reiterate what was said on Monday at the General Committee through our Director, Shaun Walsh, that some areas of the pathways don't need to be expanded necessarily to three and a half, that we would look at precinct by so thank you Council Finzel Karen Finzel 02:08:02.748
A question Through the Chair and possibly at the CEO. I don't pertain to know everything, unfortunately. I'd like to. Because just a question 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 Phillips and also-making table in Frank Wilkie 02:09:03.108
Is about pathways Councillor and specific precincts only rather than Councillor Phillips's motion which was all pathways be 3 metres. So I do see a difference and I've ruled that it will be allowed. Karen Finzel 02:09:18.164
Yes? 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, 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 the 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 Councillor Phillips's amendment that she that tried she to move and failed with on Monday is no longer relevant so yeah yes Jessica Phillips 02:10:28.290
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 was that actually Frank Wilkie 02:10:45.844
We castle weeks that's we're getting off track they're talking about this motion in front of us here and can we just deal with this amendment and there's this time for questions as part of this part of the discussion yes Karen Finzel 02:10:59.371
Yes question 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 02:11:12.129
Not now because we have a motion before us which needs to be seconded we have an amendment before us which needs to be seconded this is a 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 the amendment happy to second thank you Councillor Phillips Councillor Lorentson Amelia Lorentson 02:11:42.697
Okay so this amendment is simply to uphold the strong inconsistent 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 boat ramp. Noosaville Boat Ramp. The proposed loss of 10 parking 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. 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 2.8 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 and it's also appropriate for low speed 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 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 observed that those bike parking facilities are under utilise 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 again, 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 activity the Noosaville Foreshore. Removing their access 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 transparent 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 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 opportunity for people 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. Karen Finzel 02:16:23.591
Can I just have a question? Frank Wilkie 02:16:24.727
Yes, Councillor Finzel. Karen Finzel 02:16:26.372
Just a question to the staff around when we talk about data and informed decision making. Just a comment please regarding the process around the walking and cycling meetings that we had where we engaged 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 02:16:59.959
Director Walsh, are you able to assist with that, an answer to Shaun Walsh 02:17:09.747
In terms of that previous work about the Walking and Cycling Strategy, significant. 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 02:17:24.694
Thank you. Aiden 02:17:25.235
So afternoon everyone, so part as of the Walking and Cycling 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 wurundjeri terrorists, longimbi Terrace, 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 width for pathways for different hierarchies and that also is guided by other guidelines as well. So we also have TMR guidelines, austrode 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 02:18:28.780
Does that answer your question? Yeah thank you, just one more question through the chat. That was, oh sorry, from memory it was um 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 given that have conversations. Many groups were involved? Aiden 02:18:54.410
Yes, how broad was that? 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. Karen Finzel 02:19:15.275
Yes. And was there opportunity for business people along the river and the boating and fishing community to have a voice in that space? Aiden 02:19:26.314
I believe the reference group was voted on and nominated by the Councillors at the time. Jessica Phillips 02:19:32.874
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? Aiden 02:19:53.298
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-road facilities as part of that. Jessica Phillips 02:20:10.563
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? Unidentified Speaker 02:20:23.099
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 sort 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 02:21:07.771
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? Aiden 02:21:20.134
I believe it's part of the Walking and Cycling Strategy there was. I know for the Noosaville foreshore infrastructure master fire, Sunshine and blighter fires were included in the workshops. Frank Wilkie 02:21:32.251
Councillor Stockwell. Karen Finzel 02:21:33.887
Oh, excuse me. We were just waiting for the staff member here to also bring further information in relation to my question. Thank you. Shaun Walsh 02:21:42.021
So, in relation to the question, we've gone through the feedback from the working cycling strategy. The feedback, you know, 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 as there was, again, still in the location of the program. And I recall that in the workshops that we kind of took a consultation with what that's given to the Council. So it's, and I'll just also note that there's submissions specifically from some Sunshine Butterflies, actually from their feedback to me getting out to stakeholder meetings. They particularly supported wire pathways and also reconstruction of the pathways so that it actually made it easier for them to, you know, use their various equipment to actually increase their mobility in the foreshore. So the, issue gets back to, you know, staff recommendation in terms of that living in the best interest, you know, of the foreshore. And taking on board, on balance, the feedback that the 3.5 metre pathway is really desirable to achieve for the use of the 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. 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 can gather from us. So I don't know whether we can sit there and debate. Frank Wilkie 02:23:02.600
Thank you Director Walsh. Thank you. Councillor Stockwell. Yes. Thanks, Sir. You, Eileen. Brian Stockwell 02:23:08.274
Thanks. The 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 deliberate 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 experts and advice on the need for wider footpaths for safety reasons. It is very clear, it is very transparent. A need and it has been prosecuted over and again to suggest that the decision and the recommendation put forward by staff and eminent consultants in the field wasn't properly researched. This a is a complete furphy. Councillor, this should be a 6-1 vote against. Frank Wilkie 02:24:11.641
Mr Stockwell, the Councillors wish to speak to the amendment. Amelia Lorentson 02:24:18.141
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 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. President: Frank Wilkie 02:25:05.366
Thank you, Councillor Lorentson. Any other Councillors wish to speak to the amendment? Councillor Wilson. Nicola Wilson 02:25:13.444
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 mobile 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 thank support you. It. Frank Wilkie 02:25:38.323
Councillor Finzel? Karen Finzel 02:25:39.391
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 from 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. Frank Wilkie 02:26:48.957
Um Councillors I won't be supporting the Councillor because it does prescribe what an outcome might be with this going to be further consultation. We don't want to lock ourselves into any 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 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 upgrades as they're currently not suitable for all abilities they believe a smooth and even material is required 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 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 worship. Work to ensure 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 in not 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 be undertaken because we do want to get it right in the long term thank you. Can the Councillors speak to the amendment? Munson, you wish to close? Amelia Lorentson 02:29:55.638
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 three and a half metre wide path what we also introduce is 30 kilometres cyclists going at 30 kilometres an hour. At the moment and this again is a conversation 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 three and a half k's in there's a speed limit you can go up to 30 k's an hour. So in terms of safety and hazards, got to again think about what is three and a half metres actually you know what are the unintended consequences of having three and a half metres so so so to say that existing the 2.8 metres doesn't meet accessibility standards either it won't simply not correct and that you know speed usage for three and a half k 30 kilometres makes me a little 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 02:31:25.588
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 changes 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 shared thanks Vicki shared pathway which is established once we have the monitoring data showing the number of pedestrians and bicycle per hour they're currently using the path stop it and establish one ain't and perhaps something like um and the future recommendation is guided by yeah sorry she's talking recommendation is or the future recommendation is guided is guided by tmr um guidelines I just gotta make sure that that's in front of the do you want uh we might write uh we might actually say trans department of transport and main don't roads spot from um just in case anyone doesn't know the team yes probably um meets more to spell it out um Unidentified Speaker 02:34:37.436
No so that no but it was put under as item a.1 did you want it as it could be item f yeah just okay I'm f Jessica Phillips 02:34:49.690
Thanks yeah because that um that a has already gone through so we're only through um we could Larry Sengstock 02:35:00.805
Amend it it's still an overall amendment but okay yeah I think if you put it as f as a separate Unidentified Speaker 02:35:05.385
Okay yeah yeah that's fine Jessica Phillips 02:35:25.401
A shared pathway 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 the department of main I road's the guidelines. I mean, the guidelines. Thank you. The pathway is established once we have a future recommendation in each of the four precincts. 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 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 and then I'm just going to I if can I ask for five minutes I can probably get this together fairly quickly. Frank Wilkie 02:36:48.625
Sure, Councillor you're happy to have five minutes off while Councillor Phillips gets her wording wrong. Karen Finzel 02:36:56.332
Sure, 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 a hundred and fifty thousand dollars for something to do with the data to capture the data through some analysis what and a staff member to capture that data can you please refresh our memory because I think you're gonna have to include something around budget to get support Jessica Phillips 02:37:33.665
To be 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 Karen Finzel 02:37:42.897
Memory can Sean Through the Chair please Shaun Walsh 02:37:48.947
Parking monitoring, not bicycle or shared parking. So that question I raised was about the budget required for significant car park monitoring. Karen Finzel 02:37:59.911
Okay thank you for the clarification Through the Chair then one more question so then what do we need actually capture actually the data for bikeways then do we have that data or we've got it have further budget or capability and staff to capture that we Shaun Walsh 02:38:16.151
Have some encounters in life so I do know that department transfer may not be very were accepted in the strategy of this principle cycle group and our understanding is that they have numerous criteria that they assess lots of things on and they don't always tick every box directly on the grant. Do want to 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 trail network. 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. Amelia Lorentson 02:39:09.064
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 through numbers and usage, he et said that information was made available at a committee or workshop. Can I ask once again the same question? Where can we access that data, Councillor Stockwell? Brian Stockwell 02:39:32.506
You misread me because I never mentioned data. You were the only one who was mentioning data. I said we had a lot of expert advice. Unidentified Speaker 02:39:41.321
Okay, so Councillor. Unidentified Speaker 02:39:42.522
So I hope that helps with your work. I'm nearly done. Yeah. So two minutes. Frank Wilkie 02:39:46.146
Keen to have a fine. Unidentified Speaker 02:39:48.469
Just before we do, I have a question Brian Stockwell 02:39:51.092
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 02:40:16.505
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 Phillips kept the wording right. Frank Wilkie 02:50:20.261
Councillor Phillips has put together the final form of her amendment. Would you care to read it please Councillor Phillips? Jessica Phillips 02:50:30.679
Yes, 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? Frank Wilkie 02:50:59.340
You need to speak first and then you can ask as many questions as you want. Jessica Phillips 02:51:02.164
Thank you. Alright, so I have, thank you for the time to try and get some wording together. First of all, I'm listening and to everyone around the table, I'm listening to community. 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 pathway 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 would 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 02:52:55.187
The question of staff 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 the appropriate authority says guided not Shaun Walsh 02:53:16.901
Locked in 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 would gathering also that by data would also optimise growth our and success as well. 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 peddery so we can pursue that approach as well. Frank Wilkie 02:53:47.098
Did you expand on what you mean by maximise our grants opportunities? Shaun Walsh 02:53:50.759
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 of in movement optimises it sort our success at grant funding and meeting applications. Now we have technology in terms of rolling out pedestrian and cyclist counters. 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 actually at that time. Frank Wilkie 02:54:23.945
Thank you. Councillor Wilson. Nicola Wilson 02:54:28.550
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 the 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. 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 to 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 02:55:57.281
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 is fair. I think it gives 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. Into interview. 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 02:57:11.964
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 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 the 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 02:58:37.563
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 02:58:56.545
It probably could be something to that effect, yes. Karen Finzel 02:59:02.023
So I have a question then to Councillor Phillips, are you prepared to add some additional information to try and aid the consensus around the table to add volume to this conversation. Jessica Phillips 02:59:13.523
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 definition of pedestrian includes every single person that walks. It includes PMD, it actually encompasses everything so I just didn't want to complicate it because I used the exact wording from legislation. Good job. 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 02:59:54.788
Is the meeting happy to include the words number and types of pedestrians and cyclists per hour. No. Okay. Animals. Do you want to put dogs in it? No. I want to keep it exactly Jessica Phillips 03:00:13.129
How I had it, which is from the wording of the legislation. Thank you. Amelia Lorentson 03:00:18.010
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. Community feedback. Jessica Phillips 03:00:38.174
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 03:00:57.256
Any other questions? Councillor Wegener. I'll speak to it. Tom Wegener 03:01:03.405
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 in if you, order to 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 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 gets a little bit of the data that you need overall. 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 the next 20 years, so we want to keep it fluid and open. So I can't support this because it's just micromanaging without actually doing much that's not already being done. Frank Wilkie 03:02:33.195
Councillor Finzel. Karen Finzel 03:02:34.156
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. Brian Stockwell 03:02:55.338
Point of order. There's a question there. Karen Finzel 03:02:58.081
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? Frank Wilkie 03:03:06.830
My point of yeah, I think Councillor Wegener's made his. I'll withdraw that, thank you. Withdraw that, thank you. His position clear, and councils are all entitled to have their own positions. Any okay, anybody else wish to speak to the amendment? Cast Phillips, you wish to close. Jessica Phillips 03:03:30.006
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, believe 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, 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 the so foreshore. Dearly about 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 03:05:28.207
Thank you. Amendment goes in favour. 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 a six metre wide path anywhere on the foreshore? Thank you for the question, there's no suggestion. Press: your question. President: okay, thank you, just thank you for clarification. 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? Unidentified Speaker 03:06:47.205
Sorry, part- Happened. F. Um, so it is, but I don't know. I'll drag this one across. So what that's great. Frank Wilkie 03:07:04.114
So what we're endorsing today, 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 argued 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 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 we wanted to respect the views of the commercial operators. By endorsing this motion we're showing that we were fair dinkum in making that change to our approach to the new civil Foreshore Master Plan in adding if that we're by endorsing this motion we're showing that we really believe that the future of the shared pathway with for each of these precincts ought to be based on data when we put our hands up here this afternoon we'll be showing that 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 have you're acknowledging that we're taking every element on its merits and it's the summation this 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 master plan 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 and to be more safer. We're endorsing the feedback from the boating and fishing alliance that their boat ramp ought not to be touched and left intact. We're endorsing the feedback from the tennis club that 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 range of to make it more publicly accessible this has been a great collective effort so by endorsing this plan and its amendments that 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 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 item 12.1, contract number RP00440, Register of Prequalified Suppliers for provision of environmental services, which was deferred from the General Committee Meeting. We have Brian whitehart, Ben Derrick, here to speak to this report. Ben, can you give us a summary please? Ben Derrick 03:12:11.540
Thank you, Mayor. Good afternoon, 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 Prequalified Suppliers, or ROPs. The provision of environmental services. The ROPs is a register of suppliers that are pre-qualified and capable of responding to council's requirements in a timely manner where the Council can either engage them directly 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 satisfaction. In terms of 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 procedure 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 below, so the most advantageous to Council. 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 13 are based in Noosa. Inclusion into 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. Frank Wilkie 03:14:52.693
You, Mr. Derek. Any questions of Councillor Lorentson? Amelia Lorentson 03:14:58.423
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 03:15:31.442
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 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. Look, I'll say just for example, and I completely understand the caution around using-- Brian Stockwell 03:16:17.522
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 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. That's all right. Any other questions of staff? Someone care to move the recommendation? I move it. Seconder? Tom. Councillor Wegener? Councillor Stockwell, you wish to speak to the motion? No. And the Councillors wish to speak to motion? Goes in favour. That's unanimous. Thanks, Ben. Thank you. Thanks, Ben. Jessica Phillips 03:17:06.287
Can we just have a two-minute break? Frank Wilkie 03:17:09.267
We've got a request for another break. Councillors, are you agreeable? Shaun Walsh 03:17:12.727
No, we just had one that I think is inappropriate. Frank Wilkie 03:17:14.687
I think Councillor Phillips missed out on that one. She working. Was on--- I did, On the--- Oh, yeah, I did. Jessica Phillips 03:17:19.613
Yeah. Amelia Lorentson 03:17:20.613
Okay, I'll hold it. No, we'll--- Can I, point of order, can I just say that we may need a comfort break? Yes. And to not allow it, I think, is totally, inappropriate. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Frank Wilkie 03:17:32.873
Yeah, I agree. 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. Thank you. Unidentified Speaker 03:17:59.597
Come on, let's do it. Unknown 03:18:00.857
Wrapped. Unidentified Speaker 03:18:04.280
Can we, very much. We put this on the next, that, the standing order, they'd have an efficient painting, wouldn't you? Of course. Sunday 03:25:33.515
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. Thank you. Ben Derrick 03:25:53.541
Thank you very good afternoon again Councillors. This agenda item deals with a 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. Enabled to it 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. It has sat for the previous two years. 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, Council, and a broad spectrum of communities. 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. There is a genuine desire board from to 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 resources. The proposed changes cleanups 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 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. Frank Wilkie 03:28:40.112
Derrick. Councillor Wegener. I'll move. Thank you Councillor Wegener. Moved Councillor Wegener. We have a seconder. I shall second. Councillor Stockwell. Councillor Wegener Tom Wegener 03:28:49.962
Used to speak to the motion. You've all heard extensively me speak on the success of them using the Biosphere Reserve Foundation in the last few years. And I think ben's coverage there just sums it up. Frank Wilkie 03:29:04.847
You recommendation up. Oh, yeah. Here we are. Anybody else wish to speak to the motion? Councillor Wilson. Nicola Wilson 03:29:19.646
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. Frank Wilkie 03:30:18.696
Thank you, Councillor Wilson. Amelia Lorentson 03:30:24.801
KPIs relevant? I'm just sort of dissecting a little bit of what Councillor Phillips said. Kim Rawlings 03:30:40.041
Councillor Lorentson may want to ask Councillor Wilson specifically. Yeah. What KPIs she considers aren't relevant that might be more appropriate. Amelia Lorentson 03:30:49.357
Yeah. Through Councillor Wilson, if you can just sort of elaborate. Nicola Wilson 03:30:53.057
Yeah. There aren't really currently KPIs as per the definition of KPIs. Are a couple of 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 the type of information that wouldn't actually be reported in financial statements generally. Thank you. Amelia Lorentson 03:31:32.625
Thank you. I'm just going to speak to it. Jessica Phillips 03:31:36.869
Yes. For most of the people around the room know that I have returned to just fill in from time to policing outside of the Shire. But on weekends. 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 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 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 Tablelands 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 the Noosa 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 the to everyday worker that's been asking when is someone gonna just stand up for me today. Thank you. Frank Wilkie 03:34:13.892
Any other Councillors wish to speak to the motion? Councillor Stockwell? I will. Brian Stockwell 03:34:24.792
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 really 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 yes I can understand being at foot 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 fifties. 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 and this is a Council that always invested wise 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 wellbeing. Just. Financing immediate response to symptoms will in the long-term cost this community. Frank Wilkie 03:36:22.866
Councillor Lorentson. Amelia Lorentson 03:36:24.375
I'll speak to this. I'm speaking to 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 I 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-Chair. 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. Have sent me emails but that's the sort of marketing and that's the sort of marketing that I would love you know to be on the front page of every newspaper in Queensland saying Noosa is 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 first-hand some of the really great stuff volunteers do so really respect Councillor Phillips and so acknowledge what you're saying 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-making proper decision so so much respect for your courage as 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 me it's the ability to rise when we fall so thank you for your courage but I will be supporting this which I think it is important Thank you. I Karen Finzel 03:38:55.330
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 we arrive at how 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 sit before us identify gaps and risks to best inform any future frameworks to provide clear accountability structures robust government models Councillor Finzel are you 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. Frank Wilkie 03:41:27.009
Thank you Councillor Finzel. Thank you. Councillor Wegener, do you wish to close? Yep. Please. Tom Wegener 03:41:33.504
Thank you very much Councillors and Councillor Finzel. We spoke before, I completely agree with you. It is 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 their 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. 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 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 thank you very much. Frank Wilkie 03:42:58.571
Councillor Wegener. Put the motion those in 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. 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 03:43:33.470
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. 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 the conditions 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. Frank Wilkie 03:45:30.741
Thank you. Questions of staff? No. Anyone care to move the motion? Councillor Wegener? Is that the second? Karen Finzel 03:45:40.187
No, I was going to just ask a question. Frank Wilkie 03:45:41.970
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. Karen Finzel 03:45:48.949
Sure, thank you. 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? But what I'm Patrick Murphy 03:46:18.962
Sorry I'm sorry, Councillor Finzel, I don't quite understand the nature of the question. Karen Finzel 03:46:24.871
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 03:46:37.678
Yes, it's a point of order then, that's a matter of appeal, it can't be discussed in open Council. Frank Wilkie 03:46:42.070
Oh, okay, my apologies. May I have a second please? Karen Finzel 03:46:46.227
Oh, happy to second. Frank Wilkie 03:46:47.292
Happy to second, Councillor Finzel. Councillor Wegener, would you wish to speak? I have some questions. Well, it's been seconded now. Councillor, would you like to speak? Tom Wegener 03:46:59.618
We're a bit limited in what we can talk about, so I will waive my right. Frank Wilkie 03:47:03.862
Okay. Councillor Lorentson, do you have some questions? Amelia Lorentson 03:47:08.666
Just in terms of the affected residents, have they been contacted? And can they join the appeal process as submitters? Patrick Murphy 03:47:20.180
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 notice to Council and to those that may have properly made submissions, they have the opportunity to join the appeal. There was a timeframe. I think it was 10 business days. The timeframe would have ended by now. So if those individuals did seek to become a party to the appeal, they had that ability to join. Frank Wilkie 03:47:48.682
The Councillor Finzel? Karen Finzel 03:47:52.080
Yes. Just a question then. Was there a cost related to that? Frank Wilkie 03:47:58.408
For them becoming co-responders? Patrick Murphy 03:47:59.929
Yes. I'm unsure whether there's a fee that they need to pay to the court. I have been part. Of representing Council Councillor 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 03:48:44.712
And just one further question, will the impacted residents be updated during this process? Patrick Murphy 03:48:53.539
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 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 that's kept in house it's not for public disclosure those mediation so it can be a bit difficult to advise the community of what's going on in that regard. Karen Finzel 03:49:40.793
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 see through that process to see that fall down now and their voice lost in the minutia of the process 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 wish every success to the to staff as you head down this road to defend the rights of our people in this process thank you Amelia Lorentson 03:50:31.712
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 03:50:50.703
I would like to say we have a good track record and we're in good hands with Richard and Patrick so thank you very much Frank Wilkie 03:51:01.856
You. Next we have the item 12.4 and risk committee membership. We have Jonci Wolff, executive officer here to speak to this report. Jonci can you give us a quick summary please welcome. Jonci Wolff 03:51:15.755
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 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 and Wegener, and two independent external members, Mr. Timothy Cronin, who is the Chair of the committee, Mr. Ian Rushworth, criteria that are considered for the appointment of independent members are expertise in governance, risk management, auditing processes, strong literacy. 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 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 maximum with next tenure of six years and this report basically seeks 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 03:53:09.090
Councillor Wilson has moved the motion. Nicola Wilson 03:53:11.491
We have a seconder as a member of the audit 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 03:53:34.746
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. Afternoon Councillors. Welcome. Pauline Coles 03:54:07.030
Monthly finance 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 2.2 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 disasters and finance 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 above budget which will be used to fund 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 expenditure 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. The variance year-to-date is driven by budget profiling and the timing of project 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 with were $111 million $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 of council's capital program making up a large component of that. Cash balances will 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 year adjustment. Frank Wilkie 03:58:15.354
Thank you. Questions for this Council? Councillor Lorentson. Amelia Lorentson 03:58:21.939
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 recorders? Pauline Coles 03:58:40.749
That's really great. 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 the 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 question? Amelia Lorentson 03:59:31.976
Thank you very much. It really does take schooling. And my other question is just, again, acknowledging just current geopolitical situations around the world in the united states and iran and 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? Us through our who actually has responsibility for this oversight? Is it the audit or risk committee that does this, the CEO, or is it external matters such as LGAQ? Margaret Gatt 04:00:17.205
Through the 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 yeah, yeah. 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. Fantastic. Thank you. Frank Wilkie 04:00:57.164
Karen Karen Finzel 04:00:57.424
Finzel. Yeah, just following on from the. I just have a question. That conversion from, you know, the asset being built and the expenditure expended through the grants, whatever, converting it to our 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's right, yeah. Pauline Coles 04:01:26.134
Just to clarify, yeah. 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 our program, but we 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 and the contractors around the actual 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 those things. So 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. Touching on the revals, when we do our revaluations, that assesses what we've capitalised on the books versus what the actual placement cost is, and you may or 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 04:02:57.693
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? Pauline Coles 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 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 for to be a 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 04:03:44.464
Yes? Just a question Through the Chair to the CEO, then. Are you satisfied with that level of the lag? Larry Sengstock 04:03:54.536
It's a question of what you say. Are you satisfied? Look, that's a the situation we're in. It's the situation that many councils as Paul even said, that's just a consequence of the current climate. But I'm comfortable and I think we've got a very good understanding of what our assets are and what our new assets coming on are. Excuse me and I feel 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. Margaret Gatt 04:04:30.134
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 have our audit through the QAO or their contract auditors they look at all of those financial risks and they look at the methodology that we apply they will do sample testing of anything that's in our asset register and even may conduct physical 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 Pauline Coles 04:05:34.418
Just to follow on from that in terms of how we've recorded appreciation 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 that 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. Frank Wilkie 04:06:18.844
Thank you. Any wish to move for the report? Councillor Wilson? Have a second please? Seconder dose Phillips? Councillor Phillips? Nicola Wilson 04:06:41.107
Phillips 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 at Pauline 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 at the end of the year but yeah thank you for your report. Frank Wilkie 04:07:14.545
Thank you Councillors. Anything else to speak? Put the motion. Those in favour? That's unanimous. Thank you. Colleen. Up to the next item which is item 12.6 fees and which was also deferred from the General Committee Meeting. We also have Pauline Coles here to speak to give us a quick summary of the report. Pauline Coles 04:07:44.739
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 the of delivery of delivering 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 2027. 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 benefit from them. Fees and Charges 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 dog about six months old is paid after the due date, currently shows a the three. Of $325.50. Due to a transposition error, this fee should actually be $235.50. Unidentified Speaker 04:10:09.112
Five page five Pauline Coles 04:10:22.150
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 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 1 to the ordering minute. Frank Wilkie 04:12:24.607
Question to the Councillors. Question, Jessica Phillips 04:12:29.806
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 that please. Richard MacGillivray 04:12:44.213
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 04:14:02.928
Couple 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 organisations-profit from even going through that process? Has that been assessed or that? Richard MacGillivray 04:14:22.965
From even going through that process? Has that been assessed or that? 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 fee, 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 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 a minimal amount of those costs through that 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. Frank Wilkie 04:15:24.150
Can I start off? In terms of the point of clarification, Brian Stockwell 04:15:28.987
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 to affect that as well look Richard MacGillivray 04:15:45.703
Through the Chair, 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 04:15:58.590
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 Richard MacGillivray 04:16:12.743
I'm not aware if all groups have been notified of this fee, no I'm not sure. Jessica Phillips 04:16:18.311
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 done but on Council staff Richard MacGillivray 04:16:48.566
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 04:17:07.099
Last question I promise what potentially will that look like for revenue? Richard MacGillivray 04:17:11.544
Through this year 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 over the year. Frank Wilkie 04:17:25.291
Related to that. 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. Amelia Lorentson 04:17:35.963
Okay. Questions? Yeah. We've had quite a few deputations by a resident suggesting that dog registration be paid every three years instead of annually. Has Council seriously considered this proposal? Richard MacGillivray 04:17:59.431
Are you referring to this particular this is a sorry we're shifting something sorry about are you referring to three year from dog registration sorry I was stuck on the previous item there. Through the Chair at this stage we're only looking at annual but we there'll 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. Unidentified Speaker 04:18:40.869
Just on Mayor wilkie's comment about the surf club but Jessica Phillips 04:18:45.354
Can you tell me another example of the ten applications because if the surf club is obviously in my mind one that are all I think of is all the other little guys so just tell me is 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 can't quite work out why it's here Richard MacGillivray 04:19:19.549
Through the Chair and you probably recall when you had some workshops on land tenure we have a range of community groups that have tenured Council ranging from smaller groups have limited financial capacity through to a range of very financially sustainable entities I guess what we're seeking to achieve is a as a balanced outcome with a moderate fee 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 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 you know has an appropriate fee otherwise that ends up being borne by the general rate payer as a cost Frank Wilkie 04:20:31.230
Can you cancel with me? The president yeah. Unidentified Speaker 04:20:32.992
So I was Tom Wegener 04:20:34.954
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, it's a question, 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 Council for applying for a grant for a garden bed where an element of the grant process is permission? Richard MacGillivray 04:21:09.240
The president 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 do Tom Wegener 04:21:36.010
So how do you evaluate whether a group can be a way waived the $50 fee? Is there a minimum bank balance or something like that? Richard MacGillivray 04:21:49.210
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 departments or 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 the fee. So 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. Frank Wilkie 04:22:41.021
Councillor Stockwell? Brian Stockwell 04:22:43.158
It's probably a. No, not. It's probably not. The question I have is, I 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 04:22:59.782
Through the Chair, look, potentially they might absorb some of that cost through those grants. Jessica Phillips 04:23:04.347
No, it's Councillor, can I make an amendment now or would you prefer to keep going with questions? Frank Wilkie 04:23:11.339
You can move a motion which includes what's on the screen plus your change. We've removed the most of you oh okay you can move a motion that includes your amendment and that becomes a motion. Amelia Lorentson 04:23:26.225
Amendment can I just also add it also prohibits you moving any additional amendments if that's being intended. That's right I'll pause and leave. Brian Stockwell 04:23:33.136
Yes just to proceed I'll move the recommendation. Unidentified Speaker 04:23:35.926
Okay thank you Councillor Stockwell. So staff recommendation? Yes. This one here with the change, okay. Frank Wilkie 04:23:42.370
A seconder for the motion please. Thank you Councillor Wilson. Unidentified Speaker 04:23:50.387
And can I now make an amendment? Well, Councillor Stockwell needs to speak to it. Brian Stockwell 04:23:55.826
Yes, I knew that. We 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. How about I basically just move so Councillor Phillips can forward her notions on an amendment. Okay. Thank you. Jessica Phillips 04:24:27.213
My amendment is just to remove that fee. Thanks for moving that along for me. Unidentified Speaker 04:24:32.359
It's alright, we'll get that up. Okay, I'm just going to display that in the audience so we can get you to be transparent. So this will go underneath the existing that was just moved? Jessica Phillips 04:25:36.582
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 licensed. Kim Rawlings 04:25:56.822
Fee, I'm not sure if I had to read all of that, but I did anyway. I'm trying to expand it, it's better on my screen than it is there, is that better? Unidentified Speaker 04:26:06.827
Yes, we can see that anyway. Frank Wilkie 04:26:09.703
Councillor Phillips, would you like to speak to the amendment? Jessica Phillips 04:26:11.805
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 as burdens, not contributions. And 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 04:27:18.898
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. Richard MacGillivray 04:27:28.270
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? Frank Wilkie 04:27:37.388
Potentially 20. Okay thank you. Sorry Councillors just questioning my notes. Who seconded that amendment? I don't think any Councillors did. Do we have a seconder? Councillor Wilson. It can't be Councillor Wilson. Who seconded the amendment? I spoke to it. Thank you. Okay. Yeah. Anyone else wish to speak to the amendment? Brian Stockwell 04:28:04.313
Yeah, will. I think Councillor Phillips has identified one of the elements of 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 was I doing a grant application 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 and if there's a bit of a gap between the grant funds being 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 04:29:03.883
I want to speak want 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 that $1,000. 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 not-profit to them and it's just staying with the current practice. Councillor Wegener. Amelia Lorentson 04:30:00.622
Sorry Tom, maybe go ahead. Tom Wegener 04:30:03.449
Yeah, I found this when we're applying 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 community 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 04:30:54.165
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 04:31:42.006
Speak to the motion? 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. Okay. That was the main thing. Have we gone back to the. Unidentified Speaker 04:32:08.872
If you want to make another amendment. I do. Have thank you. To do it. I got rihanna. Jessica Phillips 04:32:14.735
I've got just in relation to Unidentified Speaker 04:32:22.536
Meeting rooms on page 29 of 80, please. Paige 04:32:39.623
Okay, so I'm going to get page 80 up. Kim Rawlings 04:32:47.762
I'm sorry, I've got page eight of 80. Jessica Phillips 04:32:53.402
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 we can that oughtn't item B added 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 hire charges small meeting room. Non-for-profit Council per hour $7.50 meeting room. Hire charges large meeting room. Non-for-profit Council per day $100 meeting room. Hire charges large meeting room. Non-for-profit Council per hour $20. Karen Finzel 04:35:33.851
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 that also a have we've heard today process by which a community group that we have a 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 know, 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? Unidentified Speaker 04:36:30.223
Could I help by asking a question? Frank Wilkie 04:36:31.674
Well, we'll just see if there's an answer to Councillor Finzel's question. If I can. 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? Pauline Coles 04:36:52.598
Is that accurate? Did you want to talk to that Kerri? Larry Sengstock 04:36:54.661
I can talk to you about that. Frank Wilkie 04:36:57.604
Kerri, Kerri Contini 04:36:59.437
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. 90% capacity and so it's a, from a lobbyist perspective, a revenue stream. Because they incur charges around things like cleaning costs, staff for example. If it's after hours and the staff have to stay to open the meeting rooms up, et cetera, so it will be a loss of revenue between $10,000 and $12,000 a year. Frank Wilkie 04:37:41.890
Here. We have a seconder to allow, Councillor Wegener. Councillor Phillips. Jessica Phillips 04:37:53.089
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 $10,000 to $12,000. I want to talk about, probably similar to the last amendment, are our non-for-profit. These fees are separate to commercial hiring the facilities. These are our these are non-for-profit 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 a 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 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 to just extra volunteers and the extra layers and 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 that are imposed on them and so to me I'm just saying hey let's just give them a foot up 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 budget for an act of goodwill so Frank Wilkie 04:40:06.647
Question staff um is this the second year we've charged for the higher or how long has this practice been in Kerri Contini 04:40:15.257
Place so these practices in place have been in place for a number of years, um when you 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 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 see 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 so yes it's been charged in for several years-COVID what happened is that during COVID when we gave relief to a range of fees this was one of the fees that we gave relief to a number yes. So the meeting rooms have been at a fee since pre-amalgamation? 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 there to be able to provide access and the fees were 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. You know, probably a decade and a half. Okay. I have to say, don't have, we have significant demand for these rooms. So even with the fees, we have significant demand for the rooms. Frank Wilkie 04:42:55.988
I have another question for Councillor Jess. How many of these amendments do you have? This is it. The accumulative amount that I'm considering. Jessica Phillips 04:43:03.337
Yeah. This is. Mr Chair, this is the last amendment that I'll be moving today. Unless something comes out of the light of the next. Okay. Frank Wilkie 04:43:13.717
Councils, any questions? Unidentified Speaker 04:43:17.741
So this is primarily libraries or just libraries? Kerri Contini 04:43:22.166
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 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 you know, and 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. Dr. Brian Stockwell 04:44:25.918
Justice Stockwell? That was the point I was going to make. Paying for a meeting room is standard practice a for a community group so I've done think for 50 years I've been involved in them 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 if you're put it on and certainly you're community group in the local community you group in the on. Local area and you're losing 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 04:45:16.359
Do Council staff still have the capacity to waive the fee for any groups that would like to use the room for free for valid reasons? Kerri Contini 04:45:25.700
We will always work with the community organisation around what their capacity is. If it, it's for example, if that the room isn't booked and it's available 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. Say I want it every 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 04:46:07.617
How often are staff required to stay after hours to facilitate this hire? A weekly. Kerri Contini 04:46:12.937
As I said, they are booked to pretty much capacity. So in our Noosa library, for example, it's more weekend bookings, but 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. Frank Wilkie 04:46:49.261
Council. Amelia Lorentson 04:46:50.725
I am going to support the amendment in front of us. Probably, I've sort of said, I sit, 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 core Council services and 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 the community given rates for local pay for local libraries. I feel, I don't know, I just feel again an excellent opportunity to show really great goodwill and acknowledge the excellent work that our not-for-profits are doing. Unidentified Speaker 04:47:48.540
That's Council meeting. Tom Wegener 04:47:50.243
This is a great debate. I'm really torn but I understand that the whole cancellation fee kind of thing like 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 Larry Sengstock 04:48:28.905
Well I won't support Tom Wegener 04:48:30.832
That one I won't support that I won't support the amendment stuff Larry Sengstock 04:48:38.812
Recommendation of the patient charges isn't had on your report Frank Wilkie 04:48:50.405
I think it's um a wonderful gesture 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 cutting 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. Wouldn't like to see them deprived of a revenue stream because we're in effect subsidising undercutting. The other community groups. I think next year I'd like to see a broader discussion around our approach to community venues and Fees and Charges. We had a comprehensive workshop on this. There are over a thousand line items in this document and we were presented workshop details on the ones where there's been much major changes I don't believe there were major changes proposed here it is a topic raised from time to as a matter of principle should Council be charging community. Groups for the hire of their facilities it's a big discussion and a very worthy principle that you've raised here and I'd like to delve into it further because probably they're probably broader Fees and Charges broader discussion about the Fees and Charges that we have that affect not-for-profit groups remember the workshop there's a proposed fee for our H &S environmental health audits of markets and we're certainly weren't going to 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 ratification. Thank you Karen Finzel 04:51:29.692
No one can speak to that, or do you Councillor Phillips the principle behind do support I do have concerns around unintended consequences 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 honouring the story of Noosa now and into the future. I 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 it's an opportunity for us to inform any future frameworks or policies to provide clear accountability structures robust governance models etc 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 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 continue bring benefits and our focus for governance back to our community thank Frank Wilkie 04:53:15.085
Councillor Finzel. Councillor should speak to the amendment. Councillor Phillips huston please. Jessica Phillips 04:53:20.684
Yes thank you. In February I actually asked for at the Council discussion a forum 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 revenue it 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 $1,000 for a mobile Frank Wilkie 04:53:55.707
Phone ticket. Jessica Phillips 04:53:57.261
Being raised, Councillor I brought a new. Frank Wilkie 04:54:00.494
You need to sit down if it's the point of order being raised. Yes, Councillor Stockwell. Brian Stockwell 04:54:03.996
Councillor Phillips was right she is introducing new content into her clothes. Jessica Phillips 04:54:09.838
You're right I'll withdraw that. Thank you. 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 groups. In every single way by saying here is your facility use them and 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 so I don't because I don't agree with blanket charges uh that do then end up punishing everyone and I'll tell you my police story later so that will tie into that uh nothing else to say Frank Wilkie 04:55:05.893
Well done Councillor Phillips. Amendment those in favour Councillor Phillips Councillor Lorentson and those against Councillor Finzel Wilson Stockwell Wegener and Wilkie the amendments lost goes back to the original motion with the amendment included as part of the motion to which Councillor Stockwell only has spoken it's just get that on the screen. Councillor Lorentson. Amelia Lorentson 04:55:36.328
Um yeah just speak just again about you know ongoing discussion 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 Finzel raised we need to also acknowledge impacts of cost of living on our residents and also small businesses I'd love to have a 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 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 you, at a later time. Robertson. Frank Wilkie 04:56:48.616
Councillor 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. 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
