General Committee - 15 December 2025
Date: Monday, 15 December 2025 at 12:30PM
Location: Noosa Shire Council Chambers , 9 Pelican Street , Tewantin , QLD 4565 , Australia
Organiser: Noosa Shire Council
Duration: 05:28:50
Synopsis: Destination Management Plan endorsed with amendments, DSC oversight prioritized, Engagement safeguards adopted, Deferral rejected, Holiday Parks fees approved, Environment Levy land purchase authorized, Operating surplus noted.
Meeting Attendees
Committee Members
Brian Stockwell Karen Finzel Amelia Lorentson Jessica Phillips Tom Wegener Frank Wilkie Nicola Wilson Executive Officers
Chief Executive Officer Larry Sengstock Director Community Services Kerri Contini Director Corporate Services Margaret Gatt Director Development & Regulation Richard MacGillivray Director Strategy And Environment Kim Rawlings Director Infrastructure Services Shaun Walsh AI-Generated Meeting Insight
Key Decisions & Discussions Noosa Holiday Parks fees and charges adopted for forward bookings through 11 July 2027, aligning to end of Jan 2027 QLD school holidays; pricing set with competitive neutrality in mind (Item 7.1; 02:17–11:33). Frank Wilkie confirmed benchmarking shows other SEQ councils have raised prices more sharply; Noosa remains competitively priced while meeting full cost pricing obligations (05:08; Item 7.1). Financial Performance to 30 Nov 2025 noted; Council tracking operating surplus; focus on delivery of Capital Works; additional project staff in place; rates arrears at 6.5% with cyclical patterns (Item 8.1; 12:00–21:28). Destination Management Plan (DMP) “For the Love of Noosa” endorsed with multiple amendments; draft 3-year Implementation Plan noted (for ongoing refinement) and CEO delegated to make minor changes (Item 8.2; 31:04–05:12:01). Key DMP amendments adopted: rename M&E column to “Potential Measures” (Amend. 4), create a DMP Delivery Risk Register via the Destination Stewardship Council (DSC) with annual reporting (Amend. 5), require engagement with affected sectors and nearby residents before actions like paid parking or congestion charging (Amend. 6), add a clear objective for economic management of the visitor economy (Amend. 8), add a Council Advocacy & Partnership Strategy action (Amend. 9), prioritise establishment of a DSC with ToR returned to Council (Amend. 13), and require officer engagement with independent experts and key stakeholders during implementation to keep settings responsive (Amend. 14) (Item 8.2; 02:14–03:30; 04:10–04:28). Deferral motion to April 2026 and to engage an external expert to finalise DMP lost 3–4 (For: Lorentson, Phillips, Wilson; Against: Stockwell, Finzel, Wegener, Wilkie) (Item 8.2; 31:17–52:48). Substitute “Potential Measures” compromise resolved concerns that M&E items implied pre‑decisions (Amend. 4 carried unanimously) (02:14–02:16; Item 8.2). Multiple amendments by Jessica Phillips and Amelia Lorentson seeking to reframe actions pending policy decisions (e.g., parking, visitor contributions, STA) were debated; two broader governance/consultation safeguards succeeded (Amend. 6, 14) while narrower constraints on the plan were lost (Amend. 2, 3, 7, 12) (Item 8.2; 01:10–02:00; 03:40–04:00). Confidential Environment Levy Proposed Land Purchase: meeting lawfully closed and reopened; CEO authorised to negotiate purchase using Environment Levy, secure property, and explore biodiversity and carbon offsets, including entering agreements as relevant (Item 9.1; 05:12:54–05:28:26; Local Government Regulation 2012 s254J(3)(g)). Contentious / Transparency Matters Amelia Lorentson / Jessica Phillips / Nicola Wilson argued DMP lacked sufficient rigour (risk, costings, feasibility) and sought deferral; majority rejected, citing extensive consultation and need for action (Item 8.2; 31:17–52:48; 53:04–58:16). Phillips challenged survey design (leading questions) and “implied approvals” via measures; secured change to “Potential Measures” in M&E to avoid pre‑commitment perception (02:14–02:16; 01:43:30–01:45:51; Item 8.2). Process concerns: Councillors noted limited time on final drafts and numerous live amendments; Chair enforced standing orders to manage volume; some amendments refused as out of order (01:09–01:12; 03:43–03:49; Item 8.2). Engagement safeguard adopted: any action likely to materially affect businesses or nearby residents (e.g., paid parking, congestion charging, precinct closures) must have engagement before Council decision (Amend. 6; unanimous) (02:26–02:39; Item 8.2). DSC prioritised to provide oversight/monitoring; Terms of Reference to come back to Council, addressing governance transparency (Amend. 13; 04:10–04:28; Item 8.2). Public interest managed for land purchase: meeting closure and re‑opening recorded; statutory ground cited (Item 9.1; 05:12:54–05:27:20). Legal / Risk Competitive neutrality explicitly considered in Holiday Parks pricing to avoid undercutting private sector; aligns with National Competition Policy principles and QLD local government full cost pricing (Item 7.1; 04:40–10:00). DMP Delivery Risk Register mandated within DSC ToR with annual report: to track delivery risks, dependencies, resourcing, and mitigations, strengthening probity and accountability (Amend. 5; carried) (02:18–02:21; Item 8.2). Requirement for engagement with affected sectors and residents before Council decisions on impactful measures reduces administrative law risk (procedural fairness/legitimate expectation) (Amend. 6; unanimous) (02:26–02:39; Item 8.2). CEO delegated minor DMP edits; Council retains strategic control including annual review of the Implementation Plan and budget gating of actions, aligning with Local Government Act 2009 governance/financial accountability (Item 8.2; 44:12–46:04). Confidential session closure complied with Local Government Regulation 2012 s254J(3)(g) for land acquisition negotiations; resolutions authorise offsets arrangements consistent with environmental markets frameworks (Item 9.1; 05:12:54–05:28:26). Short Term Accommodation / Parking / Visitor Contributions Frank Wilkie referenced KPI to reduce STA hotline complaints by ~70% (from 592 to 178); Phillips cautioned measures must link to outcomes, not only tasks (01:20–01:21; Item 8.2). Parking actions to be refined via the separate Parking Management Plan process already budgeted; avoids DMP pre‑empting policy (debated; Chair’s clarifying amendment attempt lost) (01:01–01:08; Item 8.2). “Potential Measures” change directly addresses fears that DMP implied adoption of paid/dynamic parking or congestion charging prior to feasibility and Council decisions (Amend. 4; 02:14–02:16; Item 8.2). Visitor contribution identified as advocacy item requiring State legislative change; global models reviewed; not yet feasible locally without reform (58:26–01:01:50; Item 8.2). Environmental Concerns DMP positions protection of natural assets and regenerative tourism as core; community consultation showed broad support for environmental priorities (Kim Rawlings overview; 24:58–31:04; Item 8.2). Environment Levy land purchase: CEO authorised to negotiate, secure site, and pursue biodiversity/carbon offsets; aligns with climate and biodiversity objectives (Item 9.1; 05:27:20–05:28:26). Carrying capacity and visitor management debated; majority affirmed data‑led, site‑specific management with future governance via DSC; broader constraints amendments did not pass (01:47–02:00; 03:50–04:00; Item 8.2). Economy, Business Impacts, and Advocacy DMP amended to include a clear objective for economic management of the visitor economy with defined strategies, actions, and measurable outcomes (Amend. 8; carried) (03:08–03:25; Item 8.2). Advocacy & Partnership Strategy to be developed to support DMP implementation, recognising many levers sit with State/federal partners (Amend. 9; carried) (03:25–03:34; Item 8.2). Mandatory engagement with affected sectors and nearby residents before Council decisions on paid parking/congestion etc. provides business certainty and mitigates unintended consequences (Amend. 6; unanimous) (02:26–02:39; Item 8.2). Tom Wegener emphasised community expectation for action and brand/economy linkage to environmental quality; opposed delays (46:07–46:47; 03:12:10–03:14:18; Item 8.2). Financial & Organisational Performance Operating surplus tracking; WIP and capital works reporting integration underway; future reports to improve alignment between financials and delivery metrics (20:03–21:21; Item 8.1). Rates arrears at 6.5% with $750k reduction in month; more detailed arrears analysis to be provided; collection risk considered low due to statutory charge over land (17:04–19:41; Item 8.1). Holiday Parks revenue strong (88% of FY target secured YTD) despite industry downturn; fees set to maintain value and neutrality while sustaining operations (04:40–09:34; Item 7.1).
Official Meeting Minutes
MINUTES General Committee Meeting Monday, 15 December 2025 12:30 PM Council Chambers, 9 Pelican Street, Tewantin Committee: Crs Brian Stockwell (Chair), Karen Finzel, Amelia Lorentson, Jessica Phillips, Tom Wegener, Frank Wilkie, Nicola Wilson “Noosa Shire – different by nature” GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 15 DECEMBER 2025 1 DECLARATION OF OPENING The meeting was declared open at 12.30pm. 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 COMMITTEE MEMBERS Cr Brian Stockwell (Chair) Cr Karen Finzel Cr Amelia Lorentson Cr Jessica Phillips Cr Tom Wegener Cr Frank Wilkie Cr Nicola Wilson EXECUTIVE 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 GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 17 NOVEMBER 2025 Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Frank Wilkie Seconded: Cr Amelia Lorentson The Minutes of the General Committee Meeting held on 17 November 2025 be received and confirmed. Carried. For: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None 5. PRESENTATIONS Nil. GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 15 DECEMBER 2025 6. DEPUTATIONS Nil. 7 ITEMS REFERRED FROM COMMITTEES 7.1 NOOSA HOLIDAY PARKS - FEES AND CHARGES (Referred from Services & Organisation Committee Dated 9 December 2025) Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Frank Wilkie Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener That Council A. Note the report by the Commercial Business Advisor to the Services & Organisation Committee dated 9 December 2025 B. Set fees and charges for the Noosa Holiday Parks to align with the end of the January 2027 Queensland school holidays; and C. Adopt the proposed General Cost Recovery Fees and Commercial Charges schedule for the Noosa Holiday Parks for the period ending 11 July 2027 as detailed in the tables contained within the report. Carried. For: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None 8 REPORTS DIRECT TO GENERAL COMMITTEE 8.1 FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE REPORT - NOVEMBER 2025 Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Nicola Wilson Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That Council note the report by Revenue Services Manager and Financial Services Manager (Acting) to the General Committee dated 15 December 2025 regarding Council's financial performance to 30 November 2025. Carried. For: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 15 DECEMBER 2025 8.2 ADOPTION OF DESTINATION MANAGEMENT PLAN Motion Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Nicola Wilson That Council A. Note the Draft Noosa Destination Management Plan and the submissions received, acknowledge the need for further analysis and refinement, and defer adoption of the current draft to the April 2026 round of meetings; and B. Engage a suitably qualified, independent destination management professional to finalise the 10-year Destination Management Plan. Lost. For: Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Nicola Wilson Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Frank Against: Wilkie Motion Moved: Cr Frank Wilkie Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener That Council A. Note the report by the Director Environment and Strategy and Manager Economic Development and Destination Management to the General Committee dated 15 December 2025; B. Endorse the Destination Management Plan (DMP) – For the Love of Noosa provided at Attachment 1; C. Note the Draft Implementation plan, provided at Attachment 2, to support the implementation of the DMP, noting this plan will be refined with input from partner/support organisations, reviewed and updated on an annual basis and informed by Council’s annual budget considerations; and D. Delegate authority to the CEO to make minor changes or amendments to the DMP and associated appendices if required prior to designing and publishing final documents on Council’s website. Amendment No. 1 Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Nicola Wilson That Item C be amended to read: C. Note the Draft Implementation plan, provided at Attachment 2, to support the implementation of the DMP noting this plan will be refined with input from partner/support organisations, reviewed and updated on an annual basis; with this process including: 1. Consideration by Council of the advice provided by the Destination Stewardship Council; once established, in accordance with its Terms of Reference (form and function) to be specifically agreed to by Council (noting a key function of the proposed Stewardship Council is to provide recommendations on refinements to the Monitoring and Evaluation Framework); 2. The specific actions relating to parking will be refined and determined by Council through the Parking Management Plan process currently in progress as approved in 25/26 Council budget; and 3. Project outlines including, any proposed community or stakeholder consultation, costings and resourcing for each priority action be considered and agreed to by Council as part of the budget process. GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 15 DECEMBER 2025 Lost. For: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Frank Wilkie Against: Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Nicola Wilson Amendment No. 2 Moved: Cr Jessica Phillips Seconded: Cr Amelia Lorentson That Item E. be added to read: E. Ensure that any action or measure within the DMP that is dependent on an unendorsed plan, policy or strategy must be framed only as an investigation, feasibility study, or issue analysis for future Council consideration. Lost. For: Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Frank Wilkie Amendment No.3 Moved: Cr Jessica Phillips Seconded: Cr Amelia Lorentson That Item E be added to read: E. Ensure that actions that pre-empt decisions on matters not yet determined by Council (including but not limited to parking management approaches, visitor contributions, STA measures, or new revenue mechanisms) must be removed or reclassified as ‘subject to Council decision following receipt of evidence and analysis’. Lost. For: Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Frank Wilkie The meeting adjourned at 2.34pm. The meeting resumed at 2.44pm. Amendment No. 4 Moved: Cr Jessica Phillips Seconded: Cr Brian Stockwell That Item E be added to read: E. Amend the heading in the final column of the Monitoring and Evaluation Framework to read: "Potential Measures.” Carried. For: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 15 DECEMBER 2025 Amendment No. 5 Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Karen Finzel That Item F be added to read: F. Establish a DMP Delivery Risk Register and include in the Terms of Reference for the Destination Stewardship Council (DSC) and report to Council annually as part of the annual review. The register will outline delivery risks, dependencies, resource constraints, and mitigation strategies. Carried. For: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: Cr Tom Wegener Amendment No. 6 Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That Item G be added to read: G. Ensure that any action likely to materially affect local business activity or the amenity of nearby residents including paid parking, congestion charging, one-way corridor trials or precinct closures, be subject to an engagement with affected sectors before Council decision. Carried. For: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None Amendment No. 7 Moved: Cr Nicola Wilson Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That Item C be amended to read: C. Not take Attachment 2 to the Report - Draft Implementation Plan - into consideration until there has been review by an appropriate expert, and co-development of relevant actions that can be reliably measured and reported on. Lost. For: Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Frank Wilkie Amendment No. 8 Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That Item H be added to read: H. Amend the DMP to include a clear objective for the economic management of the visitor economy, supported by defined strategies, actions and measurable outcomes. Carried. For: Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 15 DECEMBER 2025 Amendment No. 9 Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener That Item I be added to read: I. Amend the DMP to include an action that proposes the development of a Council Advocacy and Partnership Strategy to support implementation of the plan. Carried. For: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None Amendment No. 10 Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Karen Finzel That Item J be added to read: J. Include that carrying capacity measures explicitly recognise resident access to beaches, parks, and natural areas, ensuring it is not unreasonably restricted. Lost. For: None Against: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Nicola Wilson Amendment No. 11 Moved: Cr Phillips That Item J be added to read: J. Ensure that actions within the Monitoring and Evaluation Framework and 3-Year Implementation Plan that fall wholly or partly outside Noosa Council’s legislative or operational remit and sit with State government be reframed as ‘advocacy priorities’ 'partnership actions' or 'council actions' only, with no implied operational, financial or regulatory commitment, and that this distinction be clearly shown in the Monitoring and Evaluation Framework and Implementation Plan. This Amendment was not accepted by the Chair. Amendment No. 12 Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That Item J be added to read: J. Ensure that carrying capacity and visitor management measures apply proportionate targeted solutions to specific problems. Lost. For: Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Frank Wilkie Against: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson The meeting adjourned at 3.34pm The meting resumed at 3.44pm GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 15 DECEMBER 2025 Amendment No. 13 Moved: Cr Karen Finzel Seconded: Cr Brian Stockwell That Item J be added to read: J. Endorse the establishment of a Destination Stewardship Council (DSC) as a priority action to support implementation of the Destination Management Plan, with its purpose to provide oversight, monitoring and evaluation, guidance and transparency. A Terms of Reference be prepared outlining the process for establishing the Destination Stewardship Council and report back to Council for consideration be provided as the first priority following adoption of the Destination Management Plan. Carried. For: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Frank Wilkie Against: Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Nicola Wilson Amendment No. 14 Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Karen Finzel That Item K be added to read: K. Ensure that during implementation, monitoring and review of the Noosa Destination Management Plan, Council officers engage with appropriate independent experts and key stakeholders to further refine the Plan’s strategic settings, assumptions, and delivery approach, ensuring it remains responsive to changing economic conditions, State policy and regulatory settings, market dynamics, delivery risks and emerging strategic opportunities. Carried. For: Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Frank Wilkie Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Frank Wilkie Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener That Council A. Note the report by the Director Environment and Strategy and Manager Economic Development and Destination Management to the General Committee dated 15 December 2025; B. Endorse the Destination Management Plan (DMP) – For the Love of Noosa - provided at Attachment 1; C. Note the Draft Implementation plan, provided at Attachment 2, to support the implementation of the DMP, noting this plan will be refined with input from partner/support organisations, reviewed and updated on and annual basis and informed by Council’s annual budget considerations; and D. Delegate authority to the CEO to make minor changes or amendments to the DMP and associated appendices if required prior to designing and publishing final documents on Council’s website. E. Amend the heading in the final column of the Monitoring and Evaluation Framework to read: "Potential Measures.” F. Establish a DMP Delivery Risk Register and include in the Terms of Reference for the Destination Stewardship Council (DSC) and report to Council annually as part of the GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 15 DECEMBER 2025 annual review. The register will outline delivery risks, dependencies, resource constraints, and mitigation strategies. G. Ensure that any action likely to materially affect local business activity or the amenity of nearby residents including paid parking, congestion charging, one-way corridor trials or precinct closures, be subject to an engagement with affected sectors before Council decision. H. Amend the DMP to include a clear objective for the economic management of the visitor economy, supported by defined strategies, actions and measurable outcomes. I. Amend the DMP to include an action that proposes the development of a Council Advocacy and Partnership Strategy to support implementation of the plan. J. Endorse the establishment of a Destination Stewardship Council (DSC) as a priority action to support implementation of the Destination Management Plan, with its purpose to provide oversight, monitoring and evaluation, guidance and transparency. A Terms of Reference be prepared outlining the process for establishing the Destination Stewardship Council and report back to Council for consideration be provided as the first priority following adoption of the Destination Management Plan. K. Ensure that during implementation, monitoring and review of the Noosa Destination Management Plan, Council officers engage with appropriate independent experts and key stakeholders to further refine the Plan’s strategic settings, assumptions, and delivery approach, ensuring it remains responsive to changing economic conditions, State policy and regulatory settings, market dynamics, delivery risks and emerging strategic opportunities. Carried. For: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Frank Wilkie Against: Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Nicola Wilson 9 CONFIDENTIAL SESSION 9.1. CONFIDENTIAL: NOT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE – ENVIRONMENT LEVY PROPOSED LAND PURCHASE (REFERRED FROM PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING DATED 9 DECEMBER 2025) CLOSURE OF THE MEETING TO THE PUBLIC Committee Resolution Moved: Cr Jessica Phillips Seconded: Cr Karen Finzel That the meeting be closed to the public pursuant to section 254J(3)(g) of the Local Government Regulation 2012 for the purpose of discussing Item 9.1 Environment Levy Proposed Land Purchase Carried. For: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 15 DECEMBER 2025 REOPENING OF THE MEETING TO THE PUBLIC Committee Resolution Moved: Cr Frank Wilkie Seconded: Cr Nicola Wilson That the meeting be re-opened to the public. Carried. For: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Amelia Lorentson That Council A. Note the report by the Coordinator Conservation and Environment to the Planning & Environment Committee dated 9 December 2025; and B. Authorise the CEO to 1. Commence negotiations with the owners or their agent regarding purchase of the subject property as detailed in this report; 2. If purchased by Council, utilise funds from Council's Environment Levy; 3. If purchased by Council, undertake the necessary establishment actions for security and fire safety; 4. If purchased by Council, undertake necessary investigations and actions to pursue biodiversity and carbon offsets over the property; and 5. Where relevant and to the satisfaction of the CEO, enter into agreements and arrangements for the property to receive biodiversity and carbon offsets. Carried. For: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None 10 MEETING CLOSURE The meeting closed at 5.59pm.
Meeting Transcript
Brian Stockwell 00:02.020
Okay, so welcome councillors. We are opening the general committee for December in 2025. We have all councillors present acknowledging that Councillor Finzel is... currently attending via the Teams function. I wish to open by acknowledging and respecting Australian First Nations people and their deep and abiding connection to country. We recognise the Kabi Kabi people as the traditional owners of the lands and waters of the Noosa area and of a the lands and waters of the Noosa area and offer gratitude for their careful custodianship of this unique environment over thousands of years. We pay respect to the Kabi Kabi people, past, present and emerging. And we have got a rather large gallery today. welcome you and also note that as you walked in you would have noticed that we are flying the flags at half-mast in recognition of the tragic events that happened in another iconic coastal location one day. And from Council we wish our family, friends and from Council we wish the family and friends of all those impacted by the pandemic our condolences and we acknowledge that it's epically appropriate at this time of the year to reaffirm our own commitment to respect the differences. our community and to approach these differences in a way that builds harmony rather than division so we then move on to attendance we've done that and apologies and confirmation of that, and apologies, and confirmation of the minutes. We'll move it, Mr Chair. So, Councillor Wilkie has moved the minutes from the General Committee meeting of the 17th of November, 2022, and seconded Councillor Lorentson. those in favour? I presume there's no debate. And that's unanimous. We don't have any presentations or deputations, so we move on to section seven, and item one in that section is the Noosa Holiday Park fees and charges, and that was referred from the Service and Organisation Committee. So, we have Robyn Mercer, the Commercial Business Advisor. Robin, if you'd like to give us an overview of this item, please. Robyn Mercer 02:28.620
Yes, thank you. Good afternoon. I'm pleased to present a report seeking adoption of proposed fees and charges for the Noosa Holiday Parks for the forward booking period from January 2027 to July. 2027. Council maintains an advance fees and charges schedule for forward bookings, which is reviewed twice yearly. In preparing forward pricing, we consider a variety of factors, including benchmarking against other camping and caravan facilities, analysing industry trends in occupancy and demand, considering the operational costs required to deliver the holiday park program, and being mindful of full cost pricing and competitive neutrality requirements for council. The Noosa holiday parks program The Noosa holiday parks program continues to be a strong performer, despite a broader and persistent downturn in occupancy across Queensland and southeast Queensland. Our nights sold this financial year to date are only 2% lower than last year, which is a positive outcome in the current market. And from a revenue perspective, the current market and from a revenue perspective, we've already secured 3.93 million or 88% of our financial year revenue target. We have an ongoing pursuit of efficiency within the program and integrated contracting and operating model allows us to deliver a high quality tourism product with cost efficiency. And this focus on cost and operational efficiency helps keep prices in check and competitive. In developing the proposed fees, we've also been mindful of the need to maintain value for money and honour the purpose of the lands for caravanning and camping recreation. benchmark shows that comparable parks have increased prices more sharply, widening the gap with Noosa. But even with the proposed adjustments, the Noosa holiday parks remain competitively priced and accessible while ensuring we can sustainably meet operational costs. Overall, the proposed fee strike a careful balance, considering competitive neutrality, supporting Council's financial sustainability and ensuring the holiday parks remain attractive and accessible to visitors and residents. Thank you. Frank Wilkie 04:39.227
So, thank you for the report. You're saying that compared with other Council's holiday parks like Gympie, Fraser, Sunshine Coast, Gold Coast and Tweed, Noosa Council's holiday parks pricing is slightly below and we need to catch up a little bit, so we're still affordable? a little bit. So we're still affordable but we need to increase our prices a bit also so we're not undercutting and breaching our obligations to ensure competitive neutrality. Correct. Robyn Mercer 05:09.160
Exactly, it's a balance. So we have seen over the areas that we benchmark, which are those regions that you mentioned, we have seen some prices bump up a little quicker than our rise with CPI. More so. So we do need to catch a little for a competitive neutrality purpose and to make sure that we're competing fairly with the private and public sector. But we also for sure want to make sure that we have an accessible tourism product for residents and visitors. Jessica Phillips 05:41.013
I was wanting to probably explore a little bit more around the downward trend bookings and thank you for taking my call last week after the SNO, but more broadly it's now just an education piece of the community because they probably had similar questions to me if they were to see the document. I guess glaringly when I see downward bookings the industry I just want to know a little bit more about that and how not too much about what other councils are doing I just really want to focus on Noosa and what you do when you're looking at that and how we gather when you're looking at that and how we gather statistics around the impacts that that could happen if it continues. Robyn Mercer 06:28.422
Certainly. So, look, setting prices into the future and managing that risk of a downturn in demand or outpricing people is just the nature of pricing. What we can do is, we can't crystal ball, but we can look at the price increases that we have put in place and track what our nights sold is doing. So, nights sold is our measure of occupancy. It's, you know, how many nights have we sold within a particular period? period. What we're seeing is that the industry is having a downward trend. That's happened over the last two years. There's been a year-on-year reduction and that data comes from the Caravanning Association of Australia. The rhetoric is likely that that is due to macroeconomic conditions, cost of living pressures, people changing their discretionary spend on holidays particularly. The rhetoric is likely. What we're we're not attributing our 2% reduction year-on-year to our pricing because we can see when we benchmark that we are still sitting competitively against others but it's something we're definitely But it's, we're definitely in a space of just keeping a close eye on things. Okay, and so to follow up with that, because if the industry sort of noticed that it could potentially cost a living, I always sort of look at camping as the families and the people that, you know, may not afford the Sofitel, so not that it's Operating costs versus the revenue for the commercial operator. I know that you might not be able to go into the details of that. do you consider that? So with our management agreements that we have we go out to market every five or seven years for those contracts and that is the opportunity for to access pricing at that point in time similarly to our other large contracts where we approach the market through open tender and a decision is made for those contracts based on value for money and sound procurement principles at the time. What we have done is look at bundling activities together so at a very tactical level it means that if you have one contractor who managing your preventative scheduled maintenance and also reactive you've got one tradesman going there they're going to pick up that they'll do two things instead of going there twice so that's But one small when you aggregate that it allows us to deliver an efficient model so we do pursue efficiency on a cost side across every aspect of the operating model model so so that that our our prices prices can stay at a accessible and competitive level. Nicola Wilson 09:22.499
Just coming back to the downward trend and the sort of market conditions, is that why we only set fees and charges for six months at a time? So we can respond to changes in the market and correct as we go? Robyn Mercer 09:34.579
Yes, it allows us to always have a 13 months forward booking period which is important. Someone leaves and they want to re-book for the next year, so commercially we want to secure that. Every six months in pricing means that we can be dynamic in responding to economic conditions. Brian Stockwell 09:52.099
Would you like to move the motion? Frank Wilkie 09:54.599
I'm happy to move it Mr Chair. Brian Stockwell 09:59.287
Thank you for the report I think I said it in the question you've you've we have to set these prices ahead of time they're responsibly priced with an eye to affordability and competitive price neutrality you've benchmarked against other councils and set comparative councils councils in South East Queensland, Gympie, Fraser, Coast, Gold Coast, Sunshine Coast and Tweed and found that we are still very very affordable compared to their pricing but also not lagging so far behind as to be costing ratepayers or managing them irresponsibly so thank you for the report and I support the recommendation I'll speak. I historically try and keep the Boreen Point campground lower because I know from my long-term association with that campground that it is a place where young families from our community go to camp. Because of competitive neutrality it's probably not the place to make policy decisions in that regard note but that the draft destination plan does have triggers in there where if a council wished to have incentives for families who live locally doing the right thing and could, maybe- To make that holiday more affordable by their participation in some of the programs. So that's an opportunity that we may see emerge over the coming months. Others? No, thank you Mr Chair. All those in favour? Margaret Gatt 11:32.480
Yes. Brian Stockwell 11:33.740
That's unanimous. Margaret Gatt 11:35.060
Thank you. Brian Stockwell 11:36.140
Thank you Robin. We now invite up the Acting Manager of Finance to do the financial performance report. And we also have the Director of Corporate Services. Margaret Gatt 11:57.280
Good afternoon, councillors. Zac 12:00.720
Thank you, through the chair. I'll take the report as read. The November 2025 report provides us with five months of actual data for the financial year. Approximately 42% of the year statistics, if you want that. There has been no significant changes to the previous comments in previous months so council continues to track both from a revenue and operating position in a surplus position. There has been no significant... The primary discussion being the continued maintenance or oversight of the capital works. works program itself so there is no from the report in front of you today there are no significant changes or deviations or exceptions from the previous financial report that was provided to you so as a result just be able to take questions if anything you'd like to delve into further. Brian Stockwell 12:49.800
Any questions councillors? Amelia Lorentson 12:53.660
Hey Zac, in terms of staffing and resourcing and maybe a question to the CEO, are the current staffing levels adequate to deliver the planned capital projects on time and within budget and are there any skill or capacity gaps in staff that could delay the projects or increase reliance on external consultants? Brian Stockwell 13:20.874
Thank you councillor. Larry Sengstock 13:22.754
As you know for this budget we increased the capacity of the delivery team for our major projects by an extra five people. I believe those five seats have been filled and so we do have a much stronger capacity to deliver the projects and the programs. Also I think as we have been very transparent in saying is that we have a large program that we've had over a number of years coming out of the back of on the back of COVID where there was quite a lot of money that was injected into into various councils to deliver projects, so we're still, to be honest, catching up with that, so that's why we've added extra resources to do that, and I think that, from what I understand, we're on track to at least catch up a little bit, and whether we catch completely, is relying on the environment and on the availability of contractors to deliver the work, because I think, as you know also, that we don't have a team, team that actually delivers the major projects, we contract it out, so we project manage most of the projects, other than the works that we do with our operational teams, civil operations teams, they do a lot of the work themselves, while we still outsource mowing, for example. outsource mowing, for example, to that group, and that's the model that we have endorsed and used. From a resourcing point of view, there's never enough, I think, is probably the answer in every business. We try to keep as lean as we can and do as much as probably have to keep the costs at a level that we can cater for, but I think the teams are doing really, really well in terms of attacking the workload that they've got ahead of them and doing a great job of catching up. Zac 15:42.923
So through the chair, so what we do periodically through the year is as we're going through capital projects, there's an element that possibly look at potential write-offs through the program. So that's currently the place I'll go now for that. That will be reviewed as we go to BR2 and I actually look to bring that onto the books officially. that's just a place I'll run out for the time being. Jessica Phillips 16:04.906
In relation to attachment 2, I was looking at contract liabilities and the divisions are materially higher than budget while property plan and equipment values are significantly below budget. So just wondering what obligations are accumulating faster than expected, what risks do they pose to future operating budgets and asset valuations or capital deferrals masking longer term renewal and maintenance pressures. Zac 16:33.887
So I'd be able to take that question on notice just because of the complexity attached to it and there's a few aspects of that, if that's all right, just because there's a couple of points that we need to address that I would need further information from. Jessica Phillips 16:45.007
Sorry, I didn't get to the it DMP stuff and I had the questions to go, so thanks for that, happy for it to be taken on notice. Zac 16:51.838
In terms of outstanding rates, what is the current level of outstanding rates and what's rates and what's the risk of non-collection so through the chair page so on the bottom of page so don't have the notes on me there's a page six thank you the current arrears percentage of total arrears is six point five percent so movement from the previous month of seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars of rates arrears being paid in the current period noting that we're about a month one month off from the January rates levy period and commonly hear from me is rates are cyclical they tend to go up spike in July and January down the preceding six months so the nominal benchmark that we are working towards is a five percent industry average and in terms of the risk around the the collection of the the collection of rates um from a legal legal baseline of the rates that charge the property itself so it's technically they're reasonably secured in the collection of that possibly in a future sale or transfer of ownership so they aren't seen as high risk effectively but we will do what effectively but we will do what we can to more appropriately manage that with the debt collection or the rates and charges debt management policy to hopefully bring that down over time. Does that answer the question? Amelia Lorentson 18:14.797
It does and it has reduced from I think three months ago. Zac 18:20.037
So the reduction from three months ago seems quite significant. We started three months ago with outstanding rates over $10 million, 10.4 I think, and currently it sits still quite significant at 7.6. Zach from Recollection I think. I'm stopping you there. Brian Stockwell 18:38.355
Next, there wasn't a question. stating what's in the report and what's in, yeah, we're not seeing a question. We've got a very full agenda, so if you can't get to a question, there is direct and as required by the standing orders on this business. Nicola Wilson 18:53.718
I think I asked this last month, but can we have a breakdown of what's from the most recent rates levy in verses? rates levy versus previous years, and is there a higher risk in collecting from those years? Zac 19:07.721
So yes, to that point, I think quarterly we've intended to actually provide more detailed analysis. Frank Wilkie 19:18.019
The 754,000 movement in arrears, is that in one month only? And was it attributed to a number of properties or one large property significantly? Zac 19:29.498
The specifics of that I'd have to investigate but I believe it's a number of properties, it's not a significant payment in that. But we can get a breakdown of that, if you will, I take that at most. Frank Wilkie 19:40.758
Yes, I'll see you offline about that. Thank you. Brian Stockwell 19:48.460
Would someone like to move? Karen Finzel. Karen Finzel 19:51.240
Excuse me, Mr Chair, I have a question. Brian Stockwell 19:53.240
Thank you. Karen Finzel 19:55.300
Just a quick overview again, I believe I took it on notice last month about where we're at with the WIP. Zac 20:03.345
So through the Chair, happy to make a comment there. So that's currently on our action item. There's two aspects that we look to bring back in the new financial year post BR2, the WIP being one of them. So we can provide definitely more detail... detailed information in the report, but we're hoping through BR2 and the budget process to actually bring a more holistic view of the WIP transfer of assets and capitalisation. So happy to take councillors lead if they would like to see In more on the report, but terms we do have a slightly different program to of future inclusions for future reports, the capital expenditure goes financial expenditure. In the capital works executive they use a metric about the work actually done. Can that metric be included as a comparison to the financial metric for piece of work we're endeavouring to actually work with infrastructure on in the next three the capital works? So through the Chair, this months. It's actually consolidating the financial report with the CW reporting to get a better consistency between the two. So the simple answer is yes to the question. We are looking to end the craving so there is again a more holistic view of that. That's in 10 million And a year. Brian Stockwell 21:21.246
Thank you. for those in the gathering, CWE is Capital Works Executive. Jessica Phillips 21:29.075
I just would like to know a little bit more around how our Capital Works rollovers affects our asset conditions. Would that be a way to, I'm just trying to work out how to explain it, but you know how I'm always kind of banging on about our asset management. How, if we have rollovers of Capital Works, does that, how is that matched with our asset management? Because I think if it's rolled over it then it impacts it. if it's rolled over it then it impacts it. I'm happy to think more on that question but it was just after listening to discussion. Zac 22:04.180
So we could take that on notice, there's a couple of things. I suppose the underlying driver we normally talk to is the financial sustainability ratio as it looks at the renewal of assets. But in terms of providing a complete picture there's a direct tie with the infrastructure that we probably just need to take on notice. Brian Stockwell 22:29.900
Councillor Finzel is now here in person. Karen Finzel 22:32.940
Thank you Mr Chair. Brian Stockwell 22:34.940
Would someone like to move? Councillor Wilson? I'll take that. Thank you Councillor. Nicola Wilson 22:43.562
Thanks Zach for the report. I really appreciate your efforts into continually improving the reporting and I know that you've got a lot that you're juggling doing two roles and various other things that's happening in the team at the moment so um so yeah we'll be asking for progress on this we know that you're all working off the background but I think the reporting is really improving and especially the um the analytics kind of report with the the traffic lights, so it's really great to be able to focus in on what's important. But I also appreciate that you're willing to get feedback and continue to improve, so thank you very much and support this report. Jessica Phillips 23:25.032
Can I make a quick comment? I think community tend to only see...two sitting at the chamber desk delivering the reports, but I would like to acknowledge that both of you have given me an extreme amount of confidence in the corporate services department. And I know the work that you're doing, because we get briefed on it, and I appreciate it. Brian Stockwell 23:49.732
Unanimous. Councillor Wilson, would you like to close? No. I'll put the motion. Those in favour? Okay, That's unanimous. So we now move on to adoption of the destination management plan, and while staff make their way to the desk, while staff make their way to the desk, I will... I will explain how we're going to run this. The proposal at this stage is that councils have indicated a very large number of amendments... probably 10 times more And way more than I've seen in my 20 years of local government. So we'll be quite strict on the standing orders. And if we can keep questions so they are meeting the intent of the standing orders, we'll just make them direct and to the point, I'm sure. we'll just make them direct and to the point and short. And we'll ask staff as normal to give us an outline overview of the document. Kim Rawlings 24:58.402
Thanks, councillors. Um, councillors, today we are recommending to you the adoption of the destination management plan. The destination management the destination management plan is a combination of many years of extensive community and stakeholder engagement, technical analysis and collaborative development. The DMP provides a long-term, 10-year horizon, evidence-based framework to ensure Noosa natural assets, lifestyle and experiences can be enjoyed for generations. It responds to the needs and aspirations of our residents, businesses, traditional owners and visitors and reflects the strong message heard throughout consultation. Noosa is a place we love and protecting liveability is essential to our economy, our wellbeing and our shared future. The plan seeks to strengthen the foundations of a thriving and sustainable visitor economy, one that supports local jobs, respects community expectation and safeguards our environment that underpins Noosa identity whilst ensuring that our community is at its heart. It positions council at its heart. It positions council and partners to proactively plan for change, manage pressures and plan for and leverage opportunities for our destination, including in the lead up to the Olympics. The DMP aims to identify actions to help address the challenges brought by Noosa growing popularity. as population growth, increased visitation, changing travel behaviours and the increasing impacts of climate change on our destination. It seeks to redefine the role of tourism in Noosa future, ensuring it supports and protects the environment, lifestyle and values while contributing to a thriving economy. Whilst these challenges are not unique to Noosa, the way we choose to respond to them can be. Through consultation, our community has consistently called for a stronger, more proactive approach to managing these issues, an approach that is bold and forward-looking, one that redefines and forward-looking, one that redefines the role of tourism in shaping our future and places Noosa lifestyle, environment, community and identity at its heart. The plan has been shaped through extensive community engagement and is tailor-made for Noosa. With overwhelming support, 75% of all respondents supported... the draft vision in the DMP. Across all age groups and geographical locations, the message was clear: build on our strong environmental foundations, put our community at its heart and shift towards a regenerative tourism model, one that leaves Noosa better than we found it. With over 3 With over 3,000 responses across two phases of community engagement, the DMP is structured around four guiding principles. Respecting our community, leading the way, living our values and tourism for good. It seeks to strengthen existing initiatives that are underway and align and introduce new and bold initiatives, including new areas of focus around day visitation management, establishing a joint custodian program, hinterland regeneration, and establishing a destination stewardship council. generation. The DMP is a long-term plan. It has a 10-year horizon. Success will take time and is only achievable through collective commitment and effort. Its success depends on a number of factors: strong leadership and sustained to bold action, increased investment to accelerate priorities, effective advocacy with a clear plan to influence policy and decision-making, strategic partnerships with industry business, government and community to ensure alignment and shared direction and importantly regular monitoring and evaluation and checking in with our community to stay on track, adapt and improve as needed. The plan includes a level monitoring and evaluation framework and is supported by a draft initial three-year rolling implementation plan that outlines what we aim to achieve, how we will get there and how we will measure success. The draft implementation plan sits alongside the DMP and is intended to be reviewed regularly and updated. It is intended to provide transparency and accountability while providing flexibility to monitor, learn and adapt as A key tenet of the DMP is the proposal to establish a Destination Stewardship Council to bring together people and organisations with the capacity to help deliver on the DMP. It is intended that once this group is established, they will play a key role in refining and overseeing the monitoring and evaluation framework and the implementation plan, to help guide the tracking of progress, managing risks and ensuring resources are aligned to the plan's intent. It's important to note that this strategy won't and can't do everything. It sits alongside other equally important documents that Council has endorsed. Council's corporate plan, our smart biosphere economic development strategy. Our environment strategy and many other key strategies. Each of these documents align and work together to provide clear strategic direction for our Shire and community. The DMP is considered a contemporary approach to destination management that seeks to ensure Noosa and iconic status are preserved. It puts our community and their values at its heart, this means what's important to our community, including a strong and supported economy, maintaining our enduring commitment to our incredible and significant environment and prioritising our community's wellbeing and ensuring the people... being and ensuring the people we welcome here know and respect these priorities too. As mentioned this is a long-term plan and vision. It will take shared commitment, partnerships and investment. No doubt we will learn and adapt along the way. The supporting, monitoring and evaluation and draft implementation plan are designed to enable us to do this. The most important thing now is to have a plan that is clear in its intent and vision and strategy supported by our community and in this context I'm very pleased to commend this important report and plan to Council. Frank Wilkie 31:04.616
Mr Chair, I just want to signal I'd like to move the staff motion because that's the only one that's been said. Brian Stockwell 31:10.840
I think Councillor Lorentson did have the floor and I asked the staff to do the middle process so it would be appropriate to let you go first. Amelia Lorentson 31:17.520
Thank you Mr Chair. I'd like to move an alternate motion. Brian Stockwell 31:21.856
It Monday's date now? Thank Amelia Lorentson 31:25.380
That council note the draft Noosa destination management plan and the submission received acknowledges the need for further analysis refinement and diverse adoption of the current draft to the April, 2026 April round of meetings and be engaged a suitably qualified independent destination management professional to finalise the 10-year destination management plan we have a seconder? And so Wilson was the seconder. We have a fourth councillor on the team. The draft Destination Management Plan reflects significant work and extensive consultation and the alternate motion in front of us is not intended as a criticism of staff or the effort invested to date, rather it recognises in my opinion that the plan is not yet complete and requires further refinement and analysis to ensure it is generally fit for purpose and capable of critical outcomes. In its current form, it's my opinion that the plan lacks the rigour and detail and clarity on key elements such as risk assessment, implementation detail... assessment, implementation detail, costings, funding pathways and contingency planning, engaging an independent suitably qualified professional will help ensure that these gaps are addressed and it will strengthen the foundations of the plan. And I'll note, as staff just mentioned, that the draft will be reviewed, monitored and reported on. Ongoing oversight, in my opinion, is... insufficient. We need strong foundations. Strong foundations are essential to ensure that the plan is evidence-based, actionable and again generally fit for purpose. The alternate motion is not about delaying progress or kicking the can down the road. It's basically about setting ourselves up for success. A robust Robust, well-considered plan is critical to maintain public confidence and uphold community trust and demonstrates that Council approaches strategic planning with the excellence our community expects. Robust. When I went through the plan I just thought that there was further work that was needed to ensure that the plan appropriately reflects emerging economic conditions. State policy change changes, market dynamics and strategic opportunities including Queensland Destination 2045 and the Brisbane 2032 Olympic and Paralympic Games. Strong alignment with existing council strategies and statutory plans is also essential to a good duplication. Clearer guidance on responsibilities, measures of success and contingencies for outcomes that are dependent on external agencies must also be... analysed and embedded to ensure that the plan is deliverable. Again, deferring the adoption until April and undertaking this further analysis, to me, will de-risk the plan and again set it up for success. Again, not a criticism of staff, it's about just getting it totally right so that we can generally implement a roadmap that protects our residents and supports our local businesses and most importantly safeguards Noosa unique natural and cultural environment. Nicola Wilson 35:38.360
Councillor Stockwell mentioned at the beginning of this session that there's a lot of amendments that councils have put forward and I think that really isn't a long kind of fact that the councils would feel that there needs to be so many amendments and therefore I'd consider that the plan is not yet ready for a reduction. Overall overall I appreciate the amount of work that's gone into this project and the level of consultation particularly the attempts to bring in people we don't normally hear from. This is the plan for 10 years ahead. Karen Finzel 36:10.889
And there are two council terms beyond this one and we have a responsibility to ensure this plan does not lock council into excessive cost or pre-determined outcomes. We can't accept a document on the basis that we can change it in the future as someone suggested. We've done this time entirely Well we can't expect perfect, we can't endorse plans that we know need to change before they've been implemented. We put council at risk because in a couple of years someone will come along and say we have to do this, it's in the DMP, endorsed by this council. The money spent on consultants and consultation, the endless time spent by council staff are all inputs to the process. But we can't endorse a Nicola Wilson 37:03.649
Not really a community-led document. The amount of effort should translate to a document that we're proud of, not one that we seek to amend, and also has sufficient time to respond to the feedback given by peer reviews. We were told the DMP would give us a clear direction for our relationship with Torres and Noosa. It doesn't. The survey didn't ask specific questions other than for a review of the current model, which was supported. Respondents were also in favour of a shift towards a more regenerative approach to tourism, a shift towards, and this has been interpreted as a complete move to regenerative tourism without partnering with the business community to understand what's possible. It's positioned as a shared commitment to putting community first, but does the community agree that this will be achieved? I've raised concerns about the KPIs throughout this process, and again, yes, they can be developed over time, but I'm concerned that this wouldn't be achieved in all the time today, between all the different people involved in the process, and it seems to have presented significant challenges throughout. And so, I agree that the health of us needs to be qualified, professional... us needs to be qualified, professional... Jessica Phillips 38:33.040
I had a look at our standing orders to see if it suggested anything about amendments, or how many amendments are allowed, and it doesn't suggest I'm sorry, I'm... To support Councillor Wilson's suggestion, there are a lot of amendments, and that gives me an understanding and that gives me an understanding that the document isn't ready to be endorsed today. There's a few things that... Became glaringly obvious to me. It is strategies that I would prefer... policies that Council would endorse before the DMP, such as the parking management plan that I believe is coming next year, and some state decisions around the suggestions of The suggestions of the alternate funding sources. So there's certainly things that I feel given some extra time would really cement the confidence in the document. I can see the work that has gone in it to date but quite happy to see a few more months to make sure that we're sitting around this table maybe without having to put the amendments through. It isn't a live document that we see. This will kick things off and I think that the community deserves a really community deserves a really strong document that as suggested in the opening by the Chair that harmony and division is one of the things that we should be creating and after today if the amendments, we start off on amendments. I believe that that would be the opposite that to what happens it won't be harmony or division it sorry there will be no harmony it will be division after today so I think we owe it to community so I think all of us sitting here is recognised that the DMP needs to but you know if it's not ready to be endorsed today in my opinion so I'm happy to support the motion in front of me. Frank Wilkie 40:38.988
I think the community deserves the DMP in its the DMP in its current form to be endorsed today. I think to delay further would be to breach the community's trust. The community already perceives it to have been delayed unnecessarily long period. There has been no... locking in of predetermined outcomes, delaying falls well short of community expectations. I will refer to amendments because the amendments that are proposed I think fail to recognise the recommendation. It was so broad and captured a wide range of views, it's naïve to think there would be agreement and perfection on all wording and aspects of this collective piece of work among the community and even the seven councillors. Because of the reach of the engagement Think by doing this, you're kicking the can down the road in the hope that you'll come up with something that we can all agree with. This is one other person's opinion that's going to be trying to pull this together. There'll be disagreement on that as well. There's a catch-all that says that there's got to be future costings done before anything is implemented, more community consultation done before anything is implemented. It's a good plan. The community consultation has been extensive. I think the motion that had been circulated previously was the one the community has been expecting. Councillors have had time to get their heads around. We've only just seen this one. This is this is Odyssey making on the run. It's a good plan. And look, having an imperfect plan when you've got humans involved is expected. Delaying planning or having no planning. is actually quite negligent and not really acceptable. I won't be supporting this. I'll be encouraging councillors to reject this and go back to the original motion and we'll work through the amendments if we need to. section C of the recommendation which makes it clear that says the plan will be refined with input from partner support organisations reviewed and updated on an annual basis and informed by council's annual budget considerations. but I draw Yeah and that's a catch-all for the amendments so please councillors let's trust the process let's not delay this any further there's no guarantee that even after being delayed till April that we're all going to agree on it because it's a it's an ambitious plan lots of inputs an ambitious plan lots of inputs and i think you're after perfection when a plan is any a good plan is better than hoping holding out hope for a perfect plan Nicola Wilson 44:13.220
Yeah, based on that recommendation C and D, how can we call this a final report today if there's still all this work to do? How are we going to know that that, if we say, yes, there will be further input from partners of all organisations, it will be reviewed and it will be delegated to the CEO of that kind of team, so how can we call this a final report today that we're endorsing? Kim Rawlings 44:44.826
Councillors, what you're being asked to adopt is the DMP as a final document. Alongside that is a draft implementation plan. Alongside that is document. It's not unusual. It's actually normal practice for us to have strategic documents endorsed by council and then to have annual implementation plans. You receive annual updates on our implementation plans, like the environment strategy, for instance. So that's what we're to do, to adopt the final destination management plan and a draft rolling implementation plan that will include and be evolved when any first destination stewardship council is established. So there's, you know, independent shared oversight, detailed project scopes, detailed project feasibilities, costings for budget, ongoing monitoring, adapting, all of those things. That's right, yeah. Before we publish the final, in case there's spelling errors and things like that. And thank you, one councillor's already picked up a couple of spelling errors. So things like that. I've caught up in the D resolution here. Tom Wegener 46:03.888
I would wish to talk to the motion. Councillor Wilkie. What I've heard consistently for the last six years is the community wants action. And that's number one. They want us do something and carry on with our business to responding to economic changing, changing economic conditions. Well, that's not going to change between now and April. economic conditions are changing constantly, so I don't see that as a reason to delay it. A harmonious council in April, I sincerely doubt that. From what I've seen is when we kick the can down the road, it does not create harmony in the final decision. So I will not be supporting Karen Finzel 46:56.924
It takes a specific type and style of bold leadership to legitimise voice through the act of engaging and illuminating our citizens' contribution of their own knowledge, coupled with their lived experience, so that we can give legitimacy to their voice. I respect where Councillor Lorentson's coming from to, again, engage a suitably qualified independent. I don't know how much that costs. We've spent significant funding at the moment. I'm trying to illuminate the voice of our people who have engaged in this and have called for action. So I think that we need to go to debate, provide opportunity for myself and others to actually bring the full debate to the table. I feel this is too limiting and I won't be supporting it today. Brian Stockwell 47:53.600
Council's staff asked us and we said we wanted this by December. This council in the early days was started to be typified as the councillor who didn't make decisions because they kept on deferring. This is another part of that poor behaviour or poor habit to my... I'll take that word behaviour, poor habit of if things aren't your liking you defer it and hope to make it a little bit better for yourself. Has been peer reviewed by experts. The plan has had input by a range of people who are leading in the field. The staff have given us advice that internationally is seen as a new brand of DMP, one that fetches. And while yes, a minority of councils have posed a range amendments, this motion actually should be a guide to them whether they speak for the minority or the majority. Councillor Wilkie mentioned the, well we've sort of alluded to the old saying, don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. is a good plan. This plan sets out the strategic direction and from what my view of the potential amendments was, where people were getting bogged down to the detail for the next level in the hierarchy. The programming logic in Appendix 2 is as good as I've seen produced in this council and I haven't seen one for a sustainability strategy in the local government or in Australia as good. And I do that with my other hat on. I look for leading sustainability strategies in local government for ones that set out their program logic and their monitoring relation framework for long term plans and then monitor it for my students to evaluate. And I don't think I've found one that comes close to this level of detail. So we have to be clear that is a 10 year strategic plan. The details and the refinement happen on the annual operational plan, the implementation and any good strategy will have head. The adaptive management side. So, like others, I will be supporting this motion. I think that's all. Amelia Lorentson 50:35.094
I do, and I thank the councillors around the desk for their commentary. I need to reiterate the alternate motion is not... not delaying it for four months means that it still will come to the table. Mayor Wilkie, you mentioned it's a plan for a plan to, you know, to review, monitor, revise. What I'm saying is... is that the plan's at risk of being rushed and we're prioritising expediency, we're prioritising the commitment to get it done before the end of the year over the level of rigour required for for a strategic 10 year document of this importance. There is too much at stake. Protections for our residents, their rights and our local economy, our small businesses. What I've put in front of you again focuses on de-risking the plan and setting it up for success. It needs to be genuinely fit for purpose. It doesn't discard the work undertaken to date. it seeks to complete it properly. I ask again, in terms of community confidence, community support and community trust, deferment and engaging an expert to help finalise a 10 year destination management It's critical to the plan's long term success. So again, I ask those who have suggested they're not voting for it to reconsider and work in the best interests of and make sure that the document that we put in front of them will deliver a plan that is excellence in best practice. Brian Stockwell 52:36.604
Thank you. I put the motion. Those in favour? favour? That's Councillor Wilson. That's Councillor Wilson, Lorentson and Phillips. Those against? That's Councillor Wilkie, Finzel, Wegener and Stockwell. Frank Wilkie 52:48.798
I'd like to move the original motion, please, Mr Chair. Brian Stockwell 52:52.258
That's moved. And do we have a seconder? Councillor Wegener? And that is as appears in the agenda. Councillor Wilkie, you're on the floor. Thank you. We need to talk to this person. Frank Wilkie 53:09.600
After many years of delay, delay is for good reason, to make sure that we get this plan right, today is the day we take a collective step on the journey towards a bright future for Noosa. A future where Noosa not only retains but improves upon its natural beauty, liveability and prosperity. It's a 10-year plan that acknowledges we're all part of the solution. And this act of planning has been by a powerful, unifying truth that all of us around this community and this table share, and that is a love for Noosa. I really believe everyone's moving things here today because they want the best for Noosa. We may not always agree, but we can disagree respectfully. We're driven by the love for this place. This plan is an inclusive way forward that recognises everyone. Business owners, residents and visitors are part of the solution. Joint custodians. It invites us all to tread lightly on this place and recognise that a healthy environment is the key to livability, prosperity and success as a community and a visitor destination. Why are we doing it and why now? This is an important question. It's because Noosa at a crossroads. Whether we're aware of aware of it or not, Noosa is facing unprecedented and relentless population pressures from development in southeast Queensland. In Moreton City Council alone, in one subdivision alone, the population that population that will be housed there will be, when it's completed, will be the size of Mackay. When Aura South of Caloundra is finished, the population there will be that of Gladstone. This plan also helps position ourselves ahead of the global focus and visitors that are on their way in the During and after the Olympics in 2032. This plan is about responsible preparation, planning ahead because we must preserve what we love about Noosa for residents and visitors and it would be negligent if we did not. This planning upon the forward planning that has kept Noosa relatively relaxed look and feel despite changes everywhere else that have led to Noosa gaining biosphere status. But in the face of these increasing pressures, we need to lift again. Doing what we've always done will see us go backwards, which is why aiming higher through this plan, aspiring to regenerate Noosa, working towards leaving it in a better state than how we found it, so it can be enjoyed as we have enjoyed it for generations We're committed to working smarter, harder and in partnership with the proposed Destination Stewardship Council, where other agencies and community and industry stakeholders with real capacity to effect change, are proposed to monitor and ensure the actions of the DMP. There were two rounds of community consultation, very extensive, over 3,000 pieces of community feedback, Phases 1 and 2, over many years. This is why the community is urging us to get on with it. It's core priority is community input, we're clear, include protecting the environment, managing short term accommodation, addressing traffic and congestion, aligning tourism to community values, and the message, very clear, we've told you before, just get on with it. know what we want, get on with it. There are four guiding principles, and the DMP three year implementation plan contains key strategies plus actions of what is going to be achieved and measures to determine whether they've been achieved or not. each action has been given indicative costing, whether it can be funded under existing budget, require meeting funding up to 150,000 or high funding of an extra 150,000 or above. Because the reach of the engagement was broad and captured a wide range of views, it would be naive to think that Even at this early There'd be agreement on all the wording and the structure of this collective piece of work, which has had input from industry experts and the seven councillors. As I mentioned before, this is why Clause C, note the draft, is a catch-all for the future due diligence that must be done before projects are implemented. As I said before, an imperfect plan is expected, a delayed plan or no plan is negligent. I'd like to thank the staff for their excellent work and I'd like to thank all the councillors who worked very diligently all the councillors who worked very diligently with the staff over many workshops. I'm estimating at least six where their feedback was shared to help refine and finalise the structure, wording and measurables of this draft plan. We're all intimately engaged in the process of getting to this final draft and I thank all councillors for that and I do thank the staff for that. Brian Stockwell 58:19.161
Any questions or is that time passed? Margaret Gatt 58:21.301
Time's passed, thank you. Brian Stockwell 58:24.441
I was going to talk to the motion. Margaret Gatt 58:28.081
Can I start with some questions? You may. Just to start. Jessica Phillips 58:32.921
Hey, this is Kim, thank you. Just looking at... I'd like to know which of the following have actually gone through feasibility and economic of assessments before coming into a plan and I a lot of workshops, but just a refresher for people in the gallery and watching. Visitor contribution models, paid or dynamic parking, congestion charging and the proposed community and environmental benefit fund. Kim Rawlings 59:15.020
There's one detailed list: visitor contribution, paid parking, congestion, charging, and the proposed community and environmental benefit fund. Just wondering which ones out of those have had, have gone through the feasibility and economic Feasibility processes have not been done for those documents, those initiatives. Council will be Initiatives. Council will be aware that you have endorsed a parking management plan as part of this year's budget and you are fully aware that that is the process where assessment of parking, dynamic parking, regulated parking is consider all the issues associated with that. That process has been initiated and it will be progressed as part of this current budget process. The visitor contribution model, as you can see in the document, is an advocacy piece. It requires state legislative change and it requires collaboration with other destinations and we have started that process. It's actually been under investigation for many, many years many organisations, other local governments and other tourism bodies have done a lot of assessment and feasibility work that they've been willing to share with us. So there's a lot of background information to that but absolutely as it currently stands in the... document it's clear it's an... it requires advocacy and legislative change before it comes on board. As you know which we've presented to Council we've also done significant global research about visitor contributions that occur in more than 400 destinations across the globe. across the globe and that information has been shared with Council so there's no doubt that all of these initiatives need more work need more investment need more commitment you know that's what an action plan is about identifying these potential solutions depend to potential options initiatives to investigate initiatives to test to try and address some of the challenges that our community have raised with us over and over and over and that's what the implementation draft implementation plan seeks to set up. Brian Stockwell 01:01:49.800
I'm going to move an amendment, Councillor this amendment is really seeking just to place clarity around item C and reflects what he's already stated. Both in the report and some of which you just heard. And it's an amendment to read that items to be amended to read note the draft implementation plan is provided at attachment 2 to support the implementation of the DMP. Noting this plan will be refined with this plan will be refined with input from partner support organisations reviewed, updated on and that should be an rather than an annual basis. That will be with process including one. Consideration by Council of the advice provided by the Destination Stewardship Council once established in accordance with its Terms of Reference, Form and Function function should be specifically agreed to by Council, noting a key function of the proposed Stewardship Council is to provide recommendations on refinements to the Monitoring and Evaluation Framework. 2. The specific actions relating to parking will be refined and determined by Council through the parking management process currently in progress as approved in the 2025-26 Council Budget and 3. Project outlines including any proposed community or stakeholder consultation, costings and resources for each priority action be considered and agreed to by Council as part of the Budget process. Delighted to have taken that. Very briefly, as I said, it is a clarifying... is a clarifying amendment. It is one that, I think, addresses some of what I consider to be the issues raised by arrangements that were circulated last week. It is a stepwise process and I think the standard budgetary process is where we do make the final decision. I think it is... It is a Processes where we do make the final decision on all of this, but we need to give staff a clear direction, and that is the direction set by the draft DMP before this current round of budget. If we do, as councillors will be pilots, we want to be seen as a council of action, and that would be superb. Frank Wilkie 01:04:34.700
I see what you're trying to do there, Mr Chair. It's a solution to all of the actions proposed in the 15 amendments that we've seen circulated, which is that there be further, but all these actions be further, but all these actions need to be properly costed, subject to the budget process, and the relevant community stakeholders engaged before any of these actions are implemented. You've expanded upon the intention of Part C of the recommendation, which was a catch-all for all of the proposed You've just made it a bit clearer here, so I think I appreciate what you're trying to do. It's an elegant solution to, I guess, respect where the other councillors may be coming from with their amendments, and that is assuring the community that all actions will be properly costed, subject to budget process, approved by councillors. to budget process, approved by councillors after consultation with the appropriate stakeholders. Jessica Phillips 01:05:51.248
I'll speak to it. Although the intention is there, one of the reasons why I'm not going to support it is... there's conversation with the councillors around respect and circulating amendments prior to today. This came through at 11:42, so I actually hadn't seen it. I circulated my amendments about Friday because I was under the impression that we were trying to be respectful and give each other enough time to really see where we were coming from. So given that I did that last Friday, I'd like to... continue with the amendments as they are. Tom Wegener 01:06:40.340
It is largely redundant, I feel, and normally I don't support redundant things, amendments and things, but it and things, but I think for the community, maybe they want to see this. It might be helpful to some people, but it's all supported, despite the fact that I normally do not support redundant. Amelia Lorentson 01:07:11.653
I don't support the intent behind the amendment. Just referencing what Councillor said, my amendments were also circulated days in advance. I feel the intent of this is to try to think of another word other than gag but to stop a lot of if it's been gone into from some of the councillors in terms of reading the reports and trying up with amendments that address community concerns I feel that this overrides the efforts of a few of the councillors around the table I won't be supporting the amendment again I don't support the intent change. Brian Stockwell 01:08:04.780
I'll close to acknowledge it was 11 o 'clock and I spent some time on the weekend trying to get my head around all that that was looking for me in terms of the amendments. I was respectful of staff by not asking for support on Sundays hence why I came this morning. It's not meant to get in the way of the bill, it's meant to clarify what the staff have said in their reports and it was meant to, I suppose, allow councillors to reflect whether, having considered the due process, whether their particular amendments actually would have any further impact. put the motion of those in favour. The motion, oh sorry, the against, the motion, sorry, I'd better say the names, Will, Wilkie, Wegener and Stockwell, and those against will be Wilson, Finzel, Lorentson and Phillips. Okay, we're back to the original motion. Margaret Gatt 01:09:05.500
I'll move an amendment, please, Chair. Sure. Jessica Phillips 01:09:32.620
Uh, any, any action, not that you'll have, um, while Any action or measure within the DMP that is dependent on an unendorsed plan, policy or strategy must be reframed as an, as only as an investigation, feasibility study or issue analysis for future council consideration. consideration. I've tried with my amendments to not over complicate it but just be really specific in the language this amendment just tries one simple but critical thing in my opinion which stops assumptions from becoming commitments so it says that if an So it says that if an action or measure in this DMP depends on a plan, policy or strategy that council has not endorsed, then it must be framed exactly as that, an investigation, a feasibility study or an issue analysis, not a commitment. Because we are told plans like this are live working documents, but in practice they are not neutral, they are... decisions in pipelines. So once the plan is endorsed, the internal processes will kick off. The budget bids start falling and future councillors will be later told that it's already been... it's already in the plan that you approved. I have seen this... a few times in my first term and I believe this... the community sees this too and they feel like decisions are made well before they fully understand what has occurred. The DMP describes itself as a long-term plan supported by a three-year implementation plan and monitoring and evaluation... framework brand regular review but when you look at the MEF and the future focus table what you actually see can be explicit 2035 targets and a direct line from strategies, actions, outcomes and impacts and measures written as and impacts and measures written as if the success equals implementation of specific specific mechanisms and not improved outcomes not simply improved outcomes. There are multiple areas where action is specified before the evidence base exists so the plan commits to base exists. So the plan commits to carrying capacities, a real-time tech management across the iconic sites before costs, enforcement implications, equity impacts or community tolerance has been tested. The MEF that assumes paid parking, commission charges, visitor contribution funding and community and environmental contribution funding and community and environmental benefit are successfully established, yet there's no cost modelling, no demand sensitivity analysis and no clear distribution framework. So this could be policy by assumption. And I am much more around evidence-led decision making. Under strategy 2.3, the review alternative funding sources, the DMP doesn't just explore ideas, it talks about strong advocacy to state or visitor. Visitor contribution powers, piloting paid and dynamic parking with congestion charges, collaborating with booking platforms or funding contributions, establishing a community environmental benefit fund by 2035. Five destination projects being primarily funded by visitors. In the MEF there are no longer framed questions, they are framed outcomes, such as alternative funding sources achieved, community benefit fund established, feasibility completed and trolled. That is a directional commitment. If a future council decides these mechanisms are inequitable, unworkable or damaging to small businesses, perhaps they will be told it's already endorsed in the DMP. Day visitation, parking and traffic up will will be the same problem and day visitation management, bold move is built on dynamic parking, behaviour change programs like Noosa Rewards and tech heavy parking and traffic controls and again in the MEF these are not neutral trials. My amendment just intends to strengthen the plan by requiring clear council decisions before commitments are implied and removing ambiguity about what has or hasn't been endorsed. It protects councillors from being boxed in later and being honest with the community. I just believe this amendment will restore the correct order around evidence, council decision, implementation and not the other way around. I really am interested in rebuilding trust with our community and this is how we stop governance by momentum. Nicola Wilson 01:14:34.920
I'll try and be quick because I pretty much agree with Councillor. I have the same concerns that there are predetermined outcomes in the measures and I did point these out in my feedback. Some of these, I've got examples that I'll read out, some of these are really tasks or actions yet they've been presented as measures so that they're already completed at some point in the future. There's a few examples. 1.3 Noosa Council has determined as a clear policy position that all recreation parks will not be used for parking so there should just be a clear the use of recreation parks, not that the actual policy is predetermined. That's not yet been recommended or endorsed in the parking management plan. Same area: Noosa Council has established at least two additional park and ride facilities. a measure. There's been no decision on this. We're not told why to. We've no data to support whether we need two park and ride facilities or how much it would cost or what they could achieve. Trial flexible and timed closures of Hastings Street. No decision made on that yet during peak periods. on that yet. During peak periods, to improve the amenity and overall experience of the main bridge placement for everyone. Again, that should come out of the parking management plan and it's set in a pre-term position that we don't know if the plan will arrive at. 2.3: Increased contribution from major booking platforms into local environmental and community projects. No decision on that. That's something that council officers are Council officers are having discussions about but councils haven't been involved in so ethically I don't know if I'm going to be in support of that. Destination marketing organisation has successfully aligned with the DMP and has established new and alternative funding sources. Again, we haven't got a decision The future of our destination marketing organisation. Options for a community and environment benefit fund have been determined and shared with the community and Noosa Council as progressing implementation. So we can't predetermine that we'll progress implementation of something we haven't decided to implement. these are all areas where I'm really concerned and that's why I supported the motion that we need more time to work through these otherwise it puts us in a really risky position that we've endorsed something that's, I don't know, this is hard to see. Appendix 2 has been noting but we might not then final, like I don't know what the future process is for us to endorse that so these may stay there. So, um, I'll pass the floor to this motion. Amelia Lorentson 01:17:14.264
Been said but I just do want to raise that there's quite a few actions in the plan that may materially affect local businesses and already mentioned paid parking, congestion charging, one-way corridor trials, precinct closures. I just think that the inclusion that at any measure Any measure or action has to be framed only as an investigation, feasibility study or issue analysis for future council consideration reflects the importance of our small business community and the potential some of these actions may have on their livelihoods so I'm happy to support the amendment in front of us. Frank Wilkie 01:18:15.420
So just a question one of the actions support and showcase local food and beverage producers through Food and Agribusiness Network one of the actions so this would be investigate supporting and showcasing local food and beverage producers through Food and Agribusiness Network while building expertise and I engaging landowners guess and in general it's so it's the the investigation which is implicit in this you want to make it explicit Tom Wegener 01:18:58.920
Maybe for to staff is this the writing the way it's written is that normal and is this a matter of just semantics Chit, chit, chit, chit. Kim Rawlings 01:19:11.900
I'm probably not going to comment on the last question, the last part of that question. It's an implementation plan that sets up a series of actions and measures. A community absolutely loud and clear call for some clear outcomes and measures so that there's targets and there's outcomes. outcomes that we're working towards that the community can keep us accountable to and that we can, you know, keep ourselves accountable to. So the structure of the implementation plan is normal. But it's an implementation plan, it's a draft implementation plan, rolling plan, which has all of the things around it needing to be further detailed to occur, it talks about where these feasibilities need to be done, it talks about existing processes like parking management plan that's in train. It talks about where there needs to be feasibilities. It talks about where it needs to investigate. But it also does have some stretch outcomes to say these are the things that we've actually heard need to managed in our community. So we are putting some stretch outcomes there. And we will regularly review. There'll be robust governance. There'll be accountability. There'll be monitoring. And if we if we need to adapt these things, because we've trialled things and they haven't worked, or, you know, for a raft of reasons, then the process allows us to do that. Frank Wilkie 01:20:50.695
Another question for Councillor. I'm looking at one of the measures now is, in terms of an action, is about reducing the impacts of STA. It says one of the measures, or the KPIs, is the number of of local law complaints to the hotline has reduced by 70% from 5/9 to the end of year 1 to 178, a reduction of 414 complaints. So how would this change that measure? Jessica Phillips 01:21:18.275
It will only be specific for the ones that are around investigation. Because I'm asking for policy and strategy to be endorsed before we make decisions. Okay, so we've got an SGA policy, so that's correct, you'll be exempt. Because my wording is around without an unendorsed plan, policy or strategy, then it would have, because I couldn't go in individually, I didn't want to complicate it I didn't want to complicate it that much. So it is around just the ones that don't have a policy or a strategy by council. Frank Wilkie 01:21:51.872
So we're already committed to reducing the impacts on STA so that wouldn't be affected. Thank you. I'm still trying to get my hand around it. That's okay. Brian Stockwell 01:22:01.880
So just to clarify then, this is just won't provide, I guess it's a question to the staff, that won't, it actually underpins what we're trying to achieve, while at the same time ensuring that any gaps in the language used ensures that we're not supporting anything that's currently not being endorsed. Is that correct? Kim Rawlings 01:22:32.594
Well I think that's the intention of Councillor's motion. Well I think that's the intention. Karen Finzel 01:22:36.474
And are you satisfied with that, that this inclusion won't be detrimental to the overall plan? Frank Wilkie 01:22:42.194
That's a bit of an alternative. I have to probably do an assessment against everything. the intention and spirit of the implementation plan is that council is the decision maker. So anything that requires council investment, budget allocation, resourcing, inclusion in our annual operational plan has to be endorsed and decided by council. So that is that is the process that we That is the process that any strategy endorsed by council and implementation plan needs to follow so in that context then you know this is absolutely the intention attention. I noticed as an action this this seems to be feasibility studies as part of as part of the measures. ready for some of the actions? Yeah. Kim Rawlings 01:23:50.780
Because many of them still require more work and feasibility and consultation and analysis. Brian Stockwell 01:24:09.300
Question: This talks about any actionable measure within the GMB. I'm presuming the measure referred to is in the monitoring and evaluation plan, which is an appendix to the DMD. Is that meant to be covered by this amendment? Jessica Phillips 01:24:56.808
Was trying to get it, my intention is to make sure that we're not, I'll keep it really simple, my intention is to make sure that we are not unintentionally putting the cart before the horse by not having a policy or... A strategy endorsed by council. I can't see how we can have it as an outcome in our EMP or through the DMP. So both. I don't know how we can put that in a plan when we haven't debated it and put it in a policy. That's... I'm happy to ask for help with the wording, but my intention is that I don't believe our community will be satisfied without us endorsing a policy and strategy before it's put in Yeah, Karen Finzel 01:25:48.523
Questions through the plan, through the plan, through the council. Margaret Gatt 01:25:52.403
Chairs. Karen Finzel 01:25:54.963
Yeah, it's been a long day. If we're looking at If we're looking at higher order strategies just overarching over this, in my opinion, but it's a question to the CEO, would that document be the corporate plan that could give assurance to Councillor? Larry Sengstock 01:26:18.980
My opinion on this one is that this is, and I think Kim mentioned it at the start, this is one of many plans that we have, this is a plan, it's not the overall be all plan, we have a corporate plan which is our overarching, this is one plan that fits in related specifically to tourism and promotion and economy of Noosa, but it's a piece. I think what Councillor is trying to say is that we don't want to take any measures unless there is a policy or a strategy that's been developed to guide that. And I accept that. I think that's a reasonable position to take. So this document is not saying that. This document is actually saying here's what we think is a measure, and if there needs to be a strategy or a policy brought to bear before we can actually deliver on some of these things, that's okay. Am I right in saying that, personally? Jessica Phillips 01:27:16.559
Yes, except it doesn't suggest that in some of the wording, because it suggests that it's before it. So, because administration needs policy and strategy direction to do the work. So, I can't see how a plan or the outcomes of a plan can be put in before we've had it come to Council for endorsement. So, I'll use example, the parking management plan, we have not endorsed that strategy. So, I don't know how we strategy. So I don't know how we can have it in an implementation plan except for it should be as simple as the strategy for parking management comes to council for endorsement. Frank Wilkie 01:28:02.395
Councillor, if we endorse the DMP, the DMP will be an endorsed plan that would make all those actions and measures valid. Jessica Phillips 01:28:36.428
Both. But anything that implies that a decision's made today on car park management shouldn't happen today, because we're not debating car park management. Frank Wilkie 01:28:46.808
I don't think, yeah, that's not the intent either, I don't think. Jessica Phillips 01:28:49.688
No, but it's in the... it's in the implementation plan that that would be procedure... And this is what happens, because we finish here, and then the organisation go and do the work. That's how it should work. But I'm saying, how does that happen? Frank Wilkie 01:29:18.798
Feed into the the DMP your question of staff how many plans and strategies many lots there's been a lot of work across the Kim Rawlings 01:29:30.938
Organisation ensuring you know alignment and ensuring you know alignment and input with existing strategies it's also important to note that all of our existing strategies including our corporate plan have targets and indicators and measures you know and they provide outcomes statements all of them do our environment strategy our corporate plan they all provide those things that are outcomes aspirations indicators you know like 50% protection of our conservation estate that was endorsed as a strategy. Nicola Wilson 01:30:10.575
Questioning the relevance of the question because Councillor' amendment is about things that are not yet endorsed not about the existing policies and plans. Frank Wilkie 01:30:18.315
I guess my question is what portion... Yeah. Brian Stockwell 01:30:27.220
Yeah, it's a time of day, but I think it's a time of day. I'm not sure that the amendment will achieve what Councillor was hoping. You'll see in one of the appendices we've listed all the existing... strategies and commitments that have led to a range of different strategies and a lot of them are the higher level commitments to do this plan and do certain outcomes. but there is the main concerns as I've of is in the final column of the monitoring evaluation fund where staff have indicated what would be an appropriate measure. Just to be clear, it's not a target. It's how we might measure. The target is if you look at the outcome, the impacts, that's saying what we want. It could be down as a key performance measure and this. measure, and it's really important to understand that the actions as written, if we look at the one that we've been talking about, actions on parking, it's really clear. That what the process is going to be, so the action in the DMP already does highlight if it's something we're going ahead with or something that needs further research, and I've just been looking through so many things I've lost my spot there. It's hard to see why we would need to do this when, for me, if the DMP sets out under the strategy, each action, and which one will go straight to the budget process and which one is going to be going through a more detailed process to get to it, I think it's already there. issue for me isn't that, and it's also going to be complicated about what the level of support is needed in a planning policy or strategy. It's not clear on when this particular element would click in. To me, it just complicates things. While I understand the concern that maybe some of the measures aren't what the individual councillors think should be there or are taking a step too far, in essence, the process that's been outlined with the review of the monitoring evaluation framework, the budget sharing process, The budgetary process, it doesn't create a threat, it creates an indication of the way we'd like to measure it and I think the actions are all captured in appropriate terms. Nicola Wilson 01:33:26.052
Can you have a measure in an implementation plan that is the achievement of something that's not being endorsed? That's what this is trying to address. Brian Stockwell 01:33:33.072
So how can you have a measure that's- Yes, we're not providing anything about the implementation plan this year. Nicola Wilson 01:33:38.972
No, because that's where the measures are. Brian Stockwell 01:33:41.607
The only measures that we're basing here are in monitoring and evaluation. No, the measures are in the But they relate to the actions that are in the DMP. That's right. You're mentioning the draft. The draft is not subject to submission because it's not part of the DMP. So if you look at Appendix 2, that is being adopted today. So it's the Monitoring and Evaluation Framework. That's where the measures are. So that's relevant to the amendment? It's not the implementation framework. That's where the measures are. So it's relevant to the budget. Now I'm going to go the other way if you have any questions about about the implementation. Nicola Wilson 01:34:19.560
Well, because the amendment talks about measures. So it's relevant to the appendix too. Margaret Gatt 01:34:26.960
Yes. And that's what the question was. Brian Stockwell 01:34:29.400
No, your question, you're about the attachment to the item, the item, not attachment to the appendix too, sorry. Attachment to is a draft. That's one. Attachment to is a draft three-year implementation plan. It's not part of the DMP. The only part that we're looking at endorsing at today's meeting is the appendices to monitoring and evaluation framework. Frank Wilkie 01:35:04.860
Looking at the DMP itself, not the monitoring and evaluation, not the draft implementation. Which appendix, please, Mr Chair? Brian Stockwell 01:35:19.360
Appendix 5.2, page 48, monitoring and evaluation. Nicola Wilson 01:35:37.980
It can't talk about measures without the very few appendix 2. Brian Stockwell 01:35:43.200
No, I think page 48 does have measures as well. Attachment 1 and attachment 2. Jessica Phillips 01:35:49.680
It's a appendix 2 in the DMP. That's why I did this in the first place, though. It's entwined. Nicola Wilson 01:36:01.240
The measures are on page 48, which is appendix 2. You were talking about attachment 4. Frank Wilkie 01:36:13.900
Do you understand what I'm doing? You were relating to the implementation plan. Your own question, that's why I stopped you. Nicola Wilson 01:36:23.360
Okay, it's the same measures. So your question relates to the monitoring and evaluation framework? No, I was saying how can you have a measure that is an achievement? Things like establishing two additional park and ride facilities? Brian Stockwell 01:37:01.660
Um, the current transport strategy poses nothing like that. So that's a really good part of the transport strategy. But once again, we'll be captured by this meeting. Nicola Wilson 01:37:16.460
Or options for a community environment benefit fund have been determined... and shared with the community in Noosa Council's progressing implementation. So how can that be a measure of something that the fund... hasn't actually been determined if that will go ahead yet? Larry Sengstock 01:37:29.663
That would come out of the Act. That would come out of the Actions, right? So the Actions then would determine... and the Council will determine whether we go forward and try to hit those measures. That's just a stretch measure of opportunity. It's not a decision. Frank Wilkie 01:37:44.177
Look Larry Sengstock 01:37:45.357
I'll speak. I've had a think about this. I understand what Councillor is trying to achieve. I think, look, a measure is a sign that... a measure is a sign that an action has been achieved. So saying that there's going to be an investigation into a measure or feasibility into a study, a feasibility study into a measure is post the event. It's the action that's the key. So I think there just needs to be more thought put into this amendment because a measure... a sign that something's been achieved. So to say we're going to investigate the implementation of this measure is... just doesn't compute, although I think... the action, it's implied in here that there's going to be cost analysis done of actions and feasibility studies done on actions before they're implemented and once they're implemented, the measure will be how we can... The measure will be how we can tell whether they've been effective or not. So to say there's going to be a feasibility statement by measure doesn't compute. So for that reason, just the wording, I can't support this amendment the way it's worded currently. Tom Wegener 01:39:12.800
I'm getting my head around it. And so parking is something and that I've, you know, I'll be very sensitive about. And so in the, in this one, which is implementation, monitoring evaluation, which is It a part of the DMV, says which is which is what we're voting in 1.3, ensure fair and efficient access to parking for locals and reduce congestion in high demand areas. So that that's the action. And then the output says smart parking system implemented in high demand areas providing real time availability. etc. But I think that it seems to me the crux is there is that Jess is saying well no this is already assumed like it's been implemented as as already but it's in the outputs. So I that that language doesn't doesn't bother me because it's we have the the action is here and then the outputs down the track. action is here, and then the output is down the track. I think that visionary hoping that we get there, it's not a part of a policy, because we're still wandering through that policy, but that legacy. that policy, but that language doesn't actually alarm me, and even though I'm probably very critical of that, it's still, I think that's normal. I don't think you would say investigate. That's why I brought up the word semantics. I think that it actually is normal, and I don't think that we're bound to do that. It's not a failure if we don't do that, but we are following through with the actions. So I really get what you're saying, Jess, but it doesn't come up to me supporting it. Brian Stockwell 01:41:07.728
Question to staff. It would appear to me a range of the concerns could be addressed by adding the word "potential" above the word "measures" in the one-three value life framework. Would that be any significant impact? Kim Rawlings 01:41:34.240
Look, I think you could put potential. You know, it's clearly said that the Monitoring and Evaluation Framework will be refined with collective input, stewardship council input, and evolved... tested. So, you know, you could put potential there. You'll note in the Draft Implementation Plan we use the word potential because... to signal that these are potential partners, these are, you know, potential... approaches, but they need refinement and, you know, collective kind of buy-in and further scoping. So, we do already use the word potential in the implementation plan for that reason. Amelia Lorentson 01:42:17.920
I ask a question to Jess? Can I ask a question? Did you put the wording together for this amendment because when you read the plan the language was unclear, that you were seeking clarity for yourself? Was that I'm trying to understand how this came about? Jessica Phillips 01:42:43.184
Every time I look at a document I think of people like me before I ran for council and I just look at it with real simple language so then there's no discussion like this. there's no discussion like this. We sit in all the workshops and we have so much more working knowledge, but the community don't sit in all those workshops. So whenever I look at anything like this, I look at a lens with simplicity language so it doesn't imply that there's certain things that could happen. Amelia Lorentson 01:43:12.348
So you were seeking clarity and putting yourself in our residents' shoes. asking the question what does this mean and you're just trying to simplify it. Yeah. Great, thank you. Would you support potential measure? Brian Stockwell 01:43:36.024
The question Councillor was would you support potential that That would be a segment. Okay. We have some councillors who haven't talked to the motion. Anyone wish to further talk? Margaret Gatt 01:44:00.280
Just a question then to Councillor. Would you be prepared to look this form and really put it up with the potential in it? Yes. You're happy to do that? Yep. Brian Stockwell 01:44:16.500
Do you want to close? Jessica Phillips 01:44:22.600
Yes. I will keep it very brief. When I've sat now through to budget for council, I always now look at our operating of business and how that continues to increase. And sometimes now the way I'm looking at it is more how does this does this keep continuing and at this point is when I can have some sort of level of control for community around giving them certainty that strategy and policy is what sets direction. how I always thought it should be. So my amendments today are all directed at making sure that a plan is considered with the language used, that it should never imply decisions because I think back to the original paper I put up on the wall in the first month of sitting in this room and I said I want to rebuild trust with community and that came down to the decisions in this room to me have to be based on lots of evidence, data, feasibility, tell me how much it's going to cost, all of those things before I can just endorse it. I don't want to imply decisions are made through the plan and that's the intention of my amendment Brian Stockwell 01:45:51.760
Okay I've put the amendment those in favour. That's Councillor Wilson, Lorentson and Phillips. Those against? That's Councillor Wilkie, Finzel, Wegener and Stockwell for the amendment. Stockwell the amendment is not accepted Jessica Phillips 01:46:07.609
And I'd like to move another amendment. Sure. Margaret Gatt 01:46:10.849
Is it going to be the same thing? Same wording and add potential please. Okay, well I'm going to try amendment two and then I'll work on it. Brian Stockwell 01:46:23.580
We're coming up to two hours in 14 minutes we'll have a break and then we'll work on that one over the break. Frank Wilkie 01:46:28.400
I just need to go. Brian Stockwell 01:46:30.160
Please excuse me while I spend a penny. Jessica Phillips 01:46:38.570
Can I move another amendment? Brian Stockwell 01:46:40.510
You have the floor, Councillor. Jessica Phillips 01:46:41.790
Thank you. Amendment two, Katharine. Thank you. Actions that pre-empt decisions on matters not yet determined by Council, including but not limited to parking management approaches, visitor contributions, STA measures or new revenue mechanisms must be removed or reclassified as subject to Council decision following the receipt of evidence. Amelia Lorentson 01:47:23.280
Noosa Shire Council meeting Noosa Shire Council meeting Noosa Shire Brian Stockwell 01:47:42.200
Do you have a follow up answer? Jessica Phillips 01:47:43.580
Thank you. Again, I'll try not to rehash anything that I've already said. So any of my amendments, this is one that is trying to remove or reword measures that pre-empt decisions. That council has not yet made. That matters because in several places in this document moves beyond setting direction and instead implies that specific policy outcomes are already agreed to when they're not. The DMP includes actions and measures that point towards particular parking management approaches, visitor contribution mechanisms, short-term accommodation responses and new revenue tools. In many cases, these have not been determined by Council and they have not been supported by the completed feasibility, economic or equity analysis. When those items appear in the plan as actions or measures rather than as options subject to Council decision, they can create the impression that approval has already occurred and it is exactly how implied approvals are created. Once the language like this is endorsed it is treated potentially as internal direction it informs work programs resourcing shapes future reports that come back to Council and that's not how I like to make decisions. By reclassifying these By reclassifying these actions as subject to Council decision following receipt of evidence and analysis, we restore the correct governance sequence. This amendment strengthens the DMP by removing ambiguity and by and about what has been approved. It protects Council from being unintentionally locked into future positions and it's honest with the community about what we are still considering. It closes the door on implied approvals and for those reasons I do ask, encourage you all to support the amendment as the commitment to the responsibility we hold at this table. Frank Wilkie 01:49:36.496
I'll speak against the amendment. We're talking about a plan, so a lot of the actions in there are pre-emptive. They haven't been done yet, they haven't been decided upon yet because it's a plan. So this is a very, I perceive this to be a very obstructive, delaying and confusing amendment. Tom Wegener 01:50:03.780
Question, so since we're looking at parking and it seems 1.3.1 optimised and traffic management in Action 1.3, this part of the draft plan says, "Accelerate a trial of innovative parking solutions, including dynamic systems, technology-driven tools, etc." Accelerate a trial, so then when we look over here, once again, the same outputs, I don't need to repeat it, but it says that smart parking systems implemented in high demand areas, so is this again what you're looking at? This seems like very particular, the fully focus of your amendment. Jessica Phillips 01:50:51.759
Not specifically on that, but I will talk on that, because we have had workshops in relation to that where we've asked, has the tech been, do we have the tech, do we have the budget, do we have the resources, do we have, all of these things have been asked in workshops and we've been things have been asked in workshops and we've been told we don't have that yet, so I don't understand how we can put it as a predetermined outcome in the DMP when we've been told by the Director of Infrastructure that that is not something that can be achieved. Annie Thompson. Tom Wegener 01:51:27.521
So when it comes to, you have the accelerate trials and then over here you have the output, the activity of products achieved during the project. And I see what you're saying, absolutely. But I think But I think that's just normal language. Brian Stockwell 01:51:47.457
I'll follow that up. There's a statement that Christopher has suggested. I'm not ready for that yet. Was the relevant directors and managers of each area that was... would be involved in the implementation of those actions and consulted in... because of the monitoring and the other guys, Jim Brangwick and Mosey. Kim Rawlings 01:52:13.428
Yes, absolutely there was and I'm happy for any of the directors to comment. We're both involved, both drafted and supported the actions and I just might... and supported the actions and I just might clarify that that action is to accelerate the completion of the parking management plan. That's the action to include consideration of these things. Director Walsh wanted to comment. Shaun Walsh 01:52:41.586
Yes, and so the parking management plan includes a very basic premise of parking management, which includes times, 15 minutes, 2 hours, as well as the ability to save a car park, so this is a learning base. can include consideration of dynamic parking, and we use the dynamic parking word very specifically because paid parking is almost like old hat, because the new term is dynamic parking, because dynamic parking using technology means that sometimes a year you can have free parking, other times a year you can actually pay. This has been the subject of all the workshops with the councillors and we've got further workshop sharing with the councillors to take the data we have into the next stages. Brian Stockwell 01:53:36.745
Thank you. I wanted to speak to you, but I can't support it because basically they're saying we only want things in the plan that we've already decided. It's a really perverse way to look at planning. Planning is setting out what you want to do and what you want to keep from doing that. That's what this is all about. And if you look at the words in the action, this only relates to the actions. All those actions are already framed accordingly. We've just heard the one about accelerating the parking management plan, trial the use of dedicated... lanes, explore incentivisation of smart travel charges. So the wording in the actions are really clear that we further things down. To say something, council decision following received evidence analysis, it's like saying ensure that we follow a normal process. We don't need an amendment. Others wish to talk? Can I just talk to it? Just to clarify that we're talking about the draft three-year implementation plan. Under respecting community, which looks at the improvement in infrastructure and transport solutions, it does give us a possible funding range up there and gives us the traffic rights accordingly, which which indicates indicates to me that it clearly signifies what's been allocated funding or not. I'm just wondering, is that what you're trying to answer? Like, to give clarity around this document? From is a draft which we're not endorsing. So this adoption, this one, once again, would only relate to the... Not that particular document is a draft for not endorsement. So this... Margaret Gatt 01:55:29.509
So we're looking at... Brian Stockwell 01:55:40.198
So the actions are that the ones that are numbered 1.32, 1.33, 1.34, Subtitles I'm not overly sure with the question. I'm not looking at the draft report. I'm at the destination management plan. That's where it's referred to with the different trials and committing us to things that I have not had the workshop on yet. So I'm not prepared to make decisions without being fully across it. Whilst staff may be across it, I am not. Margaret Gatt 01:56:41.397
You for your clarification. Thank you. Brian Stockwell 01:56:46.480
Okay, others willing to talk? Nicola Wilson 01:56:48.240
Yeah, I'll talk. I'll support it. Although my concern goes broader than the actions, and I've already raised those concerns on things like strategies, the terminology used for strategies, actions, tasks, outputs, outcomes, impacts, measures all being quite modelled in this framework. And so then we do get into, as Councillor into, as Councillor Wegener said, some language that's future related but past tense because it's already been achieved and I am concerned about that because although you can say it's something that we are aspiring towards. is weak? Like those decisions haven't been made yet by us as decision makers. So I'll support it and yeah I think my concerns go beyond that too and was also identified by the peer review at one of them as well. So just which is why I wanted extra time for that to be reviewed. Brian Stockwell 01:57:43.815
Okay, Councillor Lorentson. Amelia Lorentson 01:57:46.774
There were a lot of questions asked during the survey consultation process in terms of the broadness of some of the questions and for example whether we allow open recreation space to be used for car parks. Whether it's in terms of a visitor charge, congestion tax, I you know when I read the amendment in front of me I don't look for reasons not to support it. I look for reasons to support it because I understand the intent of the councillor in front of us and to me it provides transparency and clarity for the community. I look for reasons not to support it. I look for reasons to support it because I understand the intent of the councillor in front of us and to me it provides transparency and clarity for the community. It's basically saying we're going to any implied automatic implementation, that any implementation will undergo further analysis and due diligence. So to me, go back to the intent which is with Councillor is to ensure that the community spoken and are concerned with some of the the questions that were asked during the survey and consultation process, that we don't automatically implement a decision without further investigation because the DMP says 75% of people supported a visitor information. Say for instance congestion tax. It requires further analysis so for those reasons I think this is to ensure that our community and their concerns are addressed so I'm happy to support and thank Councillor for the amendment. Frank Wilkie 01:59:40.800
Just a question. This is actually saying that actions be removed. Margaret Gatt 01:59:53.300
Actions that pre-empt decisions. Frank Wilkie 01:59:55.320
So that could be a lot of actions that pre-empt, that are part of the plan, be removed from the plan. Jessica Phillips 02:00:03.120
Anything that we don't have a decision on. Brian Stockwell 02:00:13.840
Anyone else wish to talk? Yes, quickly around I think whenever there's been consultation with something like this it's hard not to get the results that we got the video was beautiful we got so much feedback there was you know along the way my issue is always that back to the community that aren't deep diving and reading through rigorously through reports is that they through reports is that they will of course answer a certain way when they don't know what the unintended consequence to their rates or to their future lifestyle here is and I can't confidently say that either without knowing and my whole life has been based on making decisions that have been informed by evidence before I've never put someone before the without evidence it just wouldn't work so I've always looked for data and feasibility and all of those things that align to give me a really objective decision and so again the intention is around making sure that we don't make decisions without without strategy and policy to support a plan okay I put the amendment those in favour that's Councillor Wilson, Lorentson and Phillips as I suppose it's Councillor Wilkie, Finzel, Wegener and Stockwell. It's now 2:32. Councillors will have a 10 minute break. Okay, welcome back councillors. We, before we leave, we suggest that council close my work on an alternative sort of wording to her motion regarding Monitoring and Evaluation Framework and we will deal with that in the near future. If you want to read it out and the words can catch up. Jessica Phillips 02:14:12.960
Any action or measure. Just in that about this though. Amendment heading in the final column of the monitoring and evaluation framework to read potential measures. Brian Stockwell 02:14:32.640
I'm happy to second that. Amelia Lorentson 02:14:35.600
Happy to second. Brian Stockwell 02:14:48.460
This came to the building of the Hensworth Film Museum. Margaret Gatt 02:14:53.240
So, what is this? Frank Wilkie 02:14:54.460
I don't know how spooky this is. Margaret Gatt 02:15:00.400
Um, is this an adjutant's AP, or? It would be. Yeah. Brian Stockwell 02:15:09.620
And it relates to, appendix two, page four, yeah. So, you could just tell me. Yes. That's it. So, that's just saying that all those dot points in grey on page 48 are just highlights as potential measures to avoid or concern the public. Oh, sorry. Margaret Gatt 02:15:53.880
Cancel it, Phil, if you get in the way of that. Brian Stockwell 02:15:55.480
That's okay. So, Councillor Finzel, you'll see that Councillor has moved that amendment as discussed. Margaret Gatt 02:16:22.500
Thank you. Brian Stockwell 02:16:24.100
And he's about to talk to her. Jessica Phillips 02:16:25.880
I'll keep it really brief. I think that in the end, appendix where it talks about does seem to lock us in to certain decisions and we've just reframed it to say potential measures rather than committing us to that's how the Measured. I don't really need to go into it in detail, I don't think. Brian Stockwell 02:17:00.480
Others wish to talk about the motion? The amendment, sorry. Nicola Wilson 02:17:07.460
I don't think it really goes far enough to alleviate my concerns, but I'll support it. Tom Wegener 02:17:20.980
I'll support it, because now that I see it, I wouldn't want to see that the press say to quote the outputs that Smart Parking System implemented, blah blah, as something that's already happened and it's set in stone and being taken set in stone and being taken well actually out of context. Brian Stockwell 02:17:56.447
It becomes part of the motion. So, does anyone else wish to talk to us and state their motion? I have some amendments, thank you. Councillor Lorentson, do you have the floor? I might start with this one, the DMP Delivery Risk Register. Be established and included in the terms of reference for the Destination Stewardship Council and Reported to Council annually as part of the annual review. The Register will outline delivery risk, dependencies, resource constraints and mitigation strategies. Do we have a seconder for that? Amelia Lorentson 02:18:44.749
I'll give you a second. I'll just note that the delivery of the DMP is subject to multiple risk and we've discussed this around the table today. Fundings are risk, staffing, external dependencies and stakeholder support. At the moment there's a risk section the report but it's actually not included as part of the DMP so my amendment just ensures that the DMP also develops a comprehensive risk management strategy. And to have it reported regularly or annually will help improve transparency and also enable early intervention if there's any implementation challenges. Brian Stockwell 02:19:53.320
Yeah, happy to talk. Thank you Councillor Lorentson for bringing this forward. I always support anything that can identify risks and help close those gaps so I think in in good governance and looking forward to the future to ensure that everything we do, you know, has an extra set of frameworks around it to eliminate as best as we can the risk, I fully support that. I think it can only benefit where we're heading. I think anything around frameworks around risk, potential things happening, whether that's economic or social, I think it's really important. important that as we give people a voice in this document that we put every way possible to ensure that the outcomes keep everyone safe. So I will support this. Thank you. Jessica Phillips 02:20:49.703
I'll speak to it. Thank you, Councillor Lorentson. I think the bit that I like the most is reporting back to us annually with a review when we look at the 10-year plan and thank you for looking at, you know, broader past our term and into the future. I think it's really important that there is a formal review process. is a formal review process of anything that we do. So, yeah, happy to support, especially Frank Wilkie 02:21:21.580
If you're interested. Question, does this imply that the funding for this is going to be one of the things we tick off on as we lead into the next budget process? I personally like to see the Destination Stewardship Council established. Established? Is that implied in this amendment is my question. Amelia Lorentson 02:21:54.200
Question to me I had sought advice and was told that the intention was that a risk register will be included as part of the Terms of Reference for the Destination Stewardship Council so that's why it was included before then I hadn't had that before then I hadn't had that included does it imply that I would say It's part of the annual review. Is it implied? I might throw that question to the Director of Environment, Kim Rawlings. Thank you. Kim Rawlings 02:22:36.060
Yeah, sure. Yeah, Councillor Lorentson did seek some comment from me on this, and what I advised is that subject to the adoption in the advised is that subject to the adoption in the DMP, a first priority is intended to develop the terms of reference for the Destination Stewardship Council, who are intended to play an integral role in the DMP's success. The proposed purpose, membership structure and recruitment process for the Destination Stewardship Council will be presented...Council for endorsement prior to its establishment. Frank Wilkie 02:23:03.473
Okay. It doesn't set a time frame? Kim Rawlings 02:23:05.753
No, it just says that it's an action, intention, proposed, still subject to comprehensive reference and recruitment process which has to come to Council. Amelia Lorentson 02:23:17.756
Sorry, question two. Sorry, there was a second part to that related specifically to risk. Do you want me to comment on that? Thank you. Yeah, sorry Councillor Lorentson. Then it also yes I suggest this be done annually and as part of the annual review and reporting on the draft implementation plan as stated in the Council report. A DMP risk register informed by risks identified in the risk opportunity of the Council report is also intended to be part of the terms of reference for the Just Nations Stewardship Council. This register could also include additional risks identified by the Stewardship Council as part of their ongoing government's responsibilities. Tom Wegener 02:24:06.911
Again, you know redundancy is this redundant because we will be discussing that terms of restaurant reference and so forth for the Destination Stewardship Council. So is this the time to address the risk register or is it when we're actually doing it? Kim Rawlings 02:24:29.367
The intention is that you will, in terms of reference, which would consider the purpose of the Destination Stewardship Council, its remit, the governance, the risk, all of those things are yet to come to Council, that if they are subject endorsement of the DMP, which has an action in it, to explore establishment of the Destination Stewardship Council. Part of that process would be to develop terms of reference and bring that to Council for consideration. Tom Wegener 02:25:00.890
I'll speak to it. It just place to vote on this now. Brian Stockwell 02:25:06.893
So, I'll speak to it. Council also reminded me of the peer review on this particular issue just over the break and I've looked it up since and it was identified by one of the peer reviewers. And I think it's quite reasonable to just edit this and I'll admit that the director's already stated that she thinks it is something that would be happening anyway but if it's, if peer reviewers say, "Look, Robert, did you care? " This is how we're addressing it. at that stage and I think that's the right stage for that. Others wish to talk? Councillor Lorentson moves to close. I'll put the motion to all those in favour. That's Councillor Wilson, Wilkie, Finzel, Lorentson, Phillips and Stockwell and... Okay, do we have anything else? Councillor Lorentson? Amelia Lorentson 02:26:04.507
I have an amendment that I'd like to test that an amendment that I'd like to test that any action likely to materially affect local business activity. the words. So that any action likely to materially affect local business activity or the amenity of nearby residents, including measures such as paid parking, congestion charging, one-way corridor trials or precinct closures, be subject to meaningful engagement with affected sectors and communities prior to It was circulated, I just added residential amenity. Okay, that's amendment three in what you're saying? I've just tweaked the wording. Brian Stockwell 02:27:19.860
Okay, so the wording has been tweaked. So moved, Councillor Finzel, seconded, Councillor, and Councillor Finzel, you have the floor. Amelia Lorentson 02:27:36.338
No, you excluded some of the extra wording, Cathy. Can I change that, that any action likely to materially affect local business activity or the amenity of nearby residents? That's the inclusion levy. Resilience. So I've just used as example some of the proposed some of the proposed actions in the plan such as paid parking, congestion charging, one-way corridor trials, precinct closures. I think it's really important that we articulate that there will be a requirement for There will be a requirement for further consultation, understanding that some of these actions have the potential to significantly impact not just the local businesses but the residents that So I think a requirement that I think a requirement that we target some sort of engagement to those that are potentially impacted that will ensure that unintended economic consequences and for those residents living nearby, access consequences are identified early and that decisions... again informed by evidence consultation and understanding of local business realities and residential and residents rights to... Jessica Phillips 02:29:48.420
I'll speak to it to support just how much I want local businesses to be included in this. I really am... I really want to make sure that... I just... When you understand how a small business operates and the extra layers of what they have to do currently, it's trying to find staffing and just... just, you know, the economic pressures that they're going through and this town that I grew up in is literally based on small businesses and family-run businesses and if they are businesses and if they are going to be materially affected in any way by a decision we make, whether I would think unintentionally, but they... they're so busy doing their own work, I just don't think they would have had the time to read and go through this and maybe there's some provider that we have a chamber or someone, you know, there's been submissions, but... There's been submissions, but at the level that I would like to make sure we're really hearing from, we're going to have to go to them and really understand the true effects that they are experiencing, anecdotally, which I never like. on, but I hear that it's some tough times out there. So if there's any way that we can make sure that we protect someone that's income doesn't hit their fortnightly wage on a Tuesday, like most government workers, these businesses rely on trade and and hard. I brought in a small business and let me tell you it was not an easy ride for them at all. So anything we can do, you know, Tom you've had your own small business, we've got to make sure they are included in anything that could unintentionally make their life any harder, otherwise it will contribute to business fall overs and I can't risk that if we can make can't risk that if we can make sure we protect them then I would jump up and say let's do whatever we can. Frank Wilkie 02:32:14.249
It's standard practice for this council if they're doing any works that potentially materially affect local businesses, the amenity of residents. This is standard practice for the council. I guess the upgrade to Sunshine Beach Road and this junction is one of the main, some of the biggest bits of work that we've undertaken. The businesses were made well aware of what was going to happen there. Of course we will subject, there will be engagement with effective sectors before implementation for any of this. I guess we're moving into one of the spaces now with these amendments that are perceived to be redundant. I don't know whether people that are really busy with their businesses will have the time to read council reports, but if it helps. With that, to make explicit an understanding of what is standard practice for this council. Karen Finzel 02:33:31.860
Yeah look I think you know overall we do engage the community before we do anything significant but in terms of supporting this amendment to provide a surety for the you know are out there slogging away every day while we're in here having the benefit of all the workshops and time to read the reports and do all that. I'm happy to support that. I think the act of engaging residents voice is you know activism in itself. It's really important that we bring the voice of our community along to do our decision-making I think we're talking about collaborative vision for a future for generations to for a future for generations to come I think it's important that every opportunity that we have to give a surety to our residents that we're providing a shared voice around a shared voice around the table is a foundation of equity, so I'm happy to support this. I think it'll give assurance to our business people who are out there, including our families who, you know, travel the Shire daily, that we're taking into consideration the impacts of measures and decisions we make, and that their voice does matter. So I will support this amendment. Nicola Wilson 02:34:46.184
The intention and definitely looking after our local businesses and economy, but I do have a little bit of a concern about the wording. could sound like we're going to engage but then implement anyway. Like it says subject to engagement with affected sectors before implementation. Does that engagement actually lead to a decision on whether or not to implement? Would that Brian Stockwell 02:35:32.840
Good morning. Is that a question you're asking? Yeah, I'm not going to ask a substantive question to start, and it may be mainly in Director Walsh's area. I'm looking at all those items listed. They're all They're all ones that would require a decision of council. So if that amendment was changed to before a determined by council, would that be...would that would that resolve your issue and are you happy with that? Amelia Lorentson 02:36:06.591
Yep, as long as it gets across the line, I think the... everyone understands the intent of the amendment. If tweaking of words gets it across the line, I'm happy for the changes. So, all councillors, would you be happy to leave the nation this before...? Frank Wilkie 02:36:21.971
Council decision. Brian Stockwell 02:36:23.131
Before a council decision. Through the Chair, for continuity, we have to allow councillors to fall before we add potential. This is just wording that doesn't change the intent, not changing the motion, it's just a grammatical change to make it clear what's intent. Amelia Lorentson 02:36:43.958
Just get rid of the implementation, so before the decision. Brian Stockwell 02:36:56.240
And I'll support it as, I don't know what Tom's going to vote for, it is basically a restatement of how we operate, and it will be an interesting Because yes, we have to, those most impacted, you know, we probably, there'll be staff members doing the Pacing Street Association every day of the week. We have, you know, there's not going to be a question of whether they're engaged. I'm not going to say that... that everyone's going to be 100% in support of it, because any change is going to raise concerns and support. We had a briefing many years ago by the Chair of the Car Park Association of Chair of the Car Park Association of Australia and he said if you want to maximise return to your local businesses, change all the parking in front of your main street to one hour slots, go away for three months. He was up for three months leaving the capos and coming back and saying how much extra turn over are they getting to the business, but if you go to the Haytham street and say we're going to change it to one hour, I bet you get a lot of feedback saying don't do it. So it is an issue but you do have to do this. it's both broader consultation like we have now at the strategic level or when you get down to the place specific actions, you need to make sure that there's special effort taken to include the thoughts and desires of those who are going to be most impacted. Tom Wegener 02:38:24.300
For staff, when saying the word "engagement, " is that consistent, totally consistent with our standard procedure for these types of changes or things that we're going to do? So the word, by saying "engagement, " isn't going to confuse people? Kim Rawlings 02:38:44.081
No, I think that's completely consistent. Tom Wegener 02:38:46.961
So it's a bit redundant, but I'll support it this time. Brian Stockwell 02:38:54.307
Any other people want to talk? Amelia Lorentson 02:38:58.967
I'll just quickly, yeah, I think it needs to be clearly articulated, and I also think it's really important that we give respect to our small businesses. They're mum and dads, they're our neighbours, they're people sitting around in this room. The destination management plan is going to have an impact on their livelihoods. So I think, you know, as many ways as we can, we need to ensure, whether it's via amendments policy, that any decisions we make is not going to detrimentally impact on their livelihoods. So again, call it redundant, I think it's totally... it's too critical not to pull out and make clear. Brian Stockwell 02:39:55.240
Okay, I put the amendment. Those in favour? That's unanimous. That now becomes part of the substantive motion of Councillor Wilson. Nicola Wilson 02:40:18.060
Commend item C to read, not take attachment to into consideration until that has been reviewed by an appropriate expert in co-development for relevant actions that can be reliably measured and reported on. Frank Wilkie 02:40:32.880
Question, is that too similar to the alternative? Brian Stockwell 02:40:39.587
So, attachment to is the draft, this is about the draft implementation plan. It will be defined with input from partners for the review and update on the annual basis of the informed occupancy budget. So, I'm just thinking whether it changes, whether it is an amendment, whether it's saying the same thing. The amended part of it is... Yeah, I'll accept amendment because it talks about a peer review that isn't mentioned in the policy at the moment. Nicola Wilson 02:41:39.560
Thank you. I mentioned before my concern that this part of the plan seems to have been quite challenging throughout the process and we have talked about many times in workshops and so maybe it's time to bring in someone else that's independent of the whole process to be able to do another review. think we need to go further than just refining this document and to make sure it's a really, really strong framework that we're going to be able to report on. In some of the workshops along the way, I've given feedback on KPIs. I know now we don't even have KPIs, we just have measures. And I've offered a double along the way, which has been accepted, but that's in the context of many years of experience in teaching business performance and strategy at a postgraduate level, as well as developing KPIs and school cards in large listed companies such as Caltex. Some of my feedback has been as simple as, "That's a great idea, but how would you measure its success? " yes, we can measure the number of people on the bus, but that doesn't actually tell us if there are fewer cars on the road, and has that actually eased congestion, which is a part of the action, so we've had these many times over, and most of those measures didn't really change, despite the alternate suggestions. Our feedback at workshops is based on seeing parts of documents on the projected screens, and we didn't see a fallback until the 4th of December. there were peer reviews as well over that time, and I just think there hasn't been time yet for all of that feedback to be brought together to improve this document to, as I said, I don't think refine what is really relevant. There's a lot of mixed terminology between tasks, measures, outputs, outcomes, impacts. It's still lacking in clean targets and KPI's and measures that are directly relevant to the actions. So, I think at this point we'll just keep going round in circles with the same, I don't know how many departments or organisations have been involved so far, but just lots of different people's reviews. might not get us to where we need to be. Frank Wilkie 02:44:14.880
How many independent experts did we get to peer review this already? Kim Rawlings 02:44:20.920
We had two independent peer reviewers. Nicola Wilson 02:44:31.535
It was at least one of those peer reviews that said very similar things in terms of the terminology around measures and things and some other structural things. Karen Finzel 02:44:51.225
Just through the Chair, for clarification, I thought three people provided peer review, not two. Margaret Gatt 02:44:59.284
One, wasn't it? Kim Rawlings 02:45:00.504
Three. No, two in the peer reviews, and then councillors were all provided the document and provided their input, and review. Councillors were all provided the document at the same time. Brian Stockwell 02:45:13.739
As councillor, I think what we're going to do is councillor, councillor Wilson did have the honourable invitation to, I think it's funny to stop there, did he use that one? Margaret Gatt 02:45:22.719
No, I gave it to him. Yeah, that's correct. Frank Wilkie 02:45:30.020
Just to clarify, what is the process for having all these measures and actions refined? If this motion is ratified today, there is a process for ratified today. There is a process for all of this to be refined and improved upon. Could you clarify what that is? Kim Rawlings 02:45:50.155
Yes, that's why the draft implementation plan is provided as a noting for Council. Not an endorsing, because there is a process over the coming months to work with stakeholders, potential organisations that might share responsibility and refine, review update all of those aspects of the implementation plan, so that it can inform business cases, project scopes, submissions to budget. Frank Wilkie 02:46:24.760
And that would involve taking on board the best advice from the Yes, some of that advice has already been taken on board and what's in front of you reflects that advice. Some of it absolutely will continue to influence the implementation plan. There's also proposal to establish the Destination Stewardship Council and it clearly says that if that council is established that they should also have oversight and opportunity to review, import, refine, align both the monitoring and evaluation framework and the implementation plan. And would there still be room for any councillors who wanted to have input into refining the measures and actions to do so as part of that process? Margaret Gatt 02:47:12.734
Yes, absolutely. Will it come back to Councillor Kim Rawlings 02:47:16.974
Anderson? It can come back to Councillor Lorentson if that's what council would like. Brian Stockwell 02:47:22.894
So, question, I'm just looking specifically at the. The, just not taking the plan into account, into consideration of the planning draft plan, that doesn't give any indication of not supporting what's proposed for year one that's coming to the proposed for year one is coming to the budget. Would you be happy with that, that you could still suggest what you think this one looks like now that you can't take any of that into account? Kim Rawlings 02:47:59.770
Maybe Councillor Wilson should clarify, but that's how I would rate it. we don't, that it's not, attachment to the draft implementation plan is not taken into account at this point until separate process. So, I don't know, Councillor Wilson might be better to answer that. Brian Stockwell 02:48:19.836
Just take this, if that's unclear, if it's an issue, and the timeline for budget submissions for doing the first stage of actions or targets, when do Margaret Gatt 02:48:42.067
Thank you through the Chair. Our normal budget process will start end of January, early February next year. Frank Wilkie 02:48:54.660
Just to clarify what we've heard, I really respect Councillor Wilson's desire to get these documents perfect and right. I'm speaking please. Refine them to a standard that she's happy with. This implies another delay. We can't even take this implies another delay. We can't even take these documents into consideration until the reviews by another independent expert has occurred. We've already had two independent experts peer review the documents. We do have a budget process. do have a budget process looming that would exclude consideration of any of these actions in here for the upcoming budget process and delay the implementation of some of these key actions. So for those reasons... Although respecting the desire to have a document that all councillors can be happy with, there is a process going forward that will see this document refined, reviewed and sharpened that we can all have input into anyway. The important thing is we keep moving forward. I'm not prepared to entertain any more delays. We can keep this thing moving forward and still refine and get it to a state where more people are happy with every aspect of it as we move forward. Jessica Phillips 02:50:32.500
I don't think we can afford not to do it given that if it comes to budget I would like this to absolutely be done prior to... That's all I've got to say because it's a no-brainer for me, so thank you. Talking about budgets, what, like, the cost of the appropriate expert to be be engaged engaged and, and, you know, know, does does that that have have to go through a budget process to allocate funding for more co-development actions? So that would have to go through, what, the budget process? Do we know the cost? Larry Sengstock 02:51:17.517
Potentially, I honestly don't know what that would cost, but I think it would be called raising costs, and potentially we'd have to go through a budget, versus we don't have money. We don't have a budget. I mean, it's this sort of stuff, but, you know, it's something that would take some time, but we'd have to go out to market for it as well, so. So, from a time perspective, I mean, once we understand what the cost is, whether we can enjoy it, or whether we need to go budget time for it, is who we need to be looking at. Margaret Gatt 02:51:57.542
So, that's with the Chair, would that be an action through procurement to engage with the appropriate Larry Sengstock 02:52:02.911
No, it expert? Would be the, we would write the proposal and then procurement would be part of that, that's essentially it. That's better than not doing this. I can see that, but you can do it, again we can do it entirely. Amelia Lorentson 02:52:20.444
I'll speak to it. I keep talking and I spoke about it with the alternate motion that we have to have to get the foundations right. And I think, you know, we use the word delay, delay, delay. It's not delay. We're just setting the plan up for success and getting it right. So I agree. don't think the draft lacks sufficient implementation detail, the measures of success, the timeframes, prioritisation, accountability. accountability. delivery. I think we need, I just think we need some expert input. Again, with the sole purpose of setting it up for success, not delaying it. So I'm happy to support the amendment in front of us. Tom Wegener 02:53:36.040
Okay, so from what I understand, I'm understanding, this is a talk, not a question. This is, this is the plan. This is, you know, the draft. So, going back to the Pirates of the Caribbean analogy, this is the code, and these are guidelines. So, did this, does it need to be did this, does it need to be set? When it comes to having an expert, we're all experts, in my opinion. I mean, this is, there's such a wide field that I can't actually, we would never agree upon an expert if you had seven experts in a room and you'd have seven different opinions. So, I, I, I'm confident that as elected members of society, we each have a certain standing, certain, you know, quality, certain experiences that can really help us understand this. I don't, I wouldn't put much faith in an expert's opinion on this. know, further than that, because we've already had heaps, and we are actually the experts, in my opinion. So, I won't vote the motion. I think we should just get on with the business. Waiting for another expert is a delay that I don't think is worth pursuing. Brian Stockwell 02:54:57.300
Whether you support this or not really boils down to the decision on, one, whether you're confident that that draft can be refined to a point where it's a useful document to guide action, and two, whether you're prepared either to have a very rough process towards the end of the budget or whether you want actions coming to us as part of the normal process of budget adoption so that we can look at the project outline. you want to go into detail of checking whether that project outline has got reasonable action and has got measures there at that level, that token for which it stands for, because that's really where the rubber hits the road. where staff have said, I'm taking priority XYZ, we said we wanted to do it in the first year, this is what we did, this is just going to do it, this is how much it costs, this is what we want to achieve, whatever the budget outline is, and that gives us the you just want to get to that level, noting that we as councils tend to have a whole host of stuff that have that whole making sure it makes sense, leading to our decisions. I actually think this would significantly slow down the implementation of the plan and I think it would be just another one of those nice to do's that would frustrate Nice to do's, that would frustrate our community, it's, to me, the other part of it is it's not adding on to see, it's actually taking away, you're trying to interpret it as a negative, it's taking away the commitment to getting input from our partners, supporting organisations, rather than just go to an independent expert, and some independent experts are well connected with the community and understand it, but without that, in item C, I think it's a backwards step. Anyone else who hasn't thought? Councillor Finzel? Karen Finzel 02:57:07.940
Yeah, I think, you know, it says in the report we've got Avalon in support, 75% of all respondents to consultation with the draft DMP, across all age groups and geographical locations. The message was clear, to build on it, our community has been calling for action. The cost of, you know, trying to, at this late stage, engage with co-development, I think we've substantially to the point we were at. We have engaged our community. We've eliminated our citizens' contribution. They've brought their expertise, their skills, their knowledge, their voice and their lived experience. I think we do have to I think we do have to come to bold action. I think we need to progress this forward. It may not be, you know, exactly as perhaps an appropriate expert might drill down to, but again, I think we've had the our people in the Shire, people around the tables, staff. We've had engagement across the business sector. We've had engagement, you know, from a broad range of people in our community. I think the DMP aims I think the DMP aims to identify actions. I think there's opportunity as we progress this forward for Council to still make decisions if we think that something's... not aligning or not ringing true or it needs an amendment or we need to go back to community, I think there's always that option for us to make those changes I think we need to facilitate change and take leadership and bring our respected voice of our community along with us on the journey, so I'm satisfied that that collective expertise has been noted and I won't be supporting the adoption of this amendment into item C. I think I think it is a step backwards. I think I'm I'm sure there's enough opportunity. think I'm I'm assured there's enough opportunities, councillors around the table and our engagement with our well-informed community to give good representation and good governance with the matters raised. Nicola Wilson 02:59:50.281
A few things from the discussion around the room. I don't like being explorative, I'm not looking for perfection, I actually said that. And I don't think there's ever a version that is right, so I'm not looking for that either. And councillors need to be conscious of making statements with subjective language. Someone might think it's right, someone might think it's good, someone else might not, so you can't say it's the right plan or a good plan. Four or six weeks ago we had a discussion as councillors I asked them that this review be taken. Everyone agreed. We asked for it. The peer reviews did not focus on this implementation plan, they basically stayed up in their feedback. asked for hasn't happened and I am not seeking to delay the point of delaying. I'm asking that this rushed process that has happened in the last few weeks and everybody trying to get this to meet the deadline, arbitrary deadline really, has meant that this hasn't been properly reviewed. I don't think we should be making budget decisions on an implementation plan that isn't really finished or isn't a point of just fine-tuning. There's still a fair bit of work to be done on this and it's really important. I'm not going to say we've met the deadline so let's just take whatever we've got. It's not good enough to say it's not perfect but whatever, we've met the deadline now. So I'm just not accepting that anymore. Yeah, that's Brian Stockwell 03:01:32.356
Okay, I've put the amendment those in favour. That's Councillor Wilson, Lorentson and Phillips. Those opposed, that's Councillor Wilkie, Finzel, Wegener and Stockwell. The motion failed. The amendment fails. Another amendment by Councillor Phillips. Jessica Phillips 03:01:49.075
And it's going to be amendment 4, Cathy, and I'm just going to add some wording at the start to relate to attachment 2 because I realise that I haven't done that specifically. Yep, so in attachment to actions that fall outside local government responsibility must be reframed as advocacy items only with no implied operational commitments. Yep, so in attachment 2. Brian Stockwell 03:02:23.540
So attachment to being the draft. The reason being is that that suggests we're endorsing Action 2. There's a process outlined in Action 2 about it and you're saying you're treating it as if it's amended, you haven't given specific guidance as to when or where that particular action is to take place. could be a form of words. That, if I was to help you, would say... In the review of the draft action plan... What's it called? Frank Wilkie 03:03:31.900
Draft Implementation Plan. Brian Stockwell 03:03:33.140
Draft Implementation Plan, yeah. Margaret Gatt 03:03:43.280
Get an attachment to it in the review of the draft. Brian Stockwell 03:03:47.560
In the review of the draft... It's really sure that it's the trigger now. To rewrite, or to write actions, I'm sorry, there might be, write actions that fall outside the local government... Oh, maybe it said that... that actions... Take out the word "write" and request... Margaret Gatt 03:04:20.822
Actions to... Brian Stockwell 03:04:23.682
Is it a separate advocacy strategy? Nicola Wilson 03:04:26.542
Pardon? Is it a separate advocacy strategy that comes up rather than bringing in implementation? Jessica Phillips 03:04:30.922
Yeah. I wish I could just speak I wish I could just speak to it and then I can re-fix the words. Brian Stockwell 03:04:36.544
I think that works. If you're happy with that. Because we're not adopting it, we can't change it. But we can request staff to consider it. Jessica Phillips 03:04:47.052
But if they've written it, it's more there's some that don't and some that don't. So what I'm hoping is to clarify. So it almost sits separately in the implementation about what state and what's our local responsibility. Brian Stockwell 03:05:02.292
And instead of words, yeah, that's right. Thank you very much. Are you happy with that, your time, with your initial decision? Jessica Phillips 03:05:21.040
I don't like the word 'consider' because they have considered it. It's the way that it's blurred. Frank Wilkie 03:05:32.502
Can we take this offline, Mr Chair, in the next break and move on to amendments? We've received 16 amendments. well ahead of time that would be well-formed? Jessica Phillips 03:05:42.056
I did submit this on Friday as well. Brian Stockwell 03:05:45.096
Yeah, so we might have to work with staff because we can't say something in a draft that might be enough to consider the draft. Frank Wilkie 03:05:56.820
And there are operational commitments for advocacy as well. It's staff time. Margaret Gatt 03:06:02.580
Is it staff being requested to read foreign communications and all that stuff? Brian Stockwell 03:06:09.160
Yes. Margaret Gatt 03:06:09.912
Staff being requested to reframe actions thank you. Nicola Wilson 03:06:10.752
Being requested to reframe actions that fall outside local government responsibility. So just moving reframes to take up as well? Frank Wilkie 03:06:22.972
So would that exclude actions where council partners with government agencies? Recognizers? I'm asking a question. Brian Stockwell 03:06:38.500
Would it exclude, that's what I've just done, would government? it exclude actions where council partners No. But it's the staff being requested to refrain from actions that fall outside of our public responsibility as advocacy items only, whereas councils often partner with government. Jessica Phillips 03:06:58.960
That will become clearer when there's the separation between what's our remit and what's our... when we partner, when we advocate. So there's no... Amelia Lorentson 03:07:12.760
Can I, So can I, through the chair, and I'm happy for you to move this, Jess, I've got something similar that may work, that the DMP be amended to include the development of a council advocacy and partnership strategy to support the implementation of the plan. So I don't know if that's the intent. more around the DMP isn't it, not the implementation, but because of that, that will, in fear, that will actually, that will happen then with yours. So maybe just move on with mine. Jessica Phillips 03:07:54.034
Can I take that off for a second? Amelia Lorentson 03:08:08.600
I'll have a few more to test. That the DMP be amended, try this one, the DMP be amended to include a For the economic management of the visitor economy supported by defined strategies, actions and measurable outcomes. Experts and it was just a note saying that how I understood it that the plan lacked a framework or a clear objective of strategy for actively managing and supporting managing and supporting our local economy so this basically the amendment allows us to have a very clear objective that could be think the peer review said it should be positioned under the tourism for good principle and I just think again you know the plan needs to be made clear the importance of tourism to the local economy and it needs economy and it needs to also include a clear objective strategy for actively managing it. Frank Wilkie 03:10:20.140
Just a question of staff. Is this management of the economic management of the visitor economy part of the economic development strategy? Is there a reference to that? Is there more? Margaret Gatt 03:10:35.412
The only thing that is in the economic development strategy is the development of a DMP and our mandate goes across all sectors of the economy and in fact it's about building resilience of the economy and minimising our reliance. Kim Rawlings 03:10:59.380
What I will just add to that, what I will say is that, um, right throughout the DMP it talks about the significance of the economy and the thriving economy and how that's fundamental and how we've grown up on tourism and we've the value of tourism and, you know, so it's inherent, it's a core tenet of the DMP, um, that the visitor economy is supported. Amelia Lorentson 03:11:34.940
I think from, again, what I understood from the peer review that, um, there needs to be, okay, incorrectly or wrong, how I interpreted it, um, that there needed to be more defaulted strategies, more defined actions. more measurable outcomes, that it wasn't detailed enough, um, as it stood. It's, that was, have I understood that correctly? Kim Rawlings 03:12:00.194
Yeah, one, one of the peer reviewers did, did, um, suggest amongst a range of great valuable insights. to, um, be more specific. Tom Wegener 03:12:10.948
I think that the GMP is the clear economic management, because our economy is so largely based on our environment and our pristine environment. Our, our tourism is based on, um, how we manage the environment. It's trying to split sliver off the visitor economy as a distinct thing is, is pretty meaningless. When it, the management of the visitor economy is whole DMP is all about. There is no micromanagement of that. It doesn't make sense. And it's supported by strategies, actions, and measurable outcomes. With? With my business, with many businesses, people come from all over the place to visit and buy the products because of the brand and the brand management. For example, the Land and Sea Brewery, when they started the distillery, they made Noosa Gin, and Noosa Gin became on various airlines and just went ballistic because the name Noosa Gin ended up all on it. And so, what sort of economists would see that coming? I think that it's all so linked up that that's what the DMP is, management of the visitor economy. I don't see it. You can't microcosm that. You can't sliver it off. Brian Stockwell 03:13:58.040
78% Of our respondents thought that we did identify a clear objective for economic management when they looked at the vision for the destination management plan, which is a way of life and travel that respects community, actively protects the environment and nurtures a thriving local economy. As the director mentioned, the destination management strategy is there to achieve the long-term sustainability and resilience without this sort of funding. It's taking the step of actively setting out a course of action that is different by nature. It is not about the traditional destination marketing, about we will try and get X, Y, Z, additional visitors, and we'll try and... The role of the destination The role of the destination management organisation may get into much specifics, but the vast array of actions in here is all about not just getting the right balance between the visitor economy and the local desire for amenity, it's about how we change what we do to boost the brand. We know that the research on the Noosa brand as in the academy has a significant multiplier compared to the national average getting out of place in that particular research that by following what we're doing here in the destination management plan. doing here in the destination management plan, we're probably going to increase the multiplier for all businesses and, you know, while it's quite significant for the logical hospitality and accommodation and the flow through to the retail, that if we get this right, it means people... get this right, it means people in many business environments will be benefiting from the fact that having new operation enterprise in our biosphere adds value, that it's a locator down the road. I don't know if there's any places, but if you're very much cities by the sea, you wouldn't care. So on that hand, I don't think the amendment is necessary. Councillor Finzel. Margaret Gatt 03:16:18.584
I just have a question. I'm just wondering about when we, it's very, like a clear objective. How are we going to determine a clear objective when I feel that's already included in the whole of everything we've read? Brian Stockwell 03:16:38.379
It's an issue with the structure of the amendment. We don't have objectives in the amendment, but as far as it's supposed to pass, do you think there's sufficient in the amendment to guide what people do? Yeah, to guide an objective that can be so simply drawn into a paragraph? We have goals, principles, goals, strategies, actions. Amelia Lorentson 03:16:59.961
We do. Kim Rawlings 03:17:01.001
Well, you could say an objective could be a goal, yeah. Amelia Lorentson 03:17:04.721
And it could be as simple, and I think the peer review referenced it, it could be as simple as just increasing in contribution. to visitor spend, increasing in interstate and international visitors, length of stay, et cetera. So just articulating what's the objective, and it's not necessarily growing. Brian Stockwell 03:17:32.815
I think we're talking about an answer. Sure. else wish to talk? Frank Wilkie 03:17:39.300
This just, the success of the Noosa visitor economy and its continued prosperity is, is an implied outcome of the successful implementation. of the successful implementation of the destination management plan. We want to make sure that Noosa, its livability and the prosperity of its visitor economy is ensured. for generations to come. I'm concerned that this looks like turning the DMP into the DMP into an economic visitor economy economic management plan where it's really intended to manage the impacts of visitors so that the livability of our communities can be sustained and the prosperity of the visitor economy can be sustained. Whatever destination marketing body approved as a result of these deliberations will have its clear measurable outcomes to determine whether the objectives are being achieved or not. Visitor rights, as has already been mentioned, but I'm concerned about turning the DMP into something else. Margaret Gatt 03:19:13.580
I'll support it because I believe that Jessica Phillips 03:19:19.420
First of all, let me go back for a second. The DMP was originally a community document. One of the reasons why I supported the push to move it was because the reasons why we have amendments now is because we've moved from the original document and now we have to include things because if we don't, in two years' time when maybe we are or are not sitting here, the next lot of councillors have, you know, things have progressed. So, economic So economic management to me is a critical part of inclusion now. And to quote Councillor Wegener, I'm the actual opposite to an expert at many things except management. A police negotiator, police officer. I'm not bad at being a mum. I think I'm finding my feet in council but I'm absolutely hand on heart not an expert at many things. probably Probably could could say say I'm I'm an an expert expert at-- Got a little carried away there at the fact that I feel like I'm constantly humbled by people that I meet in our community with absolute expertise in their fields and they drive our economy and so therefore I believe we could, it wouldn't hurt to include this. Karen Finzel 03:21:01.320
I'm happy to support, like, if we were to write, you know, a clear objective and put in some sentences. I do think though, you know, we looked at our tourism economy today in item 1.3 in our initial phase of community engagement report. I mean, there's clear, like, so much information speaking to this, much information speaking to this, but given, you know, the peer review has said that we've not given it a clear goal or objective, I'm happy to include it just to give that assurity back to the community that, you know, we've listened, we're making sure that we're trying to leave no stones unturned in support of where we're trying to progress to offer a surety to community that we have heard, we have listened, we want to take action. Yeah, I'm happy to support it so that we can progress this forward today. Frank Wilkie 03:21:52.781
Further question, probably of the mover. How would this change the DMP? Amelia Lorentson 03:22:00.814
Just if the DMP is a community document, then it's got to be totally representative of all sectors. And this was raised as a idea from the peer reviewer, but it's also been raised by our business community and our small businesses. Frank Wilkie 03:22:28.217
Could I ask what would the clear objective be? Amelia Lorentson 03:22:31.397
For the economic... Frank Wilkie 03:22:33.397
It's just the prosperity of the visitor opponent? Amelia Lorentson 03:22:35.777
Yeah, in terms of how we are going to be supporting our small businesses in terms of, again, is it increasing... GDP, is it increasing in contribution of visitor spend, increasing interstate and international visitation, length of stay. These are the things that our business community need assurance about, that they're investing in our future, in their future, in their family's future. Brian Stockwell 03:23:08.024
So the question would start, I can see how it would be quite simple to include a clearer objective, which would probably be a target or a principle, but is there enough in the amendment to actually amend the amendment to define strategies, actions and medical outcomes? Kim Rawlings 03:23:34.260
I'm going to answer this with all due respect to everybody. I don't think there's enough in the amendment to provide that direction. I think we've got enough expertise to figure it out. Given that the whole plan is actually based on supporting a thriving economy. It's articulated in the principles. One of the principles is thriving economy, facilitate diverse, thriving and resilient economy by supporting local business, innovation and generation. Circular economy principles, trying to ensure that tourism enhances business well-being, right and integrity. It's a raft of things in there about supporting business. we could definitely craft up something. What I would say is that that hasn't been tested with the community. All of these actions have been tested with the community and got more than majority support for them. Yes, it was suggested by a peer reviewer, just to note that. Nicola Wilson 03:24:53.585
Identified, and it is important that we consider the economy for our community. Amelia Lorentson 03:25:03.045
Hey, Kendall, nice to meet you. Nice to meet you, thank you. Brian Stockwell 03:25:08.503
I've put the amendment those in favour. That's Councillor Wilson, Wilkie, Finzel, Lorentson, and Phil, those against, Councillor Wegener, Annie Stockwell, the amendment is carried and becomes part of the motion. Let's proceed to whatever comes next. Do we have any more amendments? Can I try this one that I spoke to before and see how it goes? That the DMP be amended to include the development of a council advocacy and partnership strategy to support implementation. Cancel the way you're going to test it and mix it up a bit. Amelia Lorentson 03:26:22.133
Again, this was something that was suggested out of a peer review and I do put a bit of weight on the peer review. As Jess said, she's not an expert, i'm not an expert either and that's why the value of people that have already been where we want to go is of value. Council at the moment, we don't have authority or direct authority over many of the key leaders that influence destination outcomes, public land and waterways, transport infrastructure and potential visitor charging mechanism mechanism. think the idea of developing council advocacy and partnership strategy will allow us to join forces with like even our neighbouring councils such Sunshine Coast Council, Gympie, and state and federal governments to achieving the objectives of the DMP. As the peer reviewer said, this is... it was a critical component and I understand there's going to be some resourcing issues with that. I just think it's really important to understand that there's a lot of stuff that's outside our remit and lots of opportunities for us to... lots of opportunities for us to partner with, whether it's state, federal or neighbouring councils, again, that will enable us to achieve the objectives that have been set out of the DMP. Frank Wilkie 03:28:03.816
Question, would this sit inside the monitoring and evaluation report in the document itself? Brian Stockwell 03:28:13.901
I think, if I can answer, I think it could be an action under the same section that has has establishing the stewardship of the council, which is, I think, leading the way, if I'm not wrong. I've just hit too many buttons. Yeah, I think it could patch the... intent, Councillor, that to amend the DMV to include an action that proposes to develop the development? So it's an action level? Yeah, that would be fair. And if I can ask staff, would that be in... that would be in the section of governance, should it not? Kim Rawlings 03:29:01.356
In the DMP, at the back, at the last section in the back, or as an action under one of the principles? Brian Stockwell 03:29:07.196
That's a question. No, yeah, that's fine. The front section of the DMP talks to the, because we took on board this peer review, and you can see that advocacy in partnerships is critical, and the very front section of the DMP talks talks about the critical success factors and point three of critical success factors, as I try and find it, it says effective advocacy with a clear plan to influence policy and decision making. So it's already mentioned as a critical success And then strategic partnerships to do the same. Can I change the proposers to consider, please? So I mean the de-impeach, include an action that considers the development. development of council advocacy and partnership strategy to support implementation of the plan. Would you prefer to consider or propose as Kim? Margaret Gatt 03:30:10.640
Consider this to me. I'm happy with either I'm happy with either or, but proposes? Kim Rawlings 03:30:17.137
I think, I think proposes is stronger? Amelia Lorentson 03:30:20.097
Okay, we'll go with proposes. Thank you. No, no, no, don't. Kim Rawlings 03:30:29.346
Oh, I just was making a statement. Propose is a stronger word. Consider is, you know, still requires some consideration. Amelia Lorentson 03:30:36.706
No, I don't want that. Thank you very much. Thank you. Brian Stockwell 03:30:41.234
This amendment cancels. Cancel, wait another second. Tom Wegener 03:30:48.774
So, to stop, would this be redundant then? Isn't it, you just read out what it says in the beginning. Yes, okay. Kim Rawlings 03:30:59.554
It's a statement of fact that the front of the destination plan says this is a long-term Noosa, success will take time and only achievable through a commitment of effort. Its success is dependent on such factors as effective advocacy with a clear plan to influence policy and decision making. partnerships with industry, business, government and community to ensure alignment and shared direction. Amelia Lorentson 03:31:28.322
You may have. Brian Stockwell 03:31:29.562
I'm actually quite happy because it's actually an action that is meant to serve communities. That's it. Margaret Gatt 03:31:39.162
I don't really want to commit this to another strategy, but I agree. Tom Wegener 03:31:48.902
Anyone else? Question? Councillor Lorentson, would you be envisioning an ambassador program, for example? Amelia Lorentson 03:32:02.140
I wasn't, but that's a great idea, Tom. No, advocacy, council advocacy, I'm thinking in terms of like our waterways, buses, more frequent buses. There's a lot that sits outside our remit, so ambassadors, or maybe a question to Kim. I haven't considered it, no is the answer. Maybe make it a separate amendment. Margaret Gatt 03:32:35.226
If you would like to comment on that please. Kim Rawlings 03:32:38.026
There is an action in the DMP about the development of a stewardship shared custodian program called the For Love of Noosa program at the moment. Margaret Gatt 03:32:47.846
Critical to to that is the development, is building ambassadors in our community. So I think it's captured already in that action. Brian Stockwell 03:32:59.885
Okay. Anyone else? Nicola Wilson 03:33:01.603
Sorry, can I ask a question again being pedantic? Because this whole document attachment is a destination management plan, but then 2.2 is a destination management plan. So when we're talking about changing the plan, is the plan only that 10 pages that is 2.2? Sorry, can I ask a question again? Brian Stockwell 03:33:22.983
By referring to an action, there is a specific element in the framework Specific element in the framework of the plan that we're going with, so it can be 3.3.6 or something like that. Nicola Wilson 03:33:36.960
How can a document be called the destination of the plan, and an item can actually be the destination of the plan? I think this is really an inquiry that we get to have. Brian Stockwell 03:33:50.200
I know it's time, but... The question is, do we consider the whole document, that is, with the pre-cover as the destination of the plan, or only that part of it? Tom Wegener 03:34:08.486
The whole document. Kim Rawlings 03:34:18.760
This amendment would go, change the section 2.2 to include a specific action. That's how we would take this amendment. one of the principles and strategies. Brian Stockwell 03:34:41.520
Cancel the one minute phones. I'll put the amendment those in favour. We move on, Councillor Lorentson. Amelia Lorentson 03:34:55.660
I'll try another amendment. That carrying capacity measures explicitly ensure that resident access to beaches, parks, natural areas, oh sorry, start again. That carrying capacity measures explicitly recognise resident access to beaches, parks, and natural areas, ensuring it is not unreasonably restricted. Brian Stockwell 03:35:26.688
Do you have a seconder for that? Margaret Gatt 03:35:30.628
I have a second for debate. Brian Stockwell 03:35:34.628
Thank you Councillor Finzel, Councillor Lorentson, do you have a floor? Amelia Lorentson 03:35:39.448
It's just something that came up time and time again over two years of consultation and discussion in terms of resident access to beaches, parks, and natural areas. The amendment just identifies that resident access remains a priority for this council and is protected. As current capacity measures are developed and implemented the amendment also just tries to ensure that managing visitor pressure doesn't result in reduced access for residents to the natural areas that define the local lifestyle and community identity. So just putting at the forefront of our decision-making that we don't unreasonably restrict access to our residents. Karen Finzel 03:36:51.220
I just have a question about recognising the residents. I mean, we've talked about, you know, family that comes and visits that might just say live at Inhole, or live, you know, at Doonan, or your Mundy... Monday and then coming to visit family, how do we recognise, you know, they may end up being excluded to these places because they don't, you know, pay rates here or, I don't know. guess I'm just seeking clarity that when we talk about unintended consequences, are we being inclusive or are we restricting access to people who don't pay rates or, you know, where we put residents in there? How do we be inclusive when also we recognise that you know visitors to the region are not necessarily like day troopers they can be people that have a property here they're coming up on the weekend sorry yes just yeah just wondering how we be inclusive probably a rhetorical question. I don't think the other legal staff could answer that one. Would it be improved by saying recognise user access? Nicola Wilson 03:38:22.134
Yes, it would. Thank you very much. And that captures what Karen's... I did make it sound very exclusive. Brian Stockwell 03:38:33.662
Users are changing the intent. So I'm happy to make this one form and then change the wording to user access. So I'll talk to I couldn't support it. I can support the notion that is implicit within the BNP that the intent is to maintain the experience and in some areas where There is problems that we take our resident and the bioresidents needs into consideration. Why I can't support it is that the carrying capacity elements of the current DMP is about encouraging sustainable visitation by using carrying capacity to guide access and protect sense of natural places. Ensuring this environment and visitor experience are preserved for all. once again, it's there for all. And, you know, it's accelerated our work and advocacy with partners including state government to introduce carrying capacity and expanding access and protecting our most iconic and sensitive locations. locations is the action 2.1.1. The key there is where we know the current visitation is in excess of carrying capacity is where we have this on It's about people who say they're getting knocked over by joggers that are going to the national park. It's about issues about, you know, a lot of the carrying capacity stuff is going to be in partnership, you know, in the early days with state government. So, you know, carrying capacity is the maximum amount of activity that an area can handle with that quality and unaccepted damage, community values. I just think it's trying to mesh the two different objectives of the DMP into one statement and I don't think there's enough in there to guide staff into what that might mean. Amelia Lorentson 03:41:02.640
I'm happy to make this amendment full. I really haven't really thought this one out too much. I think where I was heading with this is that we don't have a 365 day solution 60 day problem. So I'm wondering, we've run out of time today, would user access to beaches not unreasonably restricted achieve that outcome? Like I said, I'm happy to make this call and maybe come back with another amendment. Okay. Brian Stockwell 03:41:41.234
So I'm going to take that as a closing address, after no one was committed to talking to 11, I've put the motion those in favour, and that's... unanimously lost. Okay, we've got another one coming. Amelia Lorentson 03:41:59.700
Through just advice to the Director, we're changing the word 'user' the outcome that I was seeking in the previous amendment. Kim Rawlings 03:42:10.477
I think what I was suggesting is I could assist with some wording if... Amelia Lorentson 03:42:16.157
Oh, that would be fantastic, just... That's Brian Stockwell 03:42:19.034
30 Minutes It's very mental. away from the next general break. OK. Thank you. So I haven't got any other amendments. Jessica Phillips 03:42:54.240
That actions within the monitoring and evaluation framework and three-year implementation plan that fall wholly or partially or partly outside Noosa Council's legislative or operational remit and sit with state government that it be reframed advocacy worries, partnership actions or council actions only with no implied operational, financial or regulatory commitment and that this distinction be clearly shown in the monitoring and evaluation framework and implementation plan. Brian Stockwell 03:43:47.280
This is the reword to one of the previous ones. It's mentioning a plan that, you know, the three-year implementation plan is not being adopted today. That's my significant issue with this. It is whether that is a legitimate plan. Frank Wilkie 03:44:20.000
I have a question. Isn't there operational resources required for advocacy and partnership actions? You can't get out of it. Staff time, councillor time, is ratepayer funded? And wouldn't we be undertaking advocacy actions to I ask that because it's often we advocate to have regulation changed at a state government level because we can't do it ourselves. Jessica Phillips 03:45:23.320
Yeah, this is only to do with the... I understand what we do as part of our business. It's more around committing us to things in the implementation plan. implementation plan that I'm not comfortable with because it doesn't clearly tell us what is our role and what stake it's blurred in that implementation plan. It's more around just saying what's in our lanes and we're not... and shut the door. Do you want to speak to it? You did raise in workshops about clarifying our role. Is this like something requesting perhaps a table that identifies who... a table that identifies who's responsible for what level or? identifies no, well what happens in that monitoring report, and it came back in the review as well, but there's not clarity around what is our responsibility and what So I'm trying to put some wording together, and again I put them Friday, so I don't have, I don't know how to clearly articulate what... Well could that a, you know, a graphic diagram that shows... No well I think it could just be separate, this is, and I think it says it in the review, I don't know the wording in front of me, he's saying, the review says, what's, what's the What's council? Yeah. It says it in the room that it was, so I'm trying to find... Yeah, could a table give us that? I don't know because I'm not the expert in how to... Karen Finzel 03:46:55.034
Or rather writing that, could we say, can we include a table that clearly identifies each level and what their responsibility is. In the implementation plan. Frank Wilkie 03:47:04.396
Council filled. Sorry, after you. Margaret Gatt 03:47:06.396
Can we put that question to the staff? Through the Chair, please, Mr Chair. Brian Stockwell 03:47:10.896
Sure. Thank you. Kim Rawlings 03:47:15.997
A table could be provided to outline roles and responsibilities. I would say in each of the actions, because we took on board the peer review feedback and actually refined the wording in the action. all aspects from that peer review, so that advice was taken on board and it has been incorporated, so I'm not sure that that confusion still exists. For instance, we say very clearly in each of the actions that are around advocacy what we're doing, so continue to advocate and and who who we we, to to our our partners partners, the the State government in the responsibility section we then also say who's the lead and who are the partners because we so we took on board that if you still think there's confusion it'd be great to get some specifics I guess because that advice was taken on board and there was restructuring that happened so question did they review it again no okay so that's probably where I'm sitting uncomfortable if they've given that I'd like to know does that cover any more Margaret Gatt 03:48:23.388
Okay, Question, sorry, I'll just get some clarification because you mentioned responsibilities so you were then saying that's in the three year implementation plan and we're not endorsing the three year implementation and saying it's like technical problem with the amendment it seemed to make changes to the draft it's not being sought to have guidance on it at this stage and then when I look at the monitoring evaluation framework you're talking about actions and in the monitoring evaluation framework actions are just listed by number. There's not words, so partnership action cancellations wouldn't make sense in that regard. That's why I'm suggesting a table perhaps. No, because it goes back to Councillor Wilson's amendment that when the review, the peer review review, then I now went don't know that back to, I'd be comfortable if they said they saw this and they've implied it, then I wouldn't need to, yeah, so I will wait. I'll let it fall and I'm going to, when we have our break, Brian Stockwell 03:49:31.258
I'm going to speak with you. No, I haven't accepted the statement, okay, because all of this review is technical correctness and I don't think I could accept it. Okay. Margaret Gatt 03:49:48.772
So is this just not happening? Brian Stockwell 03:49:51.952
It's just recorded as not accepted by the Chair. doesn't work. Do I have to take it? Other amendments? All those against? Anyone wishing to talk? Amelia Lorentson 03:50:42.840
I'm going to just play with the one that I let fall before and Kim if you can let me know if this captures what I'm trying to achieve and I'll just try that carrying capacity and visitor management measures. Apply. Proportionate targeted solutions to specific problems, not blanket restrictions. Brian Stockwell 03:51:17.520
Is that something Cathy has brought up? Amelia Lorentson 03:51:20.260
I'll send that through to you now, Cathy. Brian Stockwell 03:51:22.580
So is it just this one? No, it's a totally new one. It's a totally new one to try to... Do you want to just read it out? Amelia Lorentson 03:51:36.841
Let's see if this makes sense. I'll just send it to you, Cathy. That carrying capacity and visitor management measures... Applied proportionate targeted solutions to specific problems not Brian Stockwell 03:52:38.820
In the old village. Nicola Wilson 03:52:43.883
You know, someone says Wilson, someone says Phillips, we sing. You sing, Margaret Gatt 03:52:50.423
I go. Brian Stockwell 03:52:54.603
You have the floor. Amelia Lorentson 03:52:56.824
Without repeating what I just said before, I think what I'm trying to achieve with this We use data to provide solutions to specific problems and that we understand that, you know, congestion and traffic and issues even along the North Shore are not 365-day problems, they're, you know, whatever the data says, 40 days, you know, we have congestion. is that we use data. In Hastings, I think about 60 days a year, so I think it's just really important, access is really important to our beaches and natural places, so this, I mean, just ensures that we allow the data to inform any decision making. Margaret Gatt 03:53:54.560
Yes, Jessica Phillips 03:53:55.320
I fully agree because I think sometimes we try to like solve a huge problem that may only exist for certain times and then it diverts like a lot of time and resources and things like that into something, what are we actually trying to solve? If this just keeps it more to what we're trying to manage then yes, I would much more consider that that's what our community would want rather than, they don't want Looking at making sure that it is enjoyable for everyone and that might just need some time to be tested through and understood a little bit more but I think this would help reassure community that it isn't about stopping. Yeah there are times through the year where it's completely fine to go to these places and it's not overcrowded but we DMP was meant to manage it and so this hopefully achieves that. Thank you. Brian Stockwell 03:55:03.156
Question of staff. To me that's just a statement of what we're intending to do. The problem is basically a statement of principle, how we're going to apply that evidence. That your understanding of it is a raising red flag that you should consider. Kim Rawlings 03:55:23.240
There's two aspects to that, I think. For me, is one that it infers that we would do blanket restrictions. And no, it doesn't really say that at all. It's about managing the experience sustainably and And, um... Frank Wilkie 03:55:53.628
Thank you. Brian Stockwell 03:55:56.248
Everyone happy with that? Thank you. Karen Finzel 03:56:02.880
I'm just thinking if you just read that without listening to this conversation, I think it's quite general. I think it doesn't really address your intent and your original notion. You know, I think your intent is about making sure that that capacity is... Margaret Gatt 03:56:22.130
Sorry, yes, okay. Karen Finzel 03:56:25.910
Yeah, I think it's very broad. I think without the narrative alongside it, I don't think it... Chaos doesn't hurt you. Amelia Lorentson 03:56:33.940
And so ensure that carrying capacity measures and visitor... Margaret Gatt 03:56:41.660
Sorry, no, sorry. That carrying capacity and visitor management measures recognise recognise user access to beaches, parks and natural areas. So, Councillor, that would be a different amendment. It is, yeah. Okay, other people wish to talk to the amendment? Councillor Wilson? Nicola Wilson 03:57:04.365
I'm a bit unsure on this one because from what I understand of what's in the plan at the moment, the first step is that we have to calculate what that carrying capacity is. And until we've got that data, we don't have any specific measures. And the intention is really about finding out whether at the moment we're under or over that ideal carrying capacity so and the intention is really about I'm a bit unsure... Jessica Phillips 03:57:26.785
There would only be measures if we're looking to go above that carrying or we find that we are above that carrying capacity and where we have things like the potential development of where we have things like the potential development of an app. I did challenge the words better decisions, because it's subjective, but informed decisions is what I wanted to say. So people can go, oh, it's busy I there today, I will won't think be able of to park, or it's busy there the turtles or, you know, whichever way their behaviour is going to change, without us actually introducing specific measures in the initial stages. So I think I would want to see where we get get to first with establishing our carrying capacity and where we're actually at versus that before making any promises on that. Kim Rawlings 03:58:16.080
Can I just confirm that we took on board that and it doesn't say better? It says locate, use it to inform their choices about when and where to visit. It does somewhat. It says. It still says periods. Margaret Gatt 03:58:28.882
It still says periods. Brian Stockwell 03:58:32.302
Other than this talk, I'm a little bit of a Councillor. I actually support that in the State of the fact that it's what it's intended. I don't know whether concluding it in the motion is going to make that any impact, but I don't think it does. Which was, I think, the initial attempt was to signal to residents that we're not going to say, wait a minute, we'll sort of tend to a vibe of going, you know, they were underserved out there. We won't say anyone over 60. Amelia Lorentson 03:59:16.771
I take on board all the commentary around the table. I agree, just reading that, you need the context. the context to really understand where it's going. I think there is an understanding, clear understanding that that is what we're actually going to do. Target solutions to specific problems. So I'm happy for this amendment to lapse. Brian Stockwell 03:59:37.947
Do you want to take that as a closing address to all those in favour of the amendment? Amelia Lorentson 03:59:38.189
Thank you. Brian Stockwell 03:59:44.607
I'm smothered. Actually I am as a statement in the So there's two votes again please. So that's Councillor Wilkie, Lorentson and Phillips. Those against? Wilson, Finzel, Wegener and Stockwell. The amendment is lost. Are we ready for this one? We're debating the motion. Frank Wilkie 04:00:16.900
I think there's been a suggestion for a break, Mr Chair. Brian Stockwell 04:00:23.700
We'll have a break, and if we're lucky, we'll be certain to debate the motion. Welcome back. So councillors, we may have one more amendment. Karen Finzel 04:10:17.220
Yes, I'd like to just please test this. I did circulate it but it was probably not intended due to circumstances. My apologies. That item JB added to read, endorse the establishment of a Destination Stewardship Council as a priority action. to support implementation of the Destination Management Plan with its purpose to provide oversight, monitoring and evaluation, guidance and transparency. terms of reference be prepared outlining the process for establishing the Destination Stewardship Council and report back to Council for consideration is provided as the first priority following adoption of the Destination Management Plan. Brian Stockwell 04:11:20.672
Let me show you that. Thank you. I think a pivotal, really important part of this conversation is the Destination Stewardship Council, especially in support of Council, especially in support of another level of governance to give assurity also to the community that there is really strict and strong frameworks around transparency, providing opportunity for another level of governance around that. So it's proposed as an advisory body to provide oversight, guidance and accountability for the implementation of the DMP. The DSC as a collective, in my opinion, plays a critical stewardship role, ensuring that tourism in Noosa is managed in a way that aligns with the community values, protects environmental and cultural assets, and supports long-term wellbeing. It is understood that the DSC's purpose is to assist guiding Noosa transition towards regenerative tourism, consistent with their identity as a UNESCO Biosphere Reserve, and a destination that is different by nature. The Council provides a forum where key organisations and stakeholders come together to support shared learning transparency, and adaptive decision making. Through its oversight of the monitoring, evaluation and learning framework, and the rolling implementation plan, the DSC will help ensure that the DMP remains relevant, evidence based, and responsive to emerging challenges and opportunities. As outlined in the Council report and DMP, one of the first roles of the Destination Stewardship Council will be to refine and oversee the monitoring and evaluation framework, and Framework and the rolling three-year implementation plan. Ensuring that strategic goals are being achieved, risks are actively managed and resourcing requirements managed and resourcing requirements are identified early. Progress will be reported to Council supporting an adaptive approach that allows Noosa to test ideas, learn from experience, and continuously improve how the community, environment, and economy. Given this important role, in my opinion prioritising the establishment of this Stewardship Council is, if not the most important action before us today. Karen Finzel 04:14:25.500
Do you need an overview of what you think that might look like? Brian Stockwell 04:14:28.640
I think you've got it. Thank you. I'll just switch to Councillor Wilson. Nicola Wilson 04:14:34.900
Just asking a time question, is this redundant? Because it's already in the plan. Brian Stockwell 04:14:43.205
Who are you asking it of? Karen Finzel 04:14:48.680
Well, quite clearly, if I thought it was, I would have raised it. Brian Stockwell 04:14:54.100
So I'll answer it for you. Certainly the establishment is foreshadowed. I think what this amendment does is say it's the first cab off That's what makes it different. And I agree with that. Mark, I won't say that. That stands to your question. I'll talk to it. Yes, I think we've heard today and previously that all for their protection after using and we know that planning implementation will be better if we have a collaborative model of governance. And I think this is a key step forward. If we get the Destination Stewardship Council terms of reference right and we have reference right and we have the right people, we'll have a blend of local knowledge, expertise and enthusiasm and probably people with a long track record as well as expertise perhaps from the inside. So I'll catch them out and catch them other levels of government as well. So there's people who will have the expertise and also maybe key partners involved in the process and also the key thing about putting this up front is saying is not a set and forget and then we're going to go away and do business as usual it's about establishing the new governance as the first and then prioritising the one three evaluation review and the three year action plan. So obviously if we've got that happening as a matter of priority it should help speed the implementation process. So I support. Frank Wilkie 04:16:35.420
I think Councillor Finzel with this amendment has unlocked the Rosetta, has targeted the Rosetta Stone of this whole DMP that will unlock a lot of the key actions for this plan. Importantly, the Destination Stewardship Council has a role of refining and overseeing the monitoring and evaluation framework and the draft rolling implementation plan, which we've all been discussing this afternoon. Their job is to make sure it is is right. Get it in really good shape, functional shape. It's a very inclusive body that will take on board key stakeholders, other partner agencies that have real power to ensure that the key actions of the DMP are being implemented. I think it's a critical piece of work. I think this shows a commitment to driving this plan along and getting real change for the future of our community, so I'll be supporting Tom Wegener 04:17:40.580
That. Is it the key change that this is bringing, to move it forward, to put that, as they say, the first cap off the rank? Karen Finzel 04:17:51.800
Well, I guess for me, I always put governance is like number one, and I just that's why I'm bringing it as a priority action. Firstly, it's about governance, an extra layer of transparency, providing assurance to our community, but also, I guess, if that action itself progresses it forward, but I think it gives it that extra layer to our community that, you know, we're bringing our community along the journey, we're bringing the expertise, we're honouring the voice of our community, and we're promoting a collaborative approach. I just, and I love governance, I think it's I just and I love governance I think it's just you know we can't miss out or have gaps if we have strong governance and I think this provides that just another layer to bring everyone on the journey and ensure that we have you know things that we can look at measure and have a surety that we can move forward with confidence. Jessica Phillips 04:18:55.620
Can you, it might be because it's late in the day, can you remind me when the Stewardship Council came into the DMP? Was it the first round, second round, just remind me. It was in the second round in the draft. document that went out to consultation. And can you remind me what the question was in the survey that, I know, I'm putting that up. I just want to know where our... I think I can actually. Thanks. Margaret Gatt 04:19:30.110
Give me one minute. I think they're sitting here. I'm a sinner. So while the question time is also arranged, it's seconded by the community to look at other destinations that haven't developed destinations for council as well. Kim Rawlings 04:19:58.712
It was to establish a destination stewardship council with the ability and influence to help drive the successful delivery of the key DMP actions, helping to implement, monitor and measure DMP progress. Whether you support that or not. So the DMP itself that went out, the draft DMP, had a section on what the Destination Stewardship Council is. And remind me team, did we also have a fact sheet? No, we didn't have a fact sheet deliberately on the DSE. In all our community engagement sessions and everything we did when we had face-to-face sessions, we explained in more detail what we meant by that because some people won't 100% sure about it. They thought it was a locally based program or panels, which I've explained it's state government decision makers. Jessica Phillips 04:21:06.326
So did community, was it glaringly obvious in the second round that this was a priority that would foresee other things? For us to decide today that it becomes priority? Kim Rawlings 04:21:20.740
It was supported through the survey and the feedback. And it was, it stated pretty clearly in the document and the survey that part of the process of a new approach to destination management and regenerative tourism, success to that is shared responsibility and, you know, collective oversight so that the Stewardship Council was a key aspect to a mechanism to do it. So, you know, I think it was it was I think it was clear for those who engaged and asked the question Amelia Lorentson 04:22:01.774
Okay i'll speak to him i'm not going to uh i'm not going to support amendment i think that it jumps a step what i would like to see as a first priority is the development of the terms of reference and my understanding is that the proposed purpose membership structure recruitment for the destination stewardship council is going to be presented firstly to council for endorsement prior to its establishment i think the the amendment in front of us skips that very very critical step so No, i'm not going to accept that because we're not we don't i need more understanding about you know the legalities what you know what what's the purpose what's the structure what's what does the membership look like um what's the relationship So... Like? What's the relationship of the DSC with Tewas and Noosa? What's the relationship with existing advisory groups and council commitments? We need to understand that prior to its establishment. commend Councillor Finzel for putting it forward but I don't support it because you can't support something that you have no understanding of what you're supporting. Frank Wilkie 04:23:27.257
Just a follow-up question. Councillor Finzel, was it your intention, if I'm reading your amendment correctly, you are saying the terms of reference be prepared outlining the process for establishing the Destination Stewardship Council so you are saying, do it in terms of reference first. Amelia Lorentson 04:23:48.419
Yeah, that's correct. Frank Wilkie 04:23:49.419
Yeah, that's what I thought. Yeah. Amelia Lorentson 04:23:50.899
But that has to be supported first before we endorse And that's got a report that has to come back to Council, is my understanding. There's continuing arguments. Question, Shaquib, have I understood that correctly? That the process, as I understood, was the terms of references will be coming, will be prepared. A report comes back to Council for consideration and approval before... approval before the establishment of the Destination Stewardship Council. Have I understood correctly? Kim Rawlings 04:24:29.653
So the DMP itself has an action that says establish the Destination Stewardship Council. Its implementation... First step is to develop the Terms of Reference and have Council and a process to recruit and have that endorsed by Council. Frank Wilkie 04:24:47.741
So is this amendment consistent with that? Kim Rawlings 04:24:50.161
I think this amendment is consistent. Jessica Phillips 04:24:55.780
One more question. We're asking for it to be priority action just so I can understand what would then become not the priority if we're bumping it up now? What's getting knocked What would you? Kim Rawlings 04:25:13.352
Look, this process was probably always going to be a priority. You know, we've said one of the language in this says one of the first priorities of the destination stewardship council so assuming establishment subject to process and council decision-making is to have oversight and review of the monitoring evaluation framework and input into the implementation plan. So given that its establishment is priority to be able to help you know and advise on those things. So I don't think being clear about it being first priority bumps anything. It was always going to be an important Amelia Lorentson 04:25:58.353
So is this redundant? If you're saying it's already articulated clearly in the plan, do we need this amendment? Kim Rawlings 04:26:06.693
I think there's been lots of things today that are up there. SPEAKER_03 04:26:08.745
Provide clarity. Kim Rawlings 04:26:12.385
So in the spirit of providing clarity, is it already in the plan? It's in the plan to establish. What is different here is that it says A is a first priority following adoption. Nicola Wilson 04:26:31.660
I'll speak to it. I'm struggling with this one a bit. I think I read the second sentence but not the first. But also it's a bit of a chicken and egg thing that we're trying to prioritise items. Items within a plan that's not complete yet and the Destination Stewardship Council are supposed to have oversight of that implementation plan so without them being established do we actually get the final implementation plan. we actually get the final implementation plan or is the establishment of the Stewardship Council a priority in the plan? Kim Rawlings 04:27:10.319
Can I just be clear, the establishment of the Destination Stewardship Council is in the DMP itself. As a key action it's also outlined as a key governance component in a separate section of the DMP so it's both an action and it says it's a key tenant to monitoring and evaluation that's in the DMP plan itself not the implementation plan that is not being endorsed. Brian Stockwell 04:27:37.691
So it's action 4.1.1? Karen Finzel 04:27:49.460
Thank you for the invitation but I think I'll just keep it brief I think just bringing it up and illuminating it is just know I'm passionate about good governance I think this just it's already in the plan as we've seen today everything has been a little bit about chicken at the egg I guess for me it's just you know raising it to awareness to I guess put my intent forward and my heart of the matter is to to ensure that it is this collaborative approach and that our community sits at the centre our community sits at the centre of that and I just wanted to bring that to everyone's attention today. Hopefully everyone will support this and thank you. Brian Stockwell 04:28:35.156
I'll put the motion that the amendment goes in favour. That's Councillor Wilkie, Finzel, Lorentson, Wegener And Stockwell. Those against? Councillor Wilson and Councillor. The amendment is carried and therefore becomes part of the... of the motion. Have we come to the end of the federal amendments? Amelia Lorentson 04:28:57.198
I'm going to try one more. See how this goes. That during implementation, monitoring and... monitoring and review of the destination management plan, council offices engaged with key stakeholders to further refine the plan's strategic settings, assumptions, and delivery approach, ensuring it remains responsive to changing economic conditions, state policy and regulatory settings, market dynamics, delivery risk, and emerging strategic options. The operating environment for destination management changes all the time, including economic conditions, the visitor markets, regulatory settings, state strategic directions, and particularly in the context of the Queensland Destination 2045 and the opportunities and pressures associated with the Brisbane 2032 Olympic and Paralympic games. Ongoing engagement with whether it's experts or just key stakeholders will support support evidence-based decision-making and help us identify emerging risk and opportunities and refine and review our implementation priorities as conditions evolved. I think it's I think the key reason I've thrown that in is to avoid a set and forget approach just allowing the plan to be just flexible and able to be adopted and and changed again with community backing and key stakeholder and independent advice. Oh yeah, happy to speak to that. Thank you councillor Lawrenston. I appreciate the time you've taken to put this up. The first thought in my mind was when we got into council in 2020 we had COVID and you know we had to pivot and move in the space so I really think this is good to ensure that we can responsive to changing economic conditions and whatever else befalls us. So I'm happy to support this hopefully also that the destination strategy group will also be around to engage with the delivery approach and remain responsive to changing conditions. So I think it's good to add this as an extra layer to ensure that we can pivot in times of ever changing environments. So thank you. Brian Stockwell 04:32:12.584
Question to start. Am I reading a partial role description in terms of reference for a destination description council? Kim Rawlings 04:32:26.686
I think yes, the destination stewardship council would have key responsibility in terms of monitoring and evaluation. We already say that we're doing that annually and reporting annually. You know, but I You know, I think it also states kind of the fact that we do regularly review. We do a state of economy report every year. We're constantly looking at context and trends and all changing conditions. plan itself says very clearly that we recognise that, you know, not everything will work. We'll address complex challenges and leverage opportunities and remain flexible and responsive. The plan and the framework provides a mechanism to do exactly that, helping us to test and pilot, measure what matters, adjust our approach and continuously improve. It's based on an adaptive cycle. So, yeah, I think it, again... I think it, again, says what's kind of already there and what we do as a matter of course when we are in an adaptive cycle and have committed to monitoring and evaluation and regular reviewing and reporting. Thank you. Brian Stockwell 04:33:46.216
Anyone else wish to talk to this? As long as you wish to close. Just, I think we all know there's some serious local know-how in our And expertise in our community. Not all those people are going to be sitting on the Destination Stewardship Committee. This amendment just broadens that scope to key stakeholders. And I'm referencing also just, you know, state... people from State who can partake in a review or refinement of our delivery approaches in our strategic settings. the plan. Again, maybe a little bit redundant, but I think it's really important that we get it right and that we actively seek You know, our key stakeholders, the chambers, the business chambers, experts, people who have already been to where we want to go, it keeps using that phrase, but this is one of the gentlemen, two of the guys that sat on the patrol control group. have experience in delivering successful destination management plans and it would be regretful for council, whether it's with them or other people that live in our community, to seek some type of engagement or advice from some great people that live amongst us. I put the amendment. Those in favour? That's Councillor Wilson, Finzel, Lorentson and Phillips. Those against? There's Councillor Wilkie, Wegener and Stockwell. The amendment is carried and becomes part of the substantive motion. and so So, can Councillors, there being no more amendments, we now debate the substantive motion to which only Councillor Wilkie has spoken. Nicola Wilson 04:36:18.260
My focus today is not on meeting a deadline, although they are important, or striving for perfection, but endorsing a plan that the community supports. The feedback I've heard from the community is it's a plan for more plans. Lots of nice Lots of nice ideas and great intentions, but lacking tangible outcomes that our community can really grab hold of and see what will improve in the coming years. We're really looking for bold actions to solve the problems of parking, congestion, waste, STAs. I'm uncomfortable with things like a rewards program or a community benefits fund that hasn't yet been designed or costed as being the answer to those problems. The surveys contained leading that's not just my opinion but shared in feedback from the community too. leading questions. Some chose to make a written submission instead. Councillors did not see the survey questions before they were released and some have raised multiple concerns about how much we can rely on the responses despite being a statistically The written submissions which were lengthy are barely mentioned in this final version although some of the feedback might be incorporated. In a plan I expect to see an executive summary that explains our current state and what the DMP sets out to achieve. The bold key actions priorities and solutions that will get us there and what will change for our community in the coming years. It should also acknowledge threats and challenges ahead alongside an economic framework and risk management framework supporting the plan. We get to the actual plan on page 29 after a lengthy introduction and that sort of ends on page And that sort of ends on page 38. The plan itself is based on four principles and various strategies and tasks. As I mentioned before the monitoring and evaluation framework and implementation plan are focused on completing tasks not on reporting on progress towards completion or their success once implemented and this was echoed in the peer reviews. On page 55 we have On page 55 we have what does success look like which I would like to have seen as the guiding principle for the document rather than really focusing on regenerative tourism because the I don't really see where we have tangible inroads into the top priorities being community well-being-being, lifestyle and local prioritisation, environmental protection and sustainability, transport and mobility improvements, balanced tourism management, preserving identity and lifestyle, and importantly, transparency, trust and accountability, although I do acknowledge the destination stewardship council will help with that. Some of the KPIs don't align to actions and tasks, and again, I accept that we're not endorsing that framework today, but I'm still concerned in how that will proceed. Strengthening the tools available to council for STAs. Strengthening how that will proceed. Strengthening the tools available to council for STAs. We can't just measure that by a decrease in hotline calls. It suggests we don't want people calling the hotline and there are plenty of other measures aligned to the recent local law review that we could implement here. Improving infrastructure to ease congestion, we need to actually measure that congestion, not just the availability of other options. Caring capacities. Measures need to be focused on the Measures need to be focused on the success of the actions, not just the completion of them, and there's lots of repetition in the various columns of those tables. For the Love of Noosa program, 3.1, the measure is that the program has been launched with at least 500 participants joining the program, and increases in the participation in regenerative activities. activities. This is a task, the measure should be whether it's having an impact, and I can't see that 500 people being involved in that program is going to have a significant impact on a population of 60,000 and a million visitors. Again, lots of the other measures at the moment are just tasks like Kabi Kabi education programmes, it's not about their success. Destination marketing and local promotions and for the love of Noosa program have inspired positive behaviour change, for example an increase in waste being diverted from landfill and being recycled, an increase in public transport use. How do we do we measure whether those promotions are correlated to the waste diversion to the landfill? How is this measuring whether our stories reflect our values? So there's lots of examples there. And also we've just been put in a position again, I've been asking all year for our meeting schedules to be reviewed so that we're not making decisions after having just one business day and a weekend at the busiest time of year to review lengthy documents that shape Noosa future. Most of us were in meetings in meetings all day Friday and again we're having all these amendments on the fly to try and improve the report and its outcomes. It's not good governance and it's not acting in the public's best interest. It doesn't set us up for good decisions or meaningful debate when we're scrambling around all weekend trying amendments. It was one of my priorities to get the DMP implemented last year and I just don't really feel like we've really got there yet in terms of what we've promised to the community and how much it's going to be a guiding document over the next 10 years. Tom Wegener 04:42:03.660
I've come to really like the plan, largely because it's courageous. In the past, Noosa has taken many very the courageous actions, and this long is line of very courageous things to do, not only have you been courageous in facing these meetings and sitting with us for the last six hours, but i'd like to applaud the courageousness of Kim, Lynn, Andrew, Juanita, and the rest of the staff. Thank you for following through. I believe this plan reflects Noosa identity. It reflects the findings from the surveys and the massive consultation process. And on that ground, I support the DMP. Thank you very much. Karen Finzel 04:42:57.240
I think I want to just say thank you to everybody who's contributed. It's been a big journey and today has been really finished that off. Another big journey. I love this idea that we can be proactive in the best of our ability and our capacity to action something that can at least move us forward. Noosa is not just us forward. Noosa is not just a place people visit. It's a place we love. It lives in our daily rituals. Our morning swims, our school drop-offs, quiet walks along our hinterland trails and stunning coastline. Conversations with neighbours sense that Noosa Shire holds something precious. Noosa has always been more than an economy. It is a community shaped by care, connection and respect for the land and each other. And yet here we are today And yet here we are today at a turning point. At an intersection that demands magnification and readjustment to safely inform and facilitate unprecedented change socially, economically and environmentally. locally and globally. The pressures of over-visitation are being felt not just in traffic or crowded beaches, but in our hearts. In the quiet erosion of amenity, in the strain on infrastructure, in the rising cost carried by residents, and also in the growing fear that what we cherish may slip beyond our reach. This is not about closing the door to visitors. Visitors are a part of our collective story. But the current model asks too much of residents and too little of residents and too little of those who benefit from Noosa without carrying its long-term responsibilities. Health and wellbeing, shared access to affordable housing, meaningful employment and equity matters here. When the costs of absorbed by ratepayers alone, when young people inherit congestion instead of connection, when community wellbeing is treated as a secondary to growth, something fundamental becomes unbalanced. That is why collective voice matters. As I said before, it takes a specific style of bold leadership to legitimise voice. Through the act of engaging and illuminating citizens' contribution of their own knowledge, coupled with their lived experience, to act together through voice, to deliver a collaborative vision for a sustainable future for the next generations. Because when decisions are made by only a few, the burdens fall on many. But when residents, traditional owners, young people, local businesses and visitors are all heard, fairness possible. Shared voice is a shared responsibility. It is the foundation of equity. Our young people remind us of what truly matters. They tell us they value a healthy environment, ease of getting around the Shire and a future where Noosa remains liveable, not overwhelmed. They are asking us to think beyond the next season, the next budget, the next election and to act for generations. to come. And this is where we must lead with heart. A destination stewardship model in conjunction with the Destination Management Stewardship Council demonstrates how tourism be responsibly managed. It's not just a governance change, it's a value statement. It says that Noosa chooses care over short-term gain, balance over burnout, and shared guardianship fragmented decision-making. It gives equal voice to residents and visitors. It ensures those who benefit also contribute. It places community wellbeing, environmental protection and social values at the centre of every decision. This is our opportunity to create a shared vision for Noosa. One grounded in fairness, respect and love for place. together, let us raise a collective voice that speaks not against visitation but for stewardship, for equity, for our young people, for future generations who deserve to inherit a Noosa that still So let That still feels like home. Because when we live with heart and when we choose to care together, Noosa doesn't just endure, it flourishes. And that is why I support the adoption of the Destination Management Plan today. Jessica Phillips 04:49:55.426
Document now contains solutions and measures and targets that imply future decisions that have already been settled on in matters such as visitor funding mechanisms, parking management approaches, behaviour change programs, governance structures, despite those decisions that have not been formally adopted. decisions that have not been formally adopted by Council and that is a minor issue for me because it goes directly to how trust is eroded. Plans like this are often described to communities as live documents but in practice we know they're neutral. Once endorsed they activate the internal processes, the work programs commence. Resources are allocated, budget bids are starting to be developed and future councils are told the direction is already embedded and so that's why to me the language matters. When measures are written as outcomes rather than options and feasibility appears assumed rather than tested, council's discretion is narrowed before the evidence is on the table. community survey work that underpins this document. Engagement is so important but how questions are framed matters just as much as how people respond. Kim Rawlings 04:51:05.208
Survey language must be crafted to have open questions that lead participants to open answers and I also want to address Jessica Phillips 04:51:16.391
When complex policy ideas are presented in values based or aspirational language they can attract broad support without respondents fully understanding the governance the financial or regulatory when we talk about our passionate community we need to be careful not to confuse passion with capacity before I sat in this room I had no time to read a council document I was a full-time police officer working night shifts raising two kids my husband at the time was FIFO I was studying at uni I was volunteering at a local sporting club so in my downtime I was actually at the river or the beach and I am sorry to say I never had time to read the council reports and that's in reality for most people in our community they care deeply about Noosa but they are not experts in local government they are not sitting through the workshops or reading monitoring frameworks and not everyone in those workshops in my opinion gets an equal my opinion, it's an equal voice. But all people deserve representation, and I owe it to them today to stand up when something doesn't feel right. I represent many views at this table. When I was voted in, maybe for my policing background, because I'm a mum, because I'm a local. direct, grounded, maybe I'm not interested in the fluff, the titles or the photos. Maybe all of us around the table, we all know why you ran. As in, you know your why. When I was in policing, I had a simple test for my decisions. If I was wearing my body on camera, and it was being live streamed to my children, and the people that I love, would I be proud of what I was doing? That test applies to me every single day. There may be only a handful of people watching this meeting live, probably not by now, but the real moment of accountability is not in our speeches. It's in our vote. So that's when the robot will hit the road. For me, the actions embedded in the document haven't aligned now with what I believe is a true reflection of our entire community. They carry assumptions, downstream consequences that are not comfortable standing behind. And while I deeply respect the the people as our professionals in the room, it isn't personal for me. I respect the effort. That doesn't mean I automatically support the outcomes if I believe that they have fallen short with I'm not interested in supporting reports and frameworks simply because they've taken time to repair, because my responsibility is to the people that I represent, and those people including who don't have the time, energy or access to be sitting in these rooms. So yes, I guess standing up and sitting down and voting against this puts me in the firing line, and I understand that. But I've never been afraid to speak up for those who cannot. So thankfully, I know I'm not alone in this room to be brave enough to go against the pressure of a meeting like this, because at the end of the day, I'm going to go home, I'm going to look at my kids, my husband, and this community and say, look them in the eye and say I acted every single day with integrity. That's the standard that I'm going to hold myself to for a while. Amelia Lorentson 04:54:34.629
Can I speak? Brian Stockwell 04:54:36.369
I was going to speak. Oh, excuse me. Amelia Lorentson 04:54:38.049
No, go ahead. I thought you opened. No, you moved to the emotions. Brian Stockwell 04:54:48.065
3,000 Or so people involved and 20 years in local government. I don't think I've seen a clearer indication from the community what they want. We can talk about the can talk about the intricacies of survey method and have some assumptions and say one question has too many variables in it, etc. Tom Wegener 04:55:09.708
But Blind Freddy could look at the results and say what our community want and see if it's in this plan and for me it's really clear what it is. Other councils would die to have the level of involvement that we've got in this process. I know we have come with high standards and expectations but it's very clear that in the vast majority of the actions that three-quarters of the people who took the time to have feedback were in support. Now there's going to be limitations on the level of support in some of the It's time to SPARK! you can't look at the results of consultation and come out with any other conclusion than the vast majority of Noosa people support what's in this plan. So when you say you're going to vote with integrity, you have to vote with integrity to vote for the issues of the minority of the people in the community. Because that's what the consultation tells us. Now, this journey has been a long one. And there's been suggestions that the process has been squashed at the end. Brian Stockwell 04:56:26.840
And I say, we have been involved in every step of the process. We've had opportunities to provide comment across numerous workshops and we were given a full draft to comment on. days ago, I spent probably a day and a half reviewing that document and providing feedback. We've all had that opportunity. And years have come to a time when we need to make a decision. And that is local government. You get an agenda and you take time and you read it read it and you adopt the position. I don't feel pressure. I feel that we've done as good a job as I've seen done in this council in engaging the community and getting expert advice. I can see a plan that is that is one that is evolving where we've come from. Now, there's some debate about transformation involved, but the interesting one was when we got expert advice on what other destinations that are is Other destinations that are seen to be at the top of the world in terms of sustainability and going down this regentive path, all the successful ones are the ones that evolved their governments and evolved how they do it. And that's what this plan does. But there is some bold things in here. And I think it's really clear that the four key areas of the same are new. Day visitor management, we've clearly identified what we're going to do to try and address the issues associated with day trips. Any? Everyone knows that's going to be probably the hardest one to make meaningful change in until there is societal change around the use of the product made of people. We did, over the final stages of the plan, come up with the Fallova Noosa concept, which really, to me, was a really good one, saying whether you go down the end of your street to surf, or whether you come 10,000 miles, the experience is shared and therefore the responsibility to care for the place is shared. So the Fallova Noosa program is picking up on elements, not just for the visitors, but for residents. Some of the concepts that I put many, ago in this place. And then we look at some of the fears that this plan was going to actually just redirect tourism to the hinterland and start having over-tourism in the hinterland. So the new focus on hinterland regeneration, what we see the hinterland doing is providing the largest areas where we can have visitor-led tree planting or visitor-funded tree planting, where we can have a whole value chain that goes from the artisan producers or the artisan winemakers and gin makers visitor economy. So we start to have the Noosa experience that is embedded with local produce and local arts and crafts. And then the destination stewardship. That will be something that I believe will help the community understand believe will help the community understand that this is a shared issue. It's one where it's not just council working with the destination management organisation, marketing, sorry, destination marketing organisation. Marketing is one element of what could help lead to a new culture within the visitor economy and a new opportunity for new opportunity for businesses within this Shire to enhance their offering, to look at the type of visitor we're trying to attract in our marketing. But the destination stewardship is about having expertise and key stakeholders around the table to look at shared responsibility and moving forward. So, I understand the individual... issues that have been raised today where improvements could be made. But on the whole, this plan has a program logic that has really strong roots that does set a direction that we as councillors can be proud of in adopting. Amelia Lorentson 05:00:44.580
I want to start with this afternoon, we've seen a number. We started with C, I think there was about 15 amendments that we were going to play with and 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 got up. That alone. That alone highlights the issues for me raised around the robustness of this plan. Keep going back to our obligations. Our obligations to our residents is to ensure that we manage and protect interests, support our small businesses and safeguard the lifestyle that defines our community. A 10-year strategic plan deserves rigorous and strong foundations. Yet today what we've been is endorse a plan that in my opinion lacks the level of detail and robustness it deserves. In doing so what I feel we're doing is prioritising expediency and a deadline over the rigor required a 10-year strategic document of this importance. That's not acceptable when what's at stake is our residents, our community's future. I don't believe that we should be rushing this again endorsing a plan without the necessary rigor, risk undermining confidence, creates unintended consequences and potentially fails to deliver on the very outcomes that we claim to protect. I've done an analysis, I've spent a lot of time reading the document and there were some red flags and gaps. Again I reference the rigor that's needed. There's been a great deal that's changed since the draft was prepared. Economic conditions, state policy settings, we, some of us attended just the 2032 Olympic and Paralympic forums that was hosted by the Noosa Chamber of Commerce. There's new opportunities that have emerged through Queensland destination 2045 and challenges. I believe that these changes need to be examined in further depth. I also go back to some of the elements in the plan. The draft doesn't clearly articulate an economic strategy including for our visiting economy including how growth will be managed. addition, and I know that I've thrown this as way of amendments but it hasn't been done yet, the plan doesn't embed a destination specific risk framework that identifies the delivery risk external dependencies and how they will be managed. Implementation details are also insufficient. Measures of success, timeframes, prioritisations, accountability for delivery and again I note that you know it's been said around this table over the last five hours that will be reviewed, it will be reported on and continuously monitored but I keep saying that's not a substitute for getting the foundations right and I just simply don't believe we've got the foundations right. several of proposed outcomes depend on state government reform or cooperation from other agencies including short-stay accommodation, visitor contributions, transport initiatives and managing visit visitor numbers. The draft in my opinion doesn't adequately address contingencies. What happens if these changes don't occur? What risk do they pose to council and are we risking are we about to endorse outcomes that are beyond our control? Some other of the measures identified in the plan also can significantly affect the residents, local businesses and access to public spaces particularly around parking congestion and visitation management and we note a lot of the amendments were around this. Again I keep coming back to this is a really important document it's a 10-year strategic plan and we have an obligation to our residents To endorse the plan without rushing it. I keep coming back to one sentence that I wrote during our meeting. Our community deserves better than a plan built on compromise for the sake of meeting a timeline. And that's what I feel that we're going to be delivering today. Brian Stockwell 05:05:48.112
Thank you. Councillor Wilkie, your opportunity to close. Frank Wilkie 05:05:52.472
Thank you. Look, after a very extensive series of workshops where all councillors were talked through the structure of the plan, had ample opportunity to have input, get their head around and understand it, the final draft for 10 days to pore over and make suggestions and improvements with staff, I'm really sorry that after all that, that they... all that, that some only see confusion, risk, uncertainty, fear of offending supporters, and wording they don't like. What I see is a fantastic... Amelia Lorentson 05:06:29.039
Point of order, point of order, Chair. Yes, what's your point of order? Risk of offending, what were the words, Mayor Wilkie? Risk of offending... offending... Frank Wilkie 05:06:37.216
Supporters. Amelia Lorentson 05:06:38.856
Supporters. I take offence to that. I think that's personal and out of line. Brian Stockwell 05:06:42.936
I didn't. I heard that's... It's not directed at the council, I'd say. Frank Wilkie 05:06:49.516
This is what I heard about wanting to... Brian Stockwell 05:06:51.776
Council, it's up to me to I acknowledge acknowledge what what you're you're saying, saying, but but I don't believe that it's a benchmark in terms of that point of order. Councillor Wilson, have you got another point of order? Nicola Wilson 05:07:01.794
Yeah, it's actually incorrect that we got the final drug tending two days ago. We got it on Thursday. Councillor? You cannot cannot use a point of order to correct what you perceive as an actual error. Thank you. Frank Wilkie 05:07:14.672
So we've had the final draft for many days prior to the release of the report. The interesting thing about this destination management plan is thing about this destination management plan is it's not about us. It is about the best long-term interest of the broader Noosa community now and into the future. I know how anyone could argue that it's reflecting a minority view or ideology when the feedback from the community was so overwhelming. And to say that the people that they represent could not be happy with a they represent could not be happy with a plan that seeks to preserve the natural beauty that makes Noosa what it is, makes it the liveable place that it is, the connections, the prosperity. This is what this plan does. That's its intent. By ratifying this today, you're giving Noosa a future. We are well aware and ought to be responsibly preparing for the challenges that we face to vote against this And to do business as usual, knowing the population increases in South East Queensland, with the Olympics on the way, is to be negligent in our duty, in my opinion. The amendments have been used as explained as a symptom of something being wrong with the plan. But as we've seen, the amendments largely reflect what's already in the plan, and have been acknowledged as largely redundant, so there can't be a problem with the plan, because the plan already inherently contains what the amendments. Subtitles Councillors I also commend you for the way you advocated for the amendments the passion with which you applied yourself for those amendments means that you would really like to see those things implemented that's way I'm interpreting it but they don't mean the genuineness of the enthusiasm with which you advocated for these things amount to nothing if you don't vote to ratify this destination plan in its entirety plan in its entirety but what we heard it said it's not what we say it's how we what we do and how we vote that shows what we really stand for and I think that's that's really true but this is a plan that's even though you may not agree with it I think you must know in your heart of hearts that it gives Noosa the best chance of facing a future where population pressures and visitation is only going to become more and more intense. Ough you may not agree with it I think you must know in your heart of hearts that it gives Noosa the best chance of facing a future where population pressures and visitation is only going to become The measures improved. It will be refined as it moves along the list. We're on the path now. The journey can commence. And I know in your heart of hearts, you're here for the betterment of the community. You want to be a council that does Not delays things. So this destination management plan is a good step forward. And I would like to I, I would like to especially thank the staff who have been saintly in their patience, in their response to information requests, in the integrity with which they've handled the work, with which they've submissions, and interpreted the submissions. I've been given the wind up, so councillors all of you around the table, I commend you for your input into this plan, and I urge all of you to support it, not for us. But for our future Noosa. The future of Noosa. Brian Stockwell 05:12:01.118
I'll put the motion. Those in favour? That's Councillor Wilkie, Finzel, Wegener and Stockwell. Those opposed? It's Wilson, Lorentson and Phillips. The motion is carried. you. And we're done. So, we are dealing with the not-for-public-release environmental levy proposed land purchase, referred from the Planning Environment Committee. If we have a stand-by motion to move to a stand-by motion. Margaret Gatt 05:12:43.487
Moved by Brian Stockwell 05:12:44.127
Councillor. by Councillor. Have you got the stand? Seconded by Councillor Finzel, was it? Margaret Gatt 05:12:54.081
Yes. Thank you, Mr Chair. Brian Stockwell 05:13:20.820
Any discussion? No? I'll put the motion in favour. Okay, so we're now back in open session and we're dealing with item 9.1 and I will move and I'll and I'll read read it it out out because because there there is is a a slight change from that which was in the Planning Environment Committee agenda and it is at the change, so it's not reported by the coordinator of conservation and environment to the Planning Environment Committee dated 9th of December 2025. and authorised the CEO to commence negotiations with the owners of their or their agent regarding purchase of subject property as detailed in this report. If purchased by Council, utilise funds from Council's environment levy, if purchased by Council, undertake the necessary establishment actions for security and biosafety. If purchased by Council, undertake the necessary investigations actions to pursue biodiversity and carbon offsets over the property. And five, where relevant and to the satisfaction five, where relevant and to the satisfaction of the CEO, enter into agreements and arrangements for the property to receive biodiversity and carbon offsets. Amelia Lorentson 05:28:24.811
I'm happy to second that. Brian Stockwell 05:28:25.991
Seconded by Councillor Lorentson. Not much we can take, but I think the staff... staff recommendation is worthy of support. Does anyone else wish to say anything? No? I'll put the motion. Those in favour? That's carried unanimously. And I would close the meeting, but Related Noosa Council Meetings
← Browse all Noosa Shire Council meeting transcripts
