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 Acting 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 00:02.720
Okay, 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 fin's 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 Custodians of the lands and waters of the Noosa area and of a I would like to thank you for their careful custodianship of this unique environment over thousands of years. We pay respect to the Kabi Kabi People, past, present and emerging. Have got a rather large gallery today. I 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 all those impacted by the event 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 then move on to attendance we've done 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 by Councillor Lorentson and I presume there's no debate. All those in favour? Yes. That's unanimous. We don't have any presentations or deputations so we move on to section 7 and item 1 in that section is the Noosa holiday park Fees and Charges and that was referred from the and organisation committee. So we have Robyn Mercer, the Commercial Business Advisor. Robin if you'd like to give us a overview of this item please. Robyn Mercer 02:29.176
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 caravanning facilities, analysing industry trends occupancy and demand, considering the operational costs required to deliver the holiday park program, and being mindful of full cost pricing and competitive neutrality for Council. Requirements for the Noosa Holiday Parks Business Activity to be a strong performer, despite a broader and persistent downturn in occupancy across Queensland and South East 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, 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 fees strike a careful balance considering competitive neutrality, supporting councils financial sustainability and ensuring the holiday parks remain attractive and accessible to visitors and residents. Thank you. Frank Wilkie 04:40.149
So thank you for the report. You're saying that compared with other councils 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. But we need to increase our prices a bit also so we're not undercutting and breaching our obligations to ensure competitive neutrality with commercial operators. Robyn Mercer 05:09.416
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 rides 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. Thank you. Jessica Phillips 05:43.757
Question, thank you. Just 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 S&O, but more broadly. Me, 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. Statistics. Around the impacts that could happen if it continues Robyn Mercer 06:28.780
Certainly so look setting prices into the future and managing that risk of a downturn in demand or out pricing 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 night sold is doing so night sold is our measure of occupancy it's you know how many nights have we sold within a particular period. What we we're seeing is that the industry is having a downward trend that's happened over the last two years it's been a year-on reduction and that data comes from the caravan association of Australia the rhetoric is likely that is due to macroeconomic conditions cost of living pressures people changing their discretionary spend on holidays particularly what we're not attributing our 2% reduction year-on to our pricing because we can see when we benchmark that we are still sitting competitively against others but it's something it would we're definitely in a space of just keeping a close eye on things Jessica Phillips 07:44.258
Yeah 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 soft tell so not that it's that the sopatel anymore, sorry. But yes I am. Operating costs versus the revenue for the commercial operator I know that you might not be able to go into the details of that but how do you consider that. Robyn Mercer 08:14.761
So with our management, um, management agreements that we have we go out to market every five or seven years for those contracts and that is the opportunity for Council to access pricing at that point in time similarly to our other large contracts where we approach the market OpenTender through open tender and a decision is made for 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 is 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 one small thing but 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 so that our prices stay at a accessible and competitive level. Okay, thank you. Nicola Wilson 09:23.054
Just coming back to the downward trend and the market conditions, is that why we only set a feed-in target for six months at a time so we can respond to changes in the market as we go. Robyn Mercer 09:34.844
Yes. It allows us to always have a 13 months forward booking period which is important. Someone leaves and they want to rebook 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 09:52.616
Would you leave I'd move like to the motion. Frank Wilkie 09:55.051
I'm happy to move it Mr Chair. Brian Stockwell 09:56.092
Councillor Wilkie seconded, Councillor Wegener. Frank Wilkie 10:00.520
Thank you for the report. I think I said it in the question. 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 comparative 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. Thank you. Brian Stockwell 10:41.526
I'll speak. I historically try and keep the Boreen Point campground lower to 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, but I do note that the Draft Destination Management Plan does have triggers in there where if a Council wish to have incentives for families who live locally doing the right thing and could maybe be able to make that affordable by their participation in some of the programs. So that's an opportunity that we may see emerge over the coming months. The press others? All those in thank you Mr Chair. All favour? Yeah yes. That's unanimous. We now invite up the Acting Manager of Finance to do the Financial Performance Report. And we also have the Director of services to assist. Who is this? Zach Morton-Adair 11:59.616
Afternoon, Councillors. Afternoon councils thank you Through the Chair I'll take the report as read uh the November 2025 report provides us with five months of actual data for the financial year approximately 42 percent of the year statistics uh statistics if you want that um 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 the primary discussion being the continued maintenance or oversight of the capital 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 12:50.860
Any questions Amelia Lorentson 12:51.340
Councillors hey Zach in terms of staffing and resourcing and maybe a question to the CEO are the current staffing levels adequate to deliver the all 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 Larry Sengstock 13:21.958
Thank you Councillor. As you know at the last, for this budget we increased the capacity of the capacity 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 do that. Deliver 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 various councils to deliver projects so we're still to be honest catching up with that so we've that's why we've added extra resources to do that and I think that what I understand that we're on track to at least catch up a little bit whether we catch up completely is um is relied on the um on the environment and on the um the, on the, availability of um contractors to deliver the work because I think as you know also that um you know we don't have a team we don't have a con we don't have a team that actually delivers the major projects we contracted out so we project manage our but by 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 um to that group and that's the model that we um that we have endorsed and used um from a resourcing point of view never there's never enough I think is probably the answer in every business um we try to keep as lean as we can and do as much as we can with what we have to keep the uh to keep the costs at a level that we can cater for but um I think the uh the teams are doing really really well in terms of um attacking the workload that they've got ahead of them and um they're doing a great job of catching up and getting over their time okay thank you Brian Stockwell 15:23.550
It's awesome Nicola Wilson 15:24.550
Thank you um on attachment one the statement that of you can income and expenditure um the bottom line of the capital expenditure table has an amount for 4.649 million of other capital expenses that weren't in the budget could you explain Zach Morton-Adair 15:43.125
Yeah so Through the Chair so uh what we do periodically through the years as we're going through capital projects there's an element that possibly look at potential write-offs um through the program so that's currently the place I'll go now for that will be reviewed as we go to br2 and I actually look to bring that onto the books officially so that's just a placeholder amount for the time being. Jessica Phillips 16:03.558
Question? Councillor Phillips? In relation to attachment 2, I was looking at contract liabilities and the provisions are materially higher than budget while property planning 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? Zach Morton-Adair 16:34.442
So we'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 with it we need to address that I wouldn't need further information from. Jessica Phillips 16:45.323
Sorry I didn't get to it earlier, I had the DMP stuff and questions to go, so thanks Zach, happy for it to be taken on notice. Amelia Lorentson 16:53.805
In terms of outstanding rates, what is the current level of outstanding rates and what's the risk of non-collection? Zach Morton-Adair 17:04.744
So Through the Chair, bear with me, I'm just getting to the other one, page, so on the bottom of the fourth page, sorry I don't have the notes on me, there's a page six, thank you, the current res percentage, the total res is 6.5%, so movement from the previous month of $750,000 of rates of res being paid in the current period. Noting that we're about one month off from the January rates levy period. Common you hear from me is rates are cyclical, tend to go up, spike in July and January down in the preceding six months. So the nominal benchmark that we are working towards is a 5% industry average. In terms of risk the around the collection of rates from a legal baseline of the rates are charged to 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 we can to more appropriately manage that with the debt collection or the debt rates and charges debt management policy to hopefully bring that down over time. Does that answer the question? Amelia Lorentson 18:15.489
It does and it has reduced from I think months ago. So the reduction from three months ago seems quite significant. Zach, from recollection, I think 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. That's why I'm stopping Brian Stockwell 18:37.596
You there. Next. There wasn't a question. Were stating what's in the report and what's in. We're not seeing a question. We've got a very full agenda, so if you can't get to a question, very direct and as devised by the Standing Orders on the business side. Nicola Wilson 18:54.457
I think I asked this last month, but can we have a breakdown of what's from the most recent what's from the most recent rates levy versus previous years? And is there a higher risk in collecting? Zach Morton-Adair 19:06.996
So yes, to that point, I think quarterly we've intended to actually provide more detailed analysis, so we will have that at the moment. Thank you. Frank Wilkie 19:18.110
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? It's significant. Zach Morton-Adair 19:29.732
The specifics of that I'd have to investigate, but I believe it's a number of. Properties. There's not a significant payment in that. But we can get a breakdown of that. Will I take that at most? Frank Wilkie 19:40.877
Yes. I'll see you offline about that. Yep. Thank you. Karen Finzel 19:51.464
Excuse me, Mr Chair, I have a question. Thank you. Just a quick overview again. I believe I took it on notice last month about where we're at with the WIP. Zach Morton-Adair 20:03.899
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 vr2 the WIP being one of them we can provide definitely more 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. Happy to take Councillors lead if they would like to see more on the report, but we do have a slightly different program to bring that to Councillors through workshops. Brian Stockwell 20:32.749
And if you just could let anyone know what the acronym WIP stands for please? Work in progress. Frank Wilkie 20:37.758
Oh, sorry. In terms of future inclusions for future reports, the capital expenditure goes by the financial expenditure. In the Capital Works Executive they use a metric about the work actually done. Can that metric be included? As a comparison? As a comparison to the financial metric for the capital works? Zach Morton-Adair 21:00.959
So Through the Chair, this is a piece of work we're endeavouring to actually work with infrastructure on in the next three 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 a year. Thank you. Brian Stockwell 21:22.481
And for those in the gathering, CWE is Capital Works Executive. Jessica Phillips 21:28.278
Last question. Sure. 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. 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. I'm happy to think more on that question, but it was just after listening to discussion. Zach Morton-Adair 22:04.647
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. That's fine, yeah. Brian Stockwell 22:30.222
Councillor Finzel is now here in person. Thank you Mr Chair. Would someone like to move? Councillor Wilson? I'll take that. Thank you Councillor Phillips. Nicola Wilson 22:42.464
Speak on the door. 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 yeah we'll be asking for progress on this. I think the reporting is really improving and especially the analytics kind of report. With the traffic lights so it's really great to be able to focus in on what's important but I'm also appreciate that you're willing to get feedback and continue to improve so thank you very much and support this report. Jessica Phillips 23:25.591
Can I make a quick comment um I think community tend to only see you two sitting at the table. 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. I know the work that you're doing because we get briefed on it and I appreciate it. Brian Stockwell 23:49.249
Yes. Councillor Wilson would you like to close? No. I'll put the motion. Those in favour? That's unanimous. Their way to the desk. 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 a couple of times more than normal and way more than I've ever seen in my 20 years of local government, so we'll be quite strict on the Standing Orders and people can keep questions so they are meeting the intent of this and we'll just make them direct and to the point of the short. Into shore. Kim Rawlings 24:50.630
And we'll ask staff as normal to give us an outline overview of the document thanks Councillors um Councillors today we are recommending to you the adoption of the Destination Management Plan destination 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's natural assets lifestyle and experiences can be enjoyed for generations come it responds to the needs and aspirations of our residents businesses Traditional Custodians 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 well-being and our shared future the plan seeks the 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's identity whilst ensuring that our community is at its heart it positions Council it 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 DMP aims to identify actions to help address the challenges bought by noosa's growing popularities such 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's future ensuring it supports and protects the environment lifestyle and values while contributing to a thriving economy whilst these not unique challenges to New York 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 the role of tourism in shaping and places noosa's 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 around three over 3,000 responses across two phases of community engagement the DMP is structured around four guiding four principles. Our community leading the way living our values and tourism for good it see 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 customer custodian program hinterland regeneration and establishing this Destination Stewardship Council 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 commitment to bold action increased investment to accelerate priorities effective advocacy with a clear plan to influence policy and decision-making strategic partnerships with industry and business government and community to ensure a 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 high-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 drafting 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 we go a key tenet of the DMP A is a 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 once that 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 plans 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. Been D &P is considered a contemporary approach to destination management that seeks to ensure noosa's values 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 supportive supported economy maintaining our enduring commitment to our incredible and significant environment and prioritising our community's wellbeing 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 Framework and draft implementation plan are designed to enable us to do this. The most important thing now is to have a plan that it's that is clear in its intent and vision and strategy, supported by our community, and in this context I am very pleased to commend this important report and plan to Council. Frank Wilkie 31:05.006
Mr Chair, I just want to signal I'd like to move that's the only one that's been said today. Brian Stockwell 31:10.865
I think Councillor Lorentson did have the floor and I asked the staff to do the whole process, so it would be appropriate to let you go first. Amelia Lorentson 31:17.675
Thank you Mr Chair. I'd like to move an alternate motion. Is that one just emailed? Thank you. That Council note the draft Noosa Destination Management Plan and the submission received acknowledges the need for further analysis and refinement and defers 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. Brian Stockwell 31:54.972
You have a do we have a seconder? The and so Wilson was the second one. Full cancel, aren't Amelia Lorentson 32:01.471
We? Well the Draft Destination Management Plan 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 delivering on 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, costings, funding pathways, head 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 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. 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 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. 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 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 duplication um 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, critical 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's unique natural and cultural environment. Unidentified Speaker 35:34.142
Cancel stop well, thank you. Nicola Wilson 35:38.676
Councillor Stockwell mentioned at the beginning of this session that there's a lot of elements that councils have fought a foot forward, and that's it. 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 overall, thank you very much. Is not yet ready for a reduction. 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 ten years ahead. Another 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 have done this time entirely. We've and again. 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 plan based simply on inputs and effort. We have to look at the output, the plan itself, not just the video or the consultation process. To me, it falls short of the community expectations and that's the feedback that I'm hearing. It feels rushed and unfinished. 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 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. With hierarchy which is supported. Respondents also in favour of a shift towards a more regenerative approach to tourism. 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 raise consent to that. I've raised concerns about the KPIs throughout this process, and again, yes they can be developed over time, but I've been certain that this couldn't I'm concerned be achieved in all the time today, featuring all the different people involved in the process, and it seems to have presented significant challenges throughout, and so I agree that the help of those who seem to be qualified professionals would help to reverse this create the rest of the plan. Jessica Phillips 38:31.272
Can I speak to it? Thanks. I had a look at our Standing Orders to see if it suggested anything about amendments, or how many amendments. There are a lot of amendments that are allowed, and it doesn't suggest that, so I was just. I think I'm talking to the. Thank you. I have a call to a motion. So I okay. I'm. To support Councillor Wilson's suggestion, there are a lot of amendments, 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 is strategies that I would prefer and 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 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 I'm 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. 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 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 occur but you know it's not ready to be endorsed today in my opinion so so I'm happy to support to it. Support the motion in front of me Frank Wilkie 40:39.643
I think the community deserves the DMP in its current form to be endorsed today 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 control. Falls well short of community expectations I will refer to amendments because the amendments that are proposed I think fail to recognise recommendation part C. Is there as a catch-all to indicate that there will be future due diligence that must be done before any other projects are implemented. Because of the reach of the engagement was so broad and captured a wide range of views, it's naive to think there'd be agreement and perfection on all wording and aspects of this collective piece of work among the community and even the seven Councillors. I 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. Policy is 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 very good plan. The community consultation has been extensive. 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 already policy 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 but I draw attention your attention to sections 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 councils annual budget considerations and that's 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 after we've that been. Even after being delayed till April that we're all going to agree on it because it's a 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 44:13.371
Yeah based on that um recommendation c and d um 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 if we say yes the um further import from partners of all organisations that will be reviewed and it will be um delegated to CEO technology see what kind of change how we can call this a final report now that we're in Dawson. Kim Rawlings 44:44.812
Council is what you're being asked to adopt is the dmp as a final document alongside that is a draft implementation plan 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 asking you to do adopt the final Destination Management Plan and a draft rolling implementation plan that will include and be evolved when any first destination stewardship councils established so there's you know independent shared oversight detailed approach project scopes detailed project feasibilities costings for budget ongoing monitoring adapting all of those things so Brian Stockwell 45:37.853
Just to clarify, we aren't adopting the three recommendations as a draft form, are we? That's correct. That's right, Kim Rawlings 45:51.994
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 are caught up in the D resolution. I would wish to talk to the motion. Tom Wegener 46:06.131
Councillor Wilkie. Um, what I've heard consistently for the last six years is the community wants action, and that's number one. They want us to actually do something and carry on with our business. Two, responding to changing economic conditions. Well, that's not going to change between now and April. The economic conditions are changing constantly, so I don't see that as a reason to delay it. A harmonious Council in April, I really 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 the motion. Karen Finzel 46:47.366
Uh I'm it's a draft or noting. I won't be supporting this. I think shared voice creates shared responsibility. I think and it takes a 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 that the Councillor Lorentson has come coming and from to again engage a suitably qualified independent professional. 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 47:51.021
Thank you. Um, council's staff asked us and we said we wanted this by December. This Council in the early days, um, would have started to be typified as what the it. 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. Plan has been here 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 DMP, one that fetches. And while, yes, a minority of councils have proposed a range this motion actually should be a guide them whether they speak to minorities. The minority or the majority of the jury. Will he Wilkie mentioned the, well, we've sort of alluded to the old saying, don't let the perfect be the enemy of the of good. 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. Program logic in appendix 2 as 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 for sustainability strategies. Leading sustainability strategies in local government, for ones that set out their program logic and their monitoring relation framework, their long term plans, and then monitor it for my students to evaluate. I don't think I've found one that comes close to this level of detail. So we have to be clear that this 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. Adaptive management side. So, like others, I won't be supporting this motion. I think that's all. Amelia Lorentson 50:33.584
Cancel the loan. Cancel the loan if you would please. I do, and I thank the Councillors around the desk for their commentary. I need to reiterate the alternate motion is 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 review, monitor, revise. What I'm saying is. 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 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 but to complete it properly. I ask again, in terms of community confidence, community support and community trust, deferment and engaging an expert it's to help finalise the 10-year destination management finalise plan is critical plans 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 the community and make sure document that we put in front of them will deliver a plan that is excellence in best practice. Brian Stockwell 52:37.254
Thank you. I put the motion. Those in favour? That's Councillor Wilson, Lorentson and Phillips. Those against? That's Councillor Wilkie. Let's cancel. We'll keep Finzel, Wegener and Stockwell. Frank Wilkie 52:49.411
I'd like to move the original motion please, Mr Chair. Brian Stockwell 52:52.655
That's moved. And do we have a seconder? Councillor Wegener. And that is as appears in the agenda. It will be you at the floor. Councillor Wilkie. You may have a few seconds, though, if you need to talk to us first. Frank Wilkie 53:10.070
After many years of 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 brighter 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 active planning has been driven 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 we're same 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 liveability, 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 is at a crossroads. Whether we're whether aware of it or not, Noosa is facing unprecedented and relentless population pressures from development in South East Queensland. In moreton city Council alone, in one subdivision alone, the population that 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 lead up to, 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 builds upon the planning that has kept noosa's 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 will see us go backwards which is why we're 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 to come. 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 one and two, over many years. This is why the community is urging us to get on with it. Its core priorities based on community input were clear, include protecting the environment, managing short-term accommodation, traffic and congestion, aligning tourism to community values and the message very clear we've told you before just get on with it you 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. Even at this early stage each action has been given indicative costing whether it can be funded under existing budget require meeting funding up to $150,000 or higher high or funding of an extra hundred and fifty thousand or above because the reach of the engagement was broad and captured a wide range of views it would be naive to think there'd be agreement and 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 and in an imperfect plan is expected a delayed plan or no plan is negligent I'd like to thank staff for their excellent work and I'd like to thank 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 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 Brian Stockwell 58:12.655
And I do thank the staff for that Jessica Phillips 58:28.675
Can I start with some questions? Just to start. It's Kim, thank you. Just looking at i'd like to know which of the following have actually gone through feasibility and economic assessments before coming into a plan. And I know we haven't had a lot of workshops, but just to refresh 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 59:15.575
There's one held list: visitor contribution, paid parking, congestion. Jessica Phillips 59:20.232
Charging and the proposed community and environmental benefit fund. Just wondering which ones out of those have had gone through the feasibility and economic assessment process before it came through to the DMP. Kim Rawlings 59:36.890
Disability feasibility processes have not been done for those documents, those 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 is the process where assessment of parking. Dynamic parking, regulated parking is going to occur and consider all the issues associated with 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 years and is, 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 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. 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 as potential solutions, 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 that's what the implementation draft and six set up. Implementation plan seeks to Brian Stockwell 01:01:50.769
I'm going to move the amendment. This amendment is really seeking just to place clarity around item C and reflects what is already stated both in the report and some of which you just heard. And it's been amended an amendment been amended items to read that obviously the amendment amended to read note the draft implementation plan provided at attachment 2 to support the implementations of the DMP. Noticing this plan will be refined with input from partners, support organisations, reviewed, updated on and that should be end rather than end in your basis. With the process including one by Consideration by Councillor 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 closed stewardship Council is to provide recommendations on refinements to the Monitoring and Evaluation Framework. Two, 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 three, project outlines including any proposed community or state or stakeholder projects. Consultation, costings and resourcing for each priority action be considered and agreed to by Council as part of the budget process. Do I have a seconder? Tom, you can't. No, Tom can't. I because I moved the original motion. Thank you. Very briefly, as I said, it 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. I think it is a stepwise process. And I think the standard budgetary process is 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 Councillor Wilkie pilots, I want to be seen as a Council of action. Frank Wilkie 01:04:34.849
Oh, uh. 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 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 of the proposed amendments. 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 after consultation with the appropriate stakeholders. Jessica Phillips 01:05:52.504
It's good. 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 10 o'clock last 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 01:06:41.743
It is largely redundant, I feel, and normally I don't support. Redundant things, amendments 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 editions. Amelia Lorentson 01:07:09.595
I don't support the intent behind the amendment. Just referencing what Councillor Phillips said, my amendments were also circulated days in advance. I feel the intent this is of these cities to try to trying to think of another word, other than gag, that um but to stop. A lot of effort's been gone into from some of the Councillors in terms of reading the reports and trying to come 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. Brian Stockwell 01:08:05.311
Oh, closed. Do acknowledge it was 11 o'clock. I spent some time on the weekend trying to get my head around all 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 be incredible, it's meant 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 have any further impact. I'll put the motion. Those in favour? The motion, oh sorry they're against. The motion, sorry I'd better say the names. Wolff, Wilkie, Wegener and Stockwell. Those against? It will be Wilson, Finzel, Lorentson and. Phillips. Okay, we're back to the original motion. Jessica Phillips 01:09:05.926
I'll move an amendment please, Chair. Sure. Amendment 1 please, copied. Uh, it should be A. Any action? Or measure within the DMP that is dependent on an unendorsed plan, policy or strategy must be reframed as only as an investigation, feasibility study or issue analysis for future Council consideration. Thanks. 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 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 following and future Councillors will be later told that it's already being it's already in the plan that you approved I have seen this few times in my first term and I believe this 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 a 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 success equals implementation of 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 carrying capacities a real-time tech management across the iconic sites before costs enforcement implications of what equity impacts or community tolerance has been tested the MEF that assumes paid parking commission charges visitor contribution funding and community and environmental benefit 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 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 first contracts. 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 in are 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 parking and traffic up 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 01:14:35.544
Try and I'll be quick because I pretty much agree with Councillor Phillips. I have the same concerns that there are predetermined outcomes in the measures and I did point these out in my feedback. 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 also. There should just be a clear position about the use of recreation parks, not that the actual policy is predetermined. Um yet that's not been recommended or endorsed in the parking management plan. Same area: Noosa Council has established at least two additional park and ride facilities as 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 we could achieve. Trial, flexible and timed closures of Hastings Street. No decision made on that yet during peak periods. Peak 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 predetermined position that we don't know if the plan will arrive at. 2.3, increase the contribution from major booking platforms into local environmental and community projects. No decision on that, something that Council officers are having discussions offices about but councils haven't been involved in so ethically I don't know if I would agree. I'd ever 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 yet on 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. Music is so we can't predetermine that we'll progress implementation of something we haven't decided to implement. So 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. If this is. Hard to the see. Appendix 2 is for noting but we might not then see the final. Like I don't know what the future process is for us to endorse that. So these may stay there. So. I'll pass the floor to this motion. Amelia Lorentson 01:17:09.249
I won't go over what's already been said but I just. I don't 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 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 01:18:16.036
Thank you. 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 engagement building engaging landowners and in general I guess it's so the investigation which is implicit in this you're wanting to make it explicit Unidentified Speaker 01:18:54.587
I don't have for this. Tom Wegener 01:18:59.522
Maybe a test, yeah. For to staff is this the writing the way it's written is that normal and is this a matter of just semantics? Kim Rawlings 01:19:12.417
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. Our community absolutely loud and clear called for some clear outcomes and measures. So that there's targets and there's outcomes that we're working towards that the community can keep us accountable to and that we can keep ourselves accountable to. So 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 there's 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 be 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 need to adapt these things, because we've trialled things and they or you know, a raft of reasons, then the process allows us to do that. Frank Wilkie 01:20:50.720
Another question for Councillor Phillips. I'm looking at one of the measures now is in actual in of an action is about reducing the impacts of STA. It says one of the measures or the KPIs is the number of local law complaints to the hotline has reduced by 70% from 5/9 to the end of year one to 178 a reduction of 414 complaints. So how would this change that measure? Jessica Phillips 01:21:18.926
It'll only be specific for the ones that are around investigations because I'm asking for policy and strategy to be endorsed before we decisions so okay so we've got an STA 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 with it I didn't want to complicate it so it is around just the ones that don't have a policy or a strategy by Council Frank Wilkie 01:21:51.960
Okay so we're already committed to reducing the impacts on STA so that wouldn't be affected. That's okay. Yeah. Come on. Thank you. Brian Stockwell 01:22:02.416
So, can you introduce yourself? Karen Finzel 01:22:03.556
Yeah, 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. Being is that correct? Kim Rawlings 01:22:33.279
Well I think that's the intention of Councillor Phillips' motion. Karen Finzel 01:22:36.720
And are you satisfied with that? This inclusion won't be detrimental to the overall plan? Frank Wilkie 01:22:42.642
That's a bit of an odd question. Mr Chair. Kim Rawlings 01:22:45.940
I have to probably do an assessment against everything. Thank you. Look, the, you know, spirit of the implementation plan is that Council is the decision maker. So anything that requires council's investment, budget allocation, inclusion in our annual operational plan has to be endorsed and decided by Council. So that is, the process that we work in. That is the process that any strategy endorsed by Council and implementation plan needs to follow. So in that context, then, you know, it he's is absolutely the intention. Frank Wilkie 01:23:37.367
I notice, as an action, there seems to be feasibility studies. As part of the measures, already, some of the actions. Kim Rawlings 01:23:48.688
Yeah. Because many of them still require more work, and feasibility, and consultation, and analysis, and testing. Brian Stockwell 01:24:10.522
Question. This talks about any actionable measure within the DMP. I'm. Presuming the measure referred to is in the monitoring evaluation plan, which is an appendix to the DMP. Yeah. Is that meant to be covered by this amendment? Frank Wilkie 01:24:43.276
Is it DMP implementation, that's what you're talking about? Jessica Phillips 01:24:47.679
It doesn't. It refers to the DMP, but when I. Okay, I'll go look at a different document. That's why I've. On Friday, when I circulated it, I was trying to get a. 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 DMP 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. Pass the ask for help of 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 a plan. Yeah, Unidentified Speaker 01:25:48.750
Question through the plan-- through the plan-- through the Council. Unidentified Speaker 01:25:52.693
Chair. Yeah, it's been a long day. Karen Finzel 01:25:58.830
And if we're looking at home higher orders-- 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 Lorentson to Council Phillips. Larry Sengstock 01:26:19.461
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 it's related specifically to tourism and promotion and economy of Noosa, but it's a piece. I think what Councillor Phillips 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 actually deliver on some of these things that's okay. Am I right in saying that? Jessica Phillips 01:27:16.775
Yes except it doesn't suggest that in some of the wording because it suggests that it's before it so because the 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 can have it in an implementation plan except for should be as simple as the strategy for parking management comes to Council for endorsement Frank Wilkie 01:27:57.193
Yes question Councillor Phillips if we endorse the DMP the damn people. DMP will be the an endorsed plan that would make all those actions and measures valid. Jessica Phillips 01:28:19.595
If the community see us then come to here for strategy and go why did it just get because it's already put here that will happen it's the to me it's the wrong way around. Frank Wilkie 01:28:31.294
So you're talking about the DMP implementation plan or the DMP? Jessica Phillips 01:28:36.105
But anything both but anything it implies that a decisions made today on car park management shouldn't happen today because we're not debating car park management. I don't think yeah that's not the intent either I don't think. No but it's in implementation plan. 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 when there's no endorsed policy or strategy to assist with that. The Local Government Act. We they need a strategy and policy to do the work, not a plan. Probably a question of staff, how many plans and strategies feed into the DMP? Kim Rawlings 01:29:26.532
Many, lots. There's been a lot of across the organisation 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 provide and they 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 conservationist state, that was endorsed as a strategy. Nicola Wilson 01:30:10.884
Questioning the relevance of the question because Councillor Phillips' amendment is about things that are not yet endorsed, not about the existing policies and plans. Frank Wilkie 01:30:18.994
I guess my question is what proportion. Yeah, well just. Yeah. Brian Stockwell 01:30:27.085
Yeah, it's over there, good luck. But I don't understand what you're saying, but. I'm going to speak. I'm not sure that the amendment as put will achieve what Councillor Phillips 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. The main concerns as I've heard of is in the final column the monetary 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 disease the and the impacts, that's saying what we want. It could be down as a key performance measure and this. 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. From Poppy, 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 clicking through so many things I've lost my spot there. Got a couple of questions. So 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 process and which one is going to be going through a more detailed process to get to it, I think it's already there. The issue for me isn't that it's also going to be complicated about what level of support is needed in a planning policy or strategy. You know, it's a great thing to it's not clear on when this particular room would click in. To me, it just complicates things and while I understand the concern that maybe some of the measures aren't what 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 budgetary process, it doesn't create a threat, it creates an indication of what the way we'd like to measure it and I think we the actions are all couched in appropriate terms. How you may. Nicola Wilson 01:33:26.141
How 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. So how can you have a measure that's. Brian Stockwell 01:33:35.319
Cancel providing it. We're not debating anything about implementation plan this year. Nicola Wilson 01:33:39.083
Hang on. No. that's- 'Cause that's where the measures are. Brian Stockwell 01:33:41.923
No, the measures are in. The only measures that we're debating here are in the evaluation framework. But they relate to the actions that are in the DMP. That's right you mentioned it you're mentioning the draft is not subject to some 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. Nicola Wilson 01:34:09.970
Not the implementation framework. That's where the measures are. So it's relevant to the budget. Brian Stockwell 01:34:16.850
Questions about the implementation. Nicola Wilson 01:34:18.732
Because the amendment talks about measures. So it's relevant to the appendix too. And that's what the question was. Brian Stockwell 01:34:29.867
No, you're about the to. Attachment to the item, not attachment to the appendix too, sorry. Attachment two is a draft. Through the 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. Within Frank Wilkie 01:35:05.737
DMP itself, not the monitoring and evaluation. But the draft implementation plan. Brian Stockwell 01:35:12.673
So if we look at the. Which appendix, please, Mr Chair? Appendix 5.2, page 48, monitoring and evaluation. Nicola Wilson 01:35:38.526
You me. It can't talk about measures without the very good appendix 2. Brian Stockwell 01:35:41.822
No, I think page 48 does have measures as well. Amelia Lorentson 01:35:48.065
Touch with one and a touch with the second. Jessica Phillips 01:35:49.961
It's appendix 2 in the DMP. That's why I did this in the first place though. It's entwined the measures on page 48 which is appendix 2. It's appendix 2. Brian Stockwell 01:36:07.538
You were talking about the dash report. Any questions? It's a of state. Questions. Do you understand where I'm going? Yeah. You were relating do you have a to the implementation plan. Don't have a question, that's why I stopped you. Nicola Wilson 01:36:23.787
Okay, it's the same measures in the report. So your question relates to the Monitoring and Evaluation Framework? Can you have a measure that is an achievement of a policy that's not yet endorsed. Brian Stockwell 01:36:52.573
The associes one yard will be carried through. Nicola Wilson 01:36:56.949
Things like establishing two additional five-and-one-eighths facilities. Brian Stockwell 01:37:00.766
Are there the current Transport Strategy poses something that might be able to be captured by this community. Nicola Wilson 01:37:16.991
For options a community environment. Benefit funds 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 01:37:29.588
It will that would come out of the act. That would come out of the actions, right? So the actions determine, then would determine and the Council will determine whether we go forward and try to hit those measures, if that's just a stretch measure of opportunity. Look, I'll speak. Frank Wilkie 01:37:46.320
I've had a think about this. I understand what Councillor Phillips is trying to achieve. I think, look, 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 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. Is a sign that something's been achieved. So to say we're going to investigate the implementation of this measure just doesn't compute, although I think the action implied 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 tell whether they've been effective or not. So to say there's going to be a feasibility study where a 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 01:39:13.161
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 a part of the DMP which is what we're voting on it says in 1.3 ensure fair and efficient access to parking for locals and reduce congestion in high demand areas so that the action and then the output says smart parking system implemented in high demand areas providing real-time availability et cetera. 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 already but it's in the outputs so I that language doesn't bother me because it's we have the action is here and then the outputs down the track I think that visionary hoping that we get there it's not a part of a policy who could are still wandering through that policy but that language doesn't actually alarm me and even though I'm probably you know very critical of art of that it's still I think that's normal I don't think you would say investigate and I did that 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 we're not good it's not a failure if we don't do that but we are through it. With the actions so I am I really get what you're saying Jess but I don't it doesn't that come up to me supporting it Brian Stockwell 01:41:13.444
It would appear to me a range of the concerns could be addressed by adding the word potential above the word measures in the monetary valuation framework. Would that have any significant impact? It's not the same point. Or removing it. That's the measures of the problem. Kim Rawlings 01:41:35.041
Look, I think you could put potential. You know, it's clearly said that the monetary valuation framework will be refined with collective input, stewardship Council input, and evolved, tested. So you could put potential there. You'll note in the draft implementation plan we use the word potential to signal that these are potential partners, these are potential approaches, but they need refinement. 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 01:42:19.358
Can I ask a question to Jess? Did you put word 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 01:42:41.735
Did 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. We sit in all the workshops and we have so much more working knowledge but the community don't sit in all those 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 01:43:10.871
Okay, so it's. So you were seeking clarity and putting yourself in our residents shoes and asking the question what does this mean and you're just trying to simplify it yeah great thank you. Brian Stockwell 01:43:32.265
I think the question's been answered, wasn't it? Oh, yeah. Thank you. So the question to Councillor Phillips was would she support potential, that would be a separate question. We have some Councillors who haven't talked to the motion. Karen Finzel 01:43:58.846
Who's further to talk? Oh, just a question then to Councillor Phillips. Would you be prepared to look this fall and really pull it up with the potential in it? Jessica Phillips 01:44:08.857
Yes. You're happy to do that? Yep. Brian Stockwell 01:44:16.560
Thank you. We should talk further. Councillor Phillips, would you like to close? Jessica Phillips 01:44:22.968
Yes. I will keep it very brief. When I 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 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 that's 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 of evidence start off feasibility tell me how much it's going to cost all of those things before I can just endorse it so I don't want to imply decisions are made through the plan and that's the intention of my amendment. Brian Stockwell 01:45:51.804
Okay I've put the amendment that is in favour that's Councillor Wilson Lawrence and Phillips those against that's Councillor Wilkie, Finzel, Wegener and Stockwell the amendment is not accepted and I'd like to move another amendment Jessica Phillips 01:46:10.095
Sure is it going to be the same wording and add potential please okay please excuse me while I spend a penny we'll Brian Stockwell 01:46:30.506
Please excuse thank while keep going spend talking penny to you can I move another amendment that's a little cancer Jessica Phillips 01:46:35.531
Thank you amendment to Cathy 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 and analysis Unidentified Speaker 01:47:23.972
You so much. Brian Stockwell 01:47:24.421
Thank you that's right yep thank you we full you have a follow up answer? Jessica Phillips 01:47:43.902
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 to Council decision, they can create the impression that approval has already occurred and it is exactly how implied approvals are created. Once 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 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 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 01:49:36.936
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. 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 01:50:03.016
Okay, so wait a minute. So since we're looking at parking and it seems 1.3.1 optimised parking 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 did 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 that the fully focus of your amendment Jessica Phillips 01:50:52.300
Not specifically on that but I will talk on that because we have had workshops in relation to that but 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 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 is not something that can be achieved anytime soon. Tom Wegener 01:51:25.898
Annie Thompson so it your it's when it comes to you have the accelerate trials and then over here you have that at the output the activity of products achieved during the project and I see what you're saying absolutely but I think that's just normal language Brian Stockwell 01:51:55.788
Was the relevant directors and managers of each area that was in but would be involved in the implementation of those actions and consulted in the other way and was there agreement on those relevant managers and directors? Kim Rawlings 01:52:14.249
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 clarify that action is to accelerate the completion of the parking management plan. That's the action to include consideration of these things. Brian Stockwell 01:52:39.732
Director Walsh Shaun Walsh 01:52:40.353
Wanted to comment. Yes, and so the parking management plan includes a very basic premise of parking management, which includes times, 15 minutes, two hours, and so as well as the ability to save a car park spaces and loading base. It can include consideration of dynamic parking, and we use the dynamic parking word very specifically because "pay parking" is almost like "old hat" because the new term is "dynamic parking" because "dynamic parking" using technologies means that sometimes a year you can have free parking, other times a year you can kashyapati. Brian Stockwell 01:53:14.609
Director. Sorry for the time. Into an explanation rather than an answer to the question, was that you were consulted on what's in the monthly evaluation framework? Shaun Walsh 01:53:24.809
Thank you for the correction and yes we were consulted. And this has been something we've done workshops with the Councillors, and we've got further workshops shared with the Councillors to take the data we have into the next stages. Brian Stockwell 01:53:36.963
Thank you. 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. Is setting out what you want to do and what you want to achieve from doing that. That's what this is all about. And if you look at the words in the actions, 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 for all uses of dedicated bus lanes, explore incentivisation of smart travel charges. So the wording in the actions are really clear. There'll be further things done. Two, just to say something to the Council decision following the recent government's analysis, it's like saying, ensure that we follow the normal process. We don't need an amendment. Others wish to talk. Karen Finzel 01:54:31.261
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. Transport solutions. It does give us a possible funding range up there and gives us the traffic rights accordingly, which indicates to me that it clearly signifies what's been. Allocated funding. Just wondering, is that what you're trying to answer? Like, to give clarity around this document? Brian Stockwell 01:55:11.399
I'm just. What you're reading from is a draft which we're not endorsing. So this adoption, this one, once again, we're not. Only able to let you read it. We're not. That particular document is a. Draft for not endorsement. So and an this would have an impact on. So we're looking at a different document that's in here. It'd be the Destination Management Plan, I think this mention means we're playing, you know, I think, and it only relates to the actions. It doesn't relate to the measures in the new evaluation framework. So the actions are the ones that are numbered 1.32, 1.33, 1.34, etc. Sorry, with that being said, Councillor Phillips, would you wish to answer the question? Jessica Phillips 01:56:16.082
I'm not overly sure with the question. I'm not looking at the draft report. I'm looking at the Destination Management Plan and that's where it's referred to. 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. Unidentified Speaker 01:56:43.151
Okay, Brian Stockwell 01:56:47.317
Others wish to Nicola Wilson 01:56:47.958
Talk? 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, terminology the used for strategies, actions, tasks, outputs, outcomes, impacts, measures all being wide modelled in this framework. I can't see if I can. And so then we do get into. A cancelled webinar. 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. Who 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 reviewer, one of them, as well, so just which is why I. Wanted extra time for that to be reviewed. Brian Stockwell 01:57:44.256
Okay, Councillor Lorentson. Amelia Lorentson 01:57:47.486
There were a lot of questions asked during the survey and consultation process in terms of the broadness of some of the questions. And, for example, open. 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 for reasons not support it I understand the intent of the Councillor in front of us, and to me, it's, um, it provides transparency and clarity for the community, um, it's, you know, it's basically saying, um, we're going to avoid any implied automatic implementation, that any implementation will undergo further analysis and, um, due diligence. Um, so to me, go back to the intent, is which is with Councillor of. Phillips, is to ensure that the community that have spoken and are concerned with some of the boldness of 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, 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 Phillips for the amendment. Brian Stockwell 01:59:40.300
You have any other questions? Frank Wilkie 01:59:41.440
Just a question. This is actually saying that actions be removed from the actions that pre-empt decisions. So that could be a lot of actions that pre-empt, that are part of the plan, be removed from the plan. Jessica Phillips 02:00:03.558
Anything that we don't have a decision on. Right. Brian Stockwell 02:00:14.547
And that's what it took. Anyone else wish to talk? Councillor Phillips wish to close? Jessica Phillips 02:00:20.047
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. 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 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 court 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 strategy and policy to support a plan. Brian Stockwell 02:01:41.698
Okay, I put the amendment. Those in favour? That's Councillor Wilson, Lorentson and Phillips. Those opposed? That's Councillor Wilkie, Finzel, Wegener and Stockwell. It's now 2:32. Councillors will have a 10-minute adjournment. That's Brian Stockwell 02:13:38.016
We'll make okay, welcome back Councillors. Before we wait, we suggest that the Councillors close my work on the penitentiary. To have a motion regarding the evaluation framework and we can deal with that in the near future. Yeah. If you want to read it out and the words can catch up. Jessica Phillips 02:14:10.535
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. Amelia Lorentson 02:14:33.293
I'm happy to second that. I'm happy to second. Brian Stockwell 02:14:41.151
We'll just wait for that to come up on the board. So this is what it feels like. Is this an adjunct item? It would be, yeah, and it relates to, appendix 2, page 4, yeah, can you see this? So, if you could just tell me, yes, what that item is, I'll just bring it in. Thank you. 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 the concern that others may. Oh, sorry. Cancel it. Phil, if you could get a hold of that. Okay. So, Councillor Finzel, you'll see that Councillor Phillips has moved that amendment as discussed. Thank you. And he's about to talk to her. Jessica Phillips 02:16:26.241
I'll keep it really brief. I think that in the end, it the appendix where it just talks about measures, it 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 strategy will be measured I don't really need to go into it in detail, I don't think. Brian Stockwell 02:17:01.774
To talk to the motion, the amendment to it, Nicola Wilson 02:17:07.983
And I it I don't think it's really far enough to alleviate my concerns, but I'll support it as soon as I say so. Thank you. Tom Wegener 02:17:19.356
Anything else we've talked about? I'll support it. 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, blah, as something that's already happened and it's set in stone and being taken well actually out of context. Brian Stockwell 02:17:53.894
That's unanimous, so it becomes part of the motion. So, does anyone else wish to talk to this motion? State your motion. I have some amendments, Amelia Lorentson 02:18:08.923
Thank you. Lawrence, you may have the floor. I'd like to start with this one, that the DMP delivery risk register be established and in the terms of reference to the Destination Stewardship Council and reportership Council annually as part of the annual review. The register will outline delivery dependencies, resource constraints and mitigation strategies. Do we have a seconder for that? I'll give a second. A lot of things. Adjustment. I 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 in 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. It's a 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 management strategy Karen Finzel 02:19:53.541
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 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 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 that as we give people voice in this document that we put every way possible to ensure that the outcomes escape everyone's sight. Keep everyone safe. So I will support this. You. Jessica Phillips 02:20:50.273
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 of anything that we do. So, yeah, happy to support, especially members. So, thanks. Frank Wilkie 02:21:22.741
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 mean, I'd personally like to see the Destination Stewardship Council established. Stewardship Council established? But is that implied in this amendment is my question. Amelia Lorentson 02:21:54.946
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 included. Does it imply I would it's part of the annual review. I might throw that question to the Director of environment, Kim Rawlings. Thank you. Kim Rawlings 02:22:36.446
Sure. Yeah, Councillor Lorentson did seek some comment from me on this and what I advised is that subject to the adoption of 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 success. The proposed purpose. Membership structure and recruitment process for the Destination Stewardship Council will be presented to Council for endorsement prior to its establishment. Okay. It doesn't set a time frame? No, it just says that it's an action intention, proposed, still subject to terms of reference and recruitment process which has to come to Council. Thank- Yeah. You. Amelia Lorentson 02:23:16.125
And the dis, oh sorry, question two. Kim Rawlings 02:23:21.413
Sorry, there was a second part to that, specifically to risk. Do you want me to comment on that? Thank you. Yes, sorry Councillor Lorentson. Then it also it said that 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 section report is also intended to be part of the reference, terms of reference, sorry, for the Destination Stewardship Council. This register could also include additional risks identified by the stewardship Council as part of their ongoing governance responsibilities. It's just a question where all of this all is established Tom Wegener 02:24:05.884
Thank you again, you know, redundancy, is this redundant because we will be discussing that terms of reference and so forth for the Destination Stewardship Council. So is this the time to address risk register or is it when we're actually doing it? Kim Rawlings 02:24:30.251
The intention is that you will, in terms of reference, which would consider the purpose of the Destination Stewardship Council, it's remit. The governance, the risk, all of those things are yet to come to Council, that if they are subject to endorsement of the DMP, which has an action in it, to explore establishment of the designated establishment Destination Stewardship Council. Part of that process would be develop terms of reference and bring that to Council for consideration. Tom Wegener 02:25:01.433
I'll speak to it. Just doesn't seem the place to vote on this now. Brian Stockwell 02:25:06.430
Senator holtby, could Council Wilson remark? But Councillor Wilson 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 as a gap and I think it's quite reasonable to just add F to the reference. It as an item record's already stated that she thinks it is something that would be happening anyway, but if it's, if peer reviewers say, "Look, Robert, he'd care." This is how we're addressing it, at that stage and I think that's the right stage for it. I'm going switch others wish to talk? Councillor Lorentson, you've closed, I've put the motion all those in favour. That's Councillor Wilson, Wilkie, Finzel, Lorentson, Phillips, and Stockwell, and 6-1. Six one I might stick with for them okay do we have anything else Amelia Lorentson 02:26:05.542
Have an amendment that I'd like community to test that any 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 implementation. Will it was circulated, I just added residential amenity. Okay, there's amendment three in what you're saying? I've just words. Tweaked the wording. Brian Stockwell 02:27:20.162
Okay, so the wording's been tweaked. So moved, Councillor Lorentson, seconded, Councillor Phillips, and Lorentson, you have the floor. Unidentified Speaker 02:27:31.713
Thank you very much, Amelia Lorentson 02:27:38.016
You've excluded some of the extra wording, Cathy, can change that, any action likely to materially affect local business activity or the amenity of nearby residents? That's the inclusion of nearby residents. So I've just used as example some of the proposed some of past 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 further consultation that understanding some of these actions have the potential to significantly impact not just the local businesses but the residents that live nearby has the some of the actions also have the potential to impact customer access trading conditions so I think a requirement that we target some sort of engagement to those that are potentially impacted and unintended that will ensure that economic consequences and for those residents living nearby access consequences are identified early and that decisions informed by evidence consultation and understanding of local business realities and residential and residents rights to access Brian Stockwell 02:29:46.965
Hello, Mr. Svink. Jessica Phillips 02:29:49.262
I'll speak to it to support just how much I want local businesses to be included in this. I really am and, um, 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 is trying to find staffing. 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 going to be materially affected in any way by a decision we make whether it and I would think unintended 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 provided we have the chamber or someone you know there's been submissions but at the level that I would like they're to make sure we're really hearing from going to gonna have to go to them and really understand the true effects that they are experiencing because anecdotally which I never like speaking 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 they work 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 now Tom you've had your own small business this bit it's tough there's some um we've got to make included in sure they are in anything that could unintentionally make their life any harder otherwise it will contribute to business fall overs and I just 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 02:32:14.773
It's standard practice for this Council if they're doing any works that potentially materially affect local businesses the amenity of residents engagement occurs. This for the Council is standard practice I guess the upgrade to Sunshine Beach Road and Noosa Junction was one of the main some of the biggest bits of work that were undertaken and the businesses were agreed upon. Made well aware of what was going to happen there. Of course we will subject there'll 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 to make explicit an understanding of what is standard practice for this Council, I'll support it. Karen Finzel 02:33:32.661
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 in residents' voice is, you know, activism in itself. It's really important that we bring the voice of our community along to our decision-making. I think when we're talking about collaborative vision 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 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 through the Shire daily that. We're talking to taking into consideration the impacts of measures and decisions we make and that their voice does matter. So I will support this. I mean. Brian Stockwell 02:34:49.416
Do you have a question? Nicola Wilson 02:34:52.250
The intention and definitely looking after all after our local businesses and economy but I do have a little bit of a concern about the wording that could sound like we're going to engage but then implement anyway. It just says subject to engagement with affected sectors before implementation. Does that engagement actually lead to a decision on whether or not to implement it? Unidentified Speaker 02:35:16.210
Would that be right as you're implementing it Amelia Lorentson 02:35:33.599
Boy. Good point. Is that a question you're asking? Brian Stockwell 02:35:35.760
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 are they're ones that would require a decision of Council. So if that amendment was changed to before would Resolve your issue and are you happy with that? Amelia Lorentson 02:36:07.002
Yep, it's obvious 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. Brian Stockwell 02:36:16.471
So all Councillors, would you be happy to leave the nation just before? Council decision. Before a Council decision. I'm going to throw you Through the Chair. For continuity, we have to allow Council judges to fall before we add potential. This is just wording that doesn't change the intent of changing the motion. It's just a grammatical change to make it clear what's in the plan. Amelia Lorentson 02:36:44.865
Just get rid of the implementation, so before the Council that's why people don't want to cancel the decision yet. Brian Stockwell 02:36:56.821
And I'll also quote. Support it. 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 process because, yes, we have to, those most impacted, you know, we probably, there'll be staff members doing the patient street association every day of the week. We have, you know, it's not going to be a question of whether they're engaged. I'm not going to say that. Everyone's going to absent honest. And supportive. Be 100% in support of it. Because some of the changes can raise concerns and support. We had a briefing many years ago by the 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 because after three months even the capos are coming back and saying how much extra profit. Turnover they're getting to the business. But if you go to the Hastings Street and say we're going to change it to one hour, I bet you get a lot of feedback don't do it. So it is an issue but you do have to do this and it's both broader consultation like we have now, when you get down to the place specific actions, you need to make sure that special effort taken to include the thoughts and desires of those who are going to be most Tom Wegener 02:38:23.134
Thank you very much. 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? No, I think that's completely consistent. So it's a bit redundant, but I'll support it for this time. Brian Stockwell 02:38:54.355
Any other people want to talk? Amelia Lorentson 02:38:59.669
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 or via policy that any decisions we make is not going to detrimentally impact on their livelihoods so um again call it redundant I think it's totally it's too critical. Not to pull out and make clear okay, Brian Stockwell 02:39:56.178
I put the amendment those in favour that's unanimous now becomes part of the substantive motion of Councillor Wilson Nicola Wilson 02:40:18.395
Mend commend item C to read, not take attachment to into consideration until that has been reviewed by an appropriate expert and co-development the relevant actions that can be reliably measured and reported on. Pardon me a second. Frank Wilkie 02:40:33.332
Question, is that too similar to the original, the alternative motion? Brian Stockwell 02:40:46.487
Appendix two. No, no, it says attachment two. This is about the draft implementation plan. Will it be defined with input from partners or will it be reviewed and updated on an annual basis? So, I'm just thinking whether it changed, whether it is a new, whether it's saying the same thing. The amended part of it is. They all accepted me. Yeah, I'll accept the amendment because it talks about the interview which isn't mentioned in the IDLC at I don't see the moment. Have we got a seconder? Councillor Phillips. I'm sorry. Nicola Wilson 02:41:40.279
Thank you. I um, I'm going mentioned before my concern that this part of the plan seems to have been quite challenging throughout the process and we have talked about it 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. So I'm a bit different from just-- I think we need to go further than just refine this document and to-- make sure it's a really, really strong framework that we've been able to report on. In some of the workshops along the way, I've given feedback on KPIs. I don't know how we don't even have KPIs, we just have measures. Matches. And I've offered help 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? Well, 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 used 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 them until the 4th of December. Right and 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 we're fine with there's a lot of mixed terminology between tasks, measures, outputs, outcomes, impacts. So I think a lot of us seem to agree is going to do anything. It's still lagging, but it's off. Lacking in the 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 much the partner and support organisations have been involved so far, but just lots of different people's reviews and might not get us to where we need to be. Frank Wilkie 02:44:15.221
How many independent experts did we get to peer review this already. Nicola Wilson 02:44:21.514
We had two independent peer reviewers it was at least one of those peer reviews said very similar things in terms of the terminology around terminology measures and things. And some other structural things. Brian Stockwell 02:44:50.357
Councillor Finzel. Karen Finzel 02:44:51.640
Just Through the Chair for clarification, I thought three people provided peer review, not two. Kim Rawlings 02:44:59.096
One. No, two in the peer reviews and then Councillors were all provided the document and provided their input. Brian Stockwell 02:45:13.658
And as Councillor, I think what we're looking to do is Councillor, Councillor Wilson did have one on session to, I think, one of the staff reviews, is that right? Nicola Wilson 02:45:22.677
No, I gave it to David. You gave it to David? Yeah, that's correct. Frank Wilkie 02:45:30.762
Just to clarify, what is the process for having all these measures and actions refined? As if. This motion is ratified today, there is a process for all this to be refined and improved upon. Could you clarify what that is? Kim Rawlings 02:45:50.644
Yes, that's why draft the implementation plan is. Provided as notice. 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. The of those aspects of the implementation plan so that it can inform business cases, project scopes, submissions to budget. Frank Wilkie 02:46:25.462
And that would involve taking on board the best advice from. The two independent expert peer reviews. Kim Rawlings 02:46:33.459
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 the 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. Frank Wilkie 02:47:03.600
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? Kim Rawlings 02:47:12.786
Yes, absolutely. Will it come back to Councillor Lorentson? It can come back to Councillor Lorentson if that's what Council would like. Brian Stockwell 02:47:24.386
I'm just looking specifically at the wording. The, just not taking the plan into account, into consideration. Into is what's happening with our plan, that doesn't give any indication of not supporting what's proposed for year one that's coming to the budget. You would be happy with that, you could still. Yes, what do you think about, what do you think this one looks like, and how do you think Kim Rawlings 02:47:59.672
I mean, maybe Councillor Wilson should clarify, but that's how I would read it, that 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 if Councillor Wilson might be better to answer that. Brian Stockwell 02:48:17.986
Okay, so so I'll just take this, if that's unclear, if it's an issue, and the timeline for budget submissions for. First day. The first stage of actions or targets, when do you need to put through, start putting through, so it may go to both, and I'll direct you to this, because you need to be there diligently listening to the entertaining debate. Thank you Through the Chair. Our normal budget process will start end of January, early February next year. Just Frank Wilkie 02:48:54.872
To clarify what we've heard, I really respect Councillor Wilson's desire to get these documents perfect and right. Refine them to a standard that she's happy with. 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 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, we are respecting. 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 right. Get it to a state where more people are happy with every aspect of it, as we move forward. Jessica Phillips 02:50:33.259
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 say. Karen Finzel 02:50:55.817
What might the cost of the approach be an expert to be engaged and, you know, does that 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? Unidentified Speaker 02:51:12.508
Crisis doing at a Karen Finzel 02:51:14.007
Do we know the cost? Larry Sengstock 02:51:17.585
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 process. We don't have a budget. You don't have a budget to this sort of stuff, but, you know, it's something that would take some time. We would have to go out to market for it as well. So trying to stick to it and then we must we be understand able to see what the cost is, whether we're going to juggle it or whether we need to go with a budget plan for it, we need to be able to do it. Karen Finzel 02:51:57.957
So, Mr Chair, would that be an action through procurement to engage with the appropriate expert? Larry Sengstock 02:52:05.119
We would write the proposal and then procurement would be part of that. That's better than not doing this. Oh, I can see that. You can do it. Again, we'll give you time. Amelia Lorentson 02:52:20.830
Can I I'll speak to it. I keep talking and I spoke about it with the alternate motion, that we have to get the foundations right. And I think, you know, we use the word delay, not We're just setting the plan up for success and getting it right. So I agree. I don't think the draft lacks sufficient implementation detail, the Measures of Success, the timeframes, prioritisation, accountability for 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. Unidentified Speaker 02:53:20.459
Thank you. Tom Wegener 02:53:41.644
Talk, not a question. This is the plan. This is, you know, the draft. So, going back to the pirates of the caravanning analogy, this is the code and these are guidelines. This is a need to be said. When it comes to having an expert, we're all experts, in my opinion. I mean, 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. I I'm that as so, I'm confident. Elected members of society we each have a certain standing, certain 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 02:54:57.666
And what is all about? Whether or you support this not really boils down to the decision on one, whether you're confident that draft can be refined to a point where it's a useful document to guide action. Whether you're prepared either to have a very rushed 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 a at the project and if you want to go into detail of checking whether that project deadline has got reasonable action and has got measures there at that level that token would end slot. Because that's really where the rubber hits the road. When we get to the point where staff have said I'm taking priority X, Y, Z. XO is A. 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, if you want to get to that level, noting there. That we as councils tend to have a whole host of staff that have that whole matrix where it makes sense, leading to our decisions. I actually think this would significantly slow down the implementation of the plan and I and think I it would be just another one of those. Nice to dos 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, trying to interpret it as a negative, is taking away the commitment to getting books from our partners, supporting the organisation, rather than just go to a. I'd rather discard you, ayim, than they should. And some independent experts are well connected with the community and understand it, but without that, in what anyone else who hasn't talked? Councillor Finzel? Karen Finzel 02:57:08.373
Yeah, I think, you know, it says in the report, we've got over one with support, 70% 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 co to the-developed. Point where we're 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. Think we do have to come to bold action. I think we need to progress this forward. It may not be exactly as perhaps an appropriate expert might drill down to, but again, I think we've had the experts. Our people in the Shire, people around the tables, staff. We've had engagement across the business sector. We've had engagement from a broad range of people in our community. 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 along the way. 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 collective expertise has been collective expertise has I won't be supporting the adoption of this amendment into item C. I think it is a step backwards. I think I'm sure 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 02:59:48.845
Thanks. Um, a 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. So 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. And 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 actually stayed up in their feedback. So what we actually 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 finished to meet the deadline, arbitrary treat that as one 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 at a point of just fine tuning that 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. Brian Stockwell 03:01:29.785
Yeah, that's it, thanks. Okay, I've put the amendment in favour. That's Councillor Wilson, Lorentson and Phillips. Those opposed, that's Councillor Wilkie, Finzel, Wegener and Stockwell. The motion failed, amendment fails. I had another amendment by Councillor Phillips. Jessica Phillips 03:01:49.696
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. *cough * sorry. Yep, so in attachment 2, actions that fall outside local government responsibility must be reframed as advocacy items only with no implied operational commitments. Brian Stockwell 03:02:33.482
Attachment 4 being the reason being is that suggests we're endorsing action 2. There's a process outline in action 2 about it and you're saying you're treating it as if. It's an you haven't given specific guidance as to when or where that particular action is to take place. There could be a form of words that it if I was to help you, would say. Review of the draft action plan. Was cold? Draft implementation plan, yeah. Jessica Phillips 03:03:43.340
Get an attachment to it in the review of the draft. Her to touch one too. Brian Stockwell 03:03:47.560
Yeah, that's a good idea, isn't it? The staff. Requested to, I'm not even sure that's the trick. Now. Yeah. To rewrite, or to write actions, I'm sorry, there might be, write actions that fall outside the local government's. Oh, that big, that maybe it's the actions, "write" the word and request actions to. Is it a separate advocacy strategy? Nicola Wilson 03:04:26.526
Pardon? Is it a separate advocacy strategy that comes out rather than bringing advocacy strategy that comes out rather than bringing Jessica Phillips 03:04:31.359
It in? Yeah. I wish I could just speak to it and then I can re-fix the words. Brian Stockwell 03:04:36.678
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. You stuff and see the, I'm just saying. Jessica Phillips 03:04:47.109
But if they've written it, it's more there's some that do 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. Responsibilities. Brian Stockwell 03:05:03.044
And instead of words, they're here, that's right, they get them up. With are you happy that became your initial intention? Do I do. Unidentified Speaker 03:05:19.425
Thank you. Jessica Phillips 03:05:21.815
I don't like the words consider because they have considered it. It's the way that it's blurred between the two. So, I don't know. Frank Wilkie 03:05:33.482
Can we take this offline, Mr Chair, in the next break and just move on to amendments that we've received, 16 amendments well ahead of time that look well formed. Brian Stockwell 03:05:42.538
I do submit this on Friday as well. Yeah, so we may have to work with staff because we can't say something that's in the draft. But we might be able to see it in the Frank Wilkie 03:05:57.915
There are operational commitments for advocacy is it was as well. It's staff time. Staff being requested to refrain from actions and all that sort of thing? Nicola Wilson 03:06:09.734
Thank you. So you're requested to refrain from actions and all that sort of thing, it's just moving refrain to take up as well. Frank Wilkie 03:06:23.336
So would that exclude actions where Council actions where Council partners with government agencies or recognisers? Brian Stockwell 03:06:34.280
I'm asking a question. Yeah, you're right. Would it exclude that's what I've just done. Frank Wilkie 03:06:43.155
Would it exclude actions where Council partners with government? No. But it's the start being requested to refrain actions that fall outside of that responsibility as advocacy items only, whereas councils often partner with government agencies. Jessica Phillips 03:06:59.626
That will become clearer when there's the separation between what's our remit and what's our, when we partner, when we advocate. Amelia Lorentson 03:07:11.099
So there's no, the can I through Chair, and I'm happy for you to move this, Jess, I've got something simple that may come, 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 of yours, but Jessica Phillips 03:07:37.687
That's more around the DMP isn't it, not the implementation, but because of that, will, in fear that will actually, that will happen then with yours. Amelia Lorentson 03:07:51.271
So maybe just move, I'll leave mine here. Jessica Phillips 03:07:54.171
Can I take that off for a second? Hold that for a second. Okay. Amelia Lorentson 03:08:03.991
Countless, any other amendments in relation to the motion to cancel the item? No. I have a few more to test. That the DMP be amended, let's try this on this one, the DMP be amended to include a clear objective. And strategy will for be the economic management. Of the visitor economy, supported by defined strategies, actions and measurable outcomes. Brian Stockwell 03:09:06.241
Just a second. Yes, do have we a seconder? Seconded by Councillor Phillips. Do you have a thought, Councillor Lorentson? Amelia Lorentson 03:09:13.521
This is come about by just some suggestions that were made out of the peer review by bye bye. Experts. And it was just a note saying that, how I understood it, that the plan lacked a framework or a clear objective or strategy for actively managing and supporting our local economy, so this basically, the amendment allows us to have a very clear objective. It could be positioned, I 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 to also include a clear objective strategy for actively managing it. Brian Stockwell 03:10:18.327
We'll just go to the amendment. Frank Wilkie 03:10:20.803
Just a question of staff. Is management of the economic management of the visitor economy part of the economic development strategy? Is there a reference to that? Is there more? No. Unidentified Speaker 03:10:36.547
The only thing that is in the economic development strategy is the development of a DMP and our mandate goes across Kim Rawlings 03:10:44.800
All sectors of the economy and in fact it's about building resilience of the economy and minimising our reliance on tourism. What I would just add to that, what I would say is that 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 the value of tourism and, you know, so it's inherent. It's a core tenet of the DMP that the visitor economy is supported. Yeah Amelia Lorentson 03:11:35.614
I think from, again, what I understood from the peer review that there needs to be, okay, incorrectly or wrong, how I interpreted it, that there needed to be more defaulted strategies, more defined actions, and more measurable outcomes, that it wasn't detailed enough as it stood. Have I understood that correctly? Kim Rawlings 03:12:00.400
Yeah, one of the peer reviewers did suggest a range of great, valuable insights to be more specific, yeah. Tom Wegener 03:12:16.022
I think that the DMP is the clear economic manager. Because our economy is so largely based on our environment and our pristine environment. Our tourism is based on how we manage the environment. Trying to split off and sliver off the visitor economy as a distinct thing is pretty meaningless when the management of the visitor economy what the whole of 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. Thank just 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 and they made Noosa gin and Noosa gin became on various airlines and just went ballistic because the name Noosa gin ended a pole up all on it and so there I mean, what's sort of economists would see that coming I think that it's all so linked up that what the DMP is management of the visitor economy I don't see it any you can't microcosm can't that you can't sliver it off Brian Stockwell 03:13:58.053
78% Of the respondents thought that we did identify a fair objective for economic management when they looked at the vision for this much imaginable plane. The Destination Management Plan which is a way of through Jesus, I've already lost in trouble. That respects community, actively protects the environment, and nurtures a thriving global economy. As the Director mentioned, the destination management strategy is there to achieve the long-term sustainability and resilience of our visitor economy. 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, additional business, and we'll try and. The role of the destination management organisation may get into specifics, but the vast array of actions in here is 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 you know that the research on the Noosa brand, as in the regional academy, has significant multiplier compared to the national average being able to place in that particular research. That's why following what we're 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, but if we 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 is allocated down the road in a mean if any places, if they're very much cities by the sea, you wouldn't care. So on that hand of the governor, I don't think the amendment is necessary. Councillor Finzel. I just have a question. I'm just wondering about when we. It's very. Karen Finzel 03:16:24.341
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 03:16:38.948
This is an issue with the structure of the amendment. We don't have objectives in the MPV, but as far as this was to pass, do you think there's sufficient in the amendment to guide what people do? Karen Finzel 03:16:49.834
Yeah, to guide an objective that can be so simply drawn into a paragraph? Kim Rawlings 03:16:55.758
We have goals, principles, goals, strategies, actions. We do. Well, you could say an objective could be a goal. Amelia Lorentson 03:17:05.320
And it could be as simple, and I think the peer review referenced it, could be as simple as just. Increasing in contribution through 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 03:17:37.634
Anyone else wish to talk? Frank Wilkie 03:17:40.813
This is just the success of the Noosa visitor economy and its continued prosperity is an implied outcome of the successful implementation of the Destination Management Plan. We want to make sure that Noosa, its liveability and the prosperity of its visitor economy is ensured for generations to come. I'm concerned that this looks like turning the DMP into an economic visitor economy economic management plan on the where it's really intended to manage the impacts of visitors so that liveability of our communities can be sustained and the prosperity of the visitor experience. Economy can be sustained. Whatever destination marketing body is approved as a result of these deliberations will have its clear measurable outcomes to determine whether the objectives their objectives are being achieved or not visitor it was nights as has already been mentioned but I'm concerned about turning the DMP into something else. It's not. Jessica Phillips 03:19:09.035
I'll speak to it. I'll support it because I believe that, well 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 community document and now we have to the include things because if we don't, in two years' time when, you know, maybe we are or we're not sitting here, the next lot of Councillors have, you know, things are repressed. 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 for 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 could say I'm an 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. No one Brian Stockwell 03:20:54.342
Thank you. As long as you pose. Karen Finzel 03:20:58.051
I'm sorry, you do no, I'm happy to support like if we were like, you know, a clear objective and put it 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, but given, you know, the peer reviewer said that we've not given 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 03:21:53.277
Further question, probably of the mover. How would this change the DMP? Amelia Lorentson 03:22:01.675
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. So. Could I ask, what would the clear objective be? For economic. It's just the prosperity of the visitor opponent? Yeah. Terms of how we are going to be supporting our small businesses, in terms of, again, is it increasing in 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 family's future. Brian Stockwell 03:23:09.076
So, a question to start. I can see how it would be quite simple to include a clearer objective, which would probably be a target or a principle there. But is there enough in the amendment to actually amend the effect of defined strategies, actions and medical outcomes? Kim Rawlings 03:23:34.821
I'm going these questions. 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, regeneration, circular economy principles. Wanting to ensure that tourism enhances well being a part of integrity. There's a raft of things in there about supporting business, so we could definitely craft up something. What I would say is that hasn't 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. Brian Stockwell 03:24:38.654
And so Wilson has a vote in the meeting? Now we're going to hand it over to Councillor Wilson. Nicola Wilson 03:24:48.574
Oh, yeah. I'll support it. Was a gap identified and it is important that we consider the economy for our community. Amelia Lorentson 03:25:03.484
Hey Kendall, how's it going to be for you tonight? Not so good. Need to thank you. Brian Stockwell 03:25:08.352
Okay, I'll put the amendment those in favour. That's Councillor Wilson, Wilkie, Finzel, Lorentson and Phillips. Those against? Councillor Wegener and Stockwell. The amendment is carried and becomes part of the motion. Let's proceed to whatever comes next. Do we have any more amendments? Frank Wilkie 03:25:29.158
I'm going to go out again. Unidentified Speaker 03:25:38.127
This is going to be removed I'm still thinking. Amelia Lorentson 03:25:46.219
Come on. 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 of a plan. Brian Stockwell 03:26:12.535
We have to take that? Cancel or wait now? We have to go cancel, aren't we? Amelia Lorentson 03:26:23.137
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, it's just seen she's an not 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 publicly. Land and waterways, transport infrastructure and potential visitor charging mechanism. I think the idea of developing a Council advocacy and partnership strategy will allow us to join forces with, like even our neighbouring councils, Sunshine Coast Council, Gympie, and state and Federal governments to achieving the objectives of the DMP. As the peer reviewer said, this is a critical component and I understand there's going to be some resourcing issues with that, but 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 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 03:28:04.358
Question, with set would this sit inside the monitoring and evaluation report in the document itself as an action? Unidentified Speaker 03:28:12.272
No. All right. Brian Stockwell 03:28:14.678
I think if I can answer I think it could be an action under the same section that has establishing the stewardship of the Council. Yeah. Which is, I think, leading the way if I'm not wrong. I just hit too many buttons. Yeah, I think it could perhaps be catch the. Isn't intent, Councillor, that to amend the DMP to include an action that proposes to develop the development. So, an action level? Yeah, that would be better. And if I can ask staff, would that be in group of folks are happy, but that would be interesting. Of governance or not? Kim Rawlings 03:29:01.900
In the DMP, at the last section in the back, or as an action under one of the principles? That's a question. No, yeah, that's fine. In front of the DMP. 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 about the critical success factors, and point three of critical success factors, as I try and find it, says effective advocacy with a clear plan to influence policy and decision making. So it's already mentioned as a critical success factor. And then strategic partnerships to do the same. Brian Stockwell 03:29:47.227
And repeated action it's a rebate in the actual plan. Can I change the proposes together? Amelia Lorentson 03:29:52.106
Proposers to consider, please? So I'm in the DMP, included in action that considers the development of Council advocacy and partnership strategy to support implementation of the plan. Would you prefer to consider or propose as Kim? Consider this to me. I'm happy with either or, but proposes. I think, proposes is stronger. Okay, I'll go with proposes. Thank you. Nicola Wilson 03:30:26.035
No, no, no, that was. Kim Rawlings 03:30:29.896
Oh, I just was making a statement. Proposes is a stronger word. Consider is, you know, still requires some consideration. Amelia Lorentson 03:30:36.956
No, I don't want that. Thank you very much. Thank you. Brian Stockwell 03:30:39.514
Okay. We will talk to amendment cancels. Wait another second. Tom Wegener 03:30:48.888
So, to staff, would this be redundant then? Isn't it, you just read out what it says in the beginning? Kim Rawlings 03:30:58.468
Yes, okay. It's a statement of fact that the front of the destination plan says this is a long-term plan. For 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. Strategic partnerships with industry, business, government and community to ensure alignment and shared direction. Unidentified Speaker 03:31:25.016
But I included it as an amendment. Brian Stockwell 03:31:29.740
I'm actually quite happy because it's actually an action that implements that pretty successfully. Yes, Sir. I did. Unidentified Speaker 03:31:38.338
Yeah. Wait. I don't really want to commit this to another strategy, but I agree. That's awesome. Tom Wegener 03:31:48.956
Anyone- Hey, what else? Question? Councillor Lorentson, would you be envisioning an ambassador program, for example? Amelia Lorentson 03:32:03.035
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, knows the answer. Maybe make it a separate amendment. Brian Stockwell 03:32:34.456
I can't come in here. If you'd like to comment on that, please. Kim Rawlings 03:32:38.176
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. Critical to that is the development. Building ambassadors in our community. So I think it's captured already in that action. Brian Stockwell 03:32:59.036
Okay. Anyone else? Nicola Wilson 03:33:02.580
Sorry, can I ask a question again being pedantic because this whole document. Attachment is the Destination Management Plan, but then 2. Is the Destination Management Plan, so when we're talking about changing the plan, is the plan only about 10 pages, but it's 2. Brian Stockwell 03:33:23.371
By referring to an action, there is a specific element in the framework of the plan that we're going with, so it's going to be 3.6 or something like that. Nicola Wilson 03:33:37.670
I don't care if people. Document before the Destination Management Plan, and then an item within the Destination Management Plan. Thank you. This is neat. Really an intro that we get to go through. I know what you're saying. I'm staying, but. And so the item that we just talked about other day. Is on payday, not within the plan. That it's funny. Brian Stockwell 03:34:00.223
The question was asked is, do we consider the whole document, that is, with the green colour as the Destination Management Plan, or only that part of it? The whole document. That is your question? Kim Rawlings 03:34:18.984
This amendment would go, change the section 2. To include a specific action, and that's how we would take this amendment, under I'm the with bracelet. One of the principles and strategies. Brian Stockwell 03:34:38.947
Anyone else wish to come? Can't go along with me. I'll put the amendment those in favour. Oh, that's unanimous. We move on, Councillor Lorentson. Amelia Lorentson 03:34:56.203
I'll try another amendment. That carrying capacity measures explicitly ensure that resident access to beaches, parks and 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 03:35:25.964
Thank we to take look at have a seconder for that? Thank you, Councillor Finzel. Councillor Wilson, do you have a floor? Amelia Lorentson 03:35:39.526
Um, it's just something came up time and again over two years of consultation and discussion in terms of resident access to beaches, parks and natural areas. The amendment just identified identifies that, um, resident access remains a priority for this Council, um, and is protected, um, as current capacity measures are developed and implemented. Um, 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. Um, define the local lifestyle and community identity. So just putting. At the forefront of our decision making, um, that we don't unreasonably, um, restrict access to our residents. Thank you, everyone, for your time. Karen Finzel 03:36:52.031
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 ingold or live, you know, at Doonan or Eumundi, and they're 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. I 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? You know, would we put residents in there? Is that the question? Oh yeah, that's the question. How do we be inclusive when also we've recognised that visitors to the region are not necessarily like day troopers, they could be people that have a second property here, they're coming up on the weekend. Sorry, yes, just wondering how we'd be inclusive I was just that. Brian Stockwell 03:38:06.037
Probably a rhetorical question, but I one was. Think the other legal staff could answer that one. I'm not looking at the enthusiasm there. Would be the end of the meeting. Nicola Wilson 03:38:16.157
Would it be improved by saying recognise Noosa access? Amen. That was good. Amelia Lorentson 03:38:22.917
See you soon. Jesus, yes, it would. Thank you very much. And that captures what karen's said. I did make it sound very exclusive. So I'm happy to make this one forward and then change the wording to user access. Brian Stockwell 03:38:46.463
I'll talk to the amendment. I couldn't support it. I can support the notion that is implicit within the DMP that the intent is it to maintain it. The experience and in some areas where it's overused at the moment, maybe improve the experience of residents and visitors. And I'm happy with the context of saying if there is problems that we take our resident and the by-residents needs into consideration. Why all I can't support it is that the carrying capacity. Elements carrying capacity elements of the current DMP is about encouraging sustainable visitation by using carrying capacity to provide access and protect sense of natural places, ensuring I'm sure the places, I'm sure we the environment visit this is the environment and visitor. Experience are I've preserved presented for all. Once again, I've said it for all. And, you know, it's accelerated our work and advocacy with partners, including the State government, to introduce carrying capacity, expanding and managing the excesses that we're getting to that are most iconic. The sense of locations is the action 2.1. The key there is once again, to come back to what I've just said, where we know the current visitation is in excess of carrying capacity is where have this on our soul and body. North Shore and partying when the 10th national park is in the middle of the wilderness and not under your arm. You know, it's about people who say they're getting knocked over by joggers that are going to the national park. Very aggressive. Impressive. It's a bad 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. I don't know. Got it? So, you yeah. Know, carrying capacity is the maximum amount of activity that an area can handle with that quality dynamics that could the and unaccepted damage, community values and environment. 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 03:41:01.970
Question? I'm happy to make this amendment for I don't have really haven't really thought about this one out too much I think where I was heading with this is that we don't have a 365 day solution to a 60 day problem so I'm wondering if I've 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. Brian Stockwell 03:41:39.898
You go. Well I'm going to take that as a closing address after no one was committed to talking if you haven't I've put the motion those in favour that's unanimously lost I'm going to there we go, go got to another one coming through Amelia Lorentson 03:42:00.525
Just advice to the Director would changing the word user achieve the outcome that I was seeking in the previous amendment Kim Rawlings 03:42:11.716
I think what I was suggesting is I could assist with some Amelia Lorentson 03:42:15.621
Wording that would be fantastic just 30 Brian Stockwell 03:42:20.380
Minutes away from the next general break have we got any other amendments? I'll test it on. So, Councillor Wilkie over to the other one. Jessica Phillips 03:42:55.121
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 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. Unidentified Speaker 03:43:28.438
Can I have just a second? I'm sorry. It's okay. Brian Stockwell 03:43:47.709
And reverse. So this is the reword it's to the one in the previous room. Now let's talk about campus. Meditation it's. Mentioning a plan that is, you know, the three-year communication plan is. Not being adopted today. That's my significant issue is. Whether that a legitimate thought. Frank Wilkie 03:44:20.063
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, ratepayer funded. And wouldn't we be undertaking advocacy actions to get a regulatory outcome? 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 03:45:23.360
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 that I'm not comfortable with because it doesn't clearly tell us what is our role and what's at stake. It's blurred in that implementation plan and it's more around just saying what's our, what's can shut in our lanes and we're not do you want me to speak to it? No. Unidentified Speaker 03:45:50.169
I was just presuming, I'm sorry. Can I have a question Through the Chair? Karen Finzel 03:45:56.352
You did raise in workshops about clarifying our role and others role. Is this like something requesting perhaps a table that identifies who Jessica Phillips 03:46:05.086
Who's responding. For what level or? 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 isn't. 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 could who well could that be, you know, a graphic diagram that shows. No, well I think it could just be separate. This is, and I think it says in the review, I don't have the wording in front of me, he's saying, the review says, what's state, what's Council. Yeah. It the in 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 03:46:55.670
Or rather knowing that, could we say, can the staff please include a table that clearly identifies each level and what their responsibility is for. Unidentified Speaker 03:47:03.098
In the implementation plan. Frank Wilkie 03:47:04.639
Sorry. Councillor Phillips, sorry, after you. We're going to put that question to the staff? Through the Chair please, Mr Chair. A Kim Rawlings 03:47:16.474
A title could be provided to outline roles and responsibilities. Would I say in each of the actions, because we took on board the peer review feedback and actually refined the wording in the action in all aspects from that peer review, so that advice was taken on board. It has been incorporated, so I'm not sure 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, to and who we to our partners the State government in the responsibility section we then also say who's the lead and who are the partners, 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. Jessica Phillips 03:48:09.186
So, Christian, did they review it again after? 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? Brian Stockwell 03:48:24.734
Okay. So. Male question, speaker: 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 that we're not endorsing. The 3D implementation and so on. My technical problem with the amendment, it seemed to make changes to a draft that's not being sought to have guidance on it at this stage. And then when I look at the Monitoring and Evaluation Framework, you're talking about actions and in the Monitoring and Evaluation Framework, actions are just listed by Unidentified Speaker 03:49:03.108
That's why I'm suggesting a table perhaps. Jessica Phillips 03:49:05.813
No, because it goes back to Councillor Wilson's amendment that when the review, the peer review, I now don't know that peer review then went back to. I become 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. Brian Stockwell 03:49:30.275
When we have our break, I'm going to. I haven't accepted the statement. Thank you. Because I was reviewing his technical credence, I don't think I could accept it. Okay. So is this just not happening? It's just recorded as not accepted by the Chair. It doesn't work. Do I have to take it? Thank you. Any other amendments? Amelia Lorentson 03:50:43.265
Don't you I'm going to just play with the one that I let fall before and Kim if you can let me know if this is captures what I'm trying to achieve and I'll just try that carrying capacity and visit of management. Visitor management measures apply proportionate targeted solutions to specific problems. I'll send that through to you now, Cathy. So is it this one? No, it's a totally new- It's a totally new one, so try to guess what it is. Do you want to just read it out? Apply, let's see if this makes sense. I'll just send it to you, Cathy. That carrying capacity and visitor management measures. Apply proportionate targeted solutions to specific problems, not blanket restrictions. Brian Stockwell 03:52:21.940
Very good, do we have a seconder? Councillor Wilson. Phillips. Oh, hold on. That was Councillor Phillips. Yeah, Councillor Nicola Wilson, yeah. Nicola Wilson 03:52:44.768
Know, someone we'll see. Someone says Wilson, someone says Phillips, we sing. Unidentified Speaker 03:52:47.259
You sing, I go. Brian Stockwell 03:52:52.879
You have the floor. Amelia Lorentson 03:52:56.979
Without repeating what I just said before, I think what I'm trying to achieve with this is that we use data. 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, for 40 you days, guys, you know, we have congestion 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 amendment just ensures that we allow the data to. Inform any decision-making. I'll speak to this. Jessica Phillips 03:53:55.191
Yes, 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 why are we actually 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 what our community would want rather than they don't want to be stopped from why they live here in the first place I don't think that's the intention anyway because we're 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 year it's completely fine to go to these places and it's not overcrowded but the DMP was meant to manage it and for this hopefully achieves that, Brian Stockwell 03:55:01.753
Thank you. Question of staff, to me that's just a statement of what we're intending to do. It's basically a statement of principle of how we're going to apply that evidence. Means that your understanding of the raising red flags that you should consider Kim Rawlings 03:55:23.207
There's two aspects to that I think for me is one that it infers that we would do I know it doesn't really say that at all it's about managing the experience sustainably and yeah Amelia Lorentson 03:55:41.032
So can we get rid of the word scheme not blanket restrictions and just targeted solutions to specific problems and I accept what you just you said that's never been our intention yeah Brian Stockwell 03:55:55.639
Everyone happy with that James? Kim Rawlings 03:55:59.944
Okay I'm just thinking I'm just thinking if you just read that without missing 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 capacity is, sorry, yes, okay, yeah I think it's very broad I think without the narrative alongside it I don't think it counts, doesn't reach intent. Amelia Lorentson 03:56:35.068
So ensure that carrying capacity measures use of the, sorry, visitor, sorry, no sorry, that carrying capacity and visitor management measures recognise user access to beaches, parks and natural Councillor, that would be a different amendment. It is, yeah. Brian Stockwell 03:57:01.432
Okay, other people wish to talk to the amendment? Councillor Wilson. Nicola Wilson 03:57:04.657
I'm a bit unsure on this one because from what I understand of what's in the plan at moment, 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 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 an app. I did challenge the words better decisions but it isn't subjective but informed decisions is what I wanted to say so people can go oh it's busy day today I won't be able to park or it's busy day today I will think of 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 where we get to first with that establishing our carrying capacity and actually act versus that before making any Kim Rawlings 03:58:11.579
Can we just confirm that we took on board that and it doesn't say better it does somewhat. It says locate, use it to. Use inform their choices about when and where to visit Brian Stockwell 03:58:35.229
I'm just go home I'm a little bit with Councillor Finzel. I actually support that in the State of the fact that it's what's intended. I don't know whether concluding it in the motion is going to make 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 search 10 for 5. We're going to mail it on to Jesse. Get all our underserveds out there. Yeah. We want to say, well, that's it. Amelia Lorentson 03:59:17.139
I take on board all the commentary around the table. I agree, just reading that, you need the context to really understand where it's going. Think there is an understanding, clear understanding, that is what we're actually going to do, target solutions to specific problems. So I'm happy for this amendment to lapse. Thank you. Brian Stockwell 03:59:42.740
I'm sorry? I'm smothered. Yeah, I'm going to say that. Actually I am as a statement in the form. So there's two. Who is for it again please? So that's Councillor Wilkie, Lawrence and Phillips. Those against? Wilson, Finzel, Wegener and so forth. Are and recognise we ready for this one? We're debating the motion. I think there's been a suggestion for a break, Mr Chair. Thank you. We'll have a break and if we're lucky we'll be certain in the debate that we can stand the motion. Ten minutes, we'll make it 4:40. Brian Stockwell 04:10:04.490
We're ready, yes. Welcome back. So Councillors, we may have one more amendment. Karen Finzel 04:10:17.821
Yes, I'd like to just please test this. I did circulate it but it was probably not intended due to circumstances. My apologies. Thank you. That item JB added to read, endorse the establishment of a Destination Stewardship Council as a priority action to support implementation of 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 destination and stewardship Council and report back to Council for consideration is provided as the first priority following adoption of the Destination Management Plan. I'm happy to take that. I'll get it before. Thank you. I think a pivotal, really important part of this conversation is the destination and stewardship Council, especially in support of another level of governance to a surety 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. DSC the is a 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 assist guiding noosa's transition towards regenerative tourism consistent with their identity as a UNESCO biosphere reserve and a destination that is Different by Nature. 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 end the rolling three-year implementation plan. Ensuring that strategic goals are being achieved, risks are actively managed, and resourcing requirements are identified progress will be reported to Council supporting an adaptive approach that allows Noosa to test ideas, learn from experience, and continuously improve how tourism contributes to 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. Brian Stockwell 04:14:25.983
Do you eye with you? Need an overview of what you think that might look like? I think you've got it. Thank you. I'll just switch to Councillor Wilson. Nicola Wilson 04:14:35.181
Just asking a time question. Is this redundant? Because it's already in the plan. Brian Stockwell 04:14:43.191
So who are that you asking it of? Councillor Finzel. Karen Finzel 04:14:49.618
Well, quite clearly. If I thought it was, it would be me. Brian Stockwell 04:14:54.724
So I'll answer it for you. Certainly the establishment is foreshadowed. This I think what this amendment does is say the it's the first cab off range. The rank. That's what makes it different. And I agree with that. I want to that's a few of this won't say that. Stands to your question. I'll go um talk to it. Yes, I think we've heard today and previously that all the expertise in our community and. We know that um plan implementation will be better if we have a collaborative model of governance and I think this is a key step forward um if we get the destination stewardship vice president: Council terms of reference right and we senator Griffiths, have the right people, blank. 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 side, and I catch off, catch from that, and catch 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 year evaluation review and the three year action plan. Obviously if we've got that happening as an amount of priority it should help speed the implementation process. So I support the sentence within the amendment. I wish to talk. Frank Wilkie 04:16:35.834
I will I want Mr Chair, I think Councillor Finzel with this amendment has unlocked the Rosetta, has targeted the Rosetta stone of this whole DMP. It 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 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 it. Tom Wegener 04:17:39.169
Is it the key plan along and getting real change for bringing is to move it forward, to put that as, they say, the first tab off the rank. Is that the. Karen Finzel 04:17:52.302
Well, I guess for me, I always put governance as, like, number one, and I just feel like that's why I'm bringing it as a priority action. Firstly, it's about governance. And extol- extra layer of transparency, providing a shoring to our community, but also, I guess, if that action itself progresses it forward, but I think it gives it that actual 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'm off-guard, garment, so 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 04:18:51.759
Thank you very much. Question there, I'd like you to, Mr Rawlings, can you, it might be because it's late in the day, can you remind me when the Council came into the DM? The DMP? Was it the first round, second round? Kim Rawlings 04:19:08.588
Just remind me. It was in the second round in the draft document that went out to consultation. Jessica Phillips 04:19:15.990
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. Unidentified Speaker 04:19:29.361
Do you I need give me need one minute? Brian Stockwell 04:19:51.497
Community to look at other destinations that have developed destinations for people with cancer as well. Thank you, Sandra. Kim Rawlings 04:19:59.738
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 measure DMP progress. DMP whether I don't know whether you support that or not. Jessica Phillips 04:20:14.589
Do you want to Resolve that question? No. And when did we explain what that, who would be on it and in order to get the answers, how would they understand what this was? Kim Rawlings 04:20:30.393
So the DMP itself that went out, the draft DMP, had a section on what the Destination Stewardship Council is. And remind me, team, do we also a fact sheet? Oh, no, we had it in the G &T, the. Unidentified Speaker 04:20:43.748
No, we didn't have a fact sheet deliberately on the DSC. 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, some people won't weren't 100%% understand. 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 04:21:06.993
So did community, was it glaringly obvious in the second round that this was a priority that we'll see things. Would foresee other. Things for us to, for us to decide today that it becomes priority. Kim Rawlings 04:21:21.380
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. Approach to destination management and regenerative tourism and success to that is shared responsibility and you know collective oversight so that the stewardship Council was a key aspect to as a mechanism to do it so I you know I think it was clear for those who engaged and asked the question. Amelia Lorentson 04:22:02.138
I'll speak to it. I'm not going to I'm not going to support the 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 process for the Destination Stewardship Council is going to be presented firstly to Council for endorsement prior to its establishment. I think the amendment in front of us skips that very, very critical step. So, no, I'm choose not going to accept that because we're not, we don't, I need more understanding about, you know, the legalities. You know, what's the purpose? What's the structure? What does the membership look like? What's the relationship of the DSC with Tourism Noosa? What's the relationship with existing advisory groups and Council commitments we need to understand that prior to its establishment again commend Councillor Finzel for putting it forward but I don't support it because it's and you can't support something that you have no understanding of what is supporting. Frank Wilkie 04:23:27.864
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 process for establishing the Destination Stewardship Council so and report back to Council for consideration so you are saying do terms of reference first yeah that's what I Amelia Lorentson 04:23:50.719
Thought but that has to be supported first before we endorse the establishment the and that's got to come back to Council is my understanding. Question- There's continuing arguments. Shaquem, have I understood that correctly? The process, as I understood, was the terms of reference-- will be coming-- will be prepared. A report comes back to Council for consideration and approval before the establishment of the Destination Stewardship Council. Have I understood correctly? Kim Rawlings 04:24:30.459
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 04:24:46.201
So, so is this amendment consistent with that? I think this amendment is consistent. It is. Jessica Phillips 04:24:56.481
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 04:25:13.655
The outlook look, this process was probably always going to be a priority. You know, we've said one of the, language and in you this said 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, it's establishment is a priority to be able to help and advise on those things. So I don't think being clear about it being a first priority bumps anything. It was always gonna be an important element. Amelia Lorentson 04:25:59.223
So is this redundant? If you're saying it's already articulated clearly in the plan, do we need this amendment? Kim Rawlings 04:26:07.492
I think there's been lots of things today that are up there. Just provide clarity. So in the spirit of Amelia Lorentson 04:26:15.580
Providing clarity, Kim Rawlings 04:26:16.362
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 04:26:30.927
Can't listen. 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 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. Or is the establishment of the stewardship Council a priority in the plan? Kim Rawlings 04:27:10.886
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 04:27:38.341
So it's action 4.1. Who else? Councillor Finzel if you like to start. Karen Finzel 04:27:50.287
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 you 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 our awareness to um I guess put my intent forward and my heart of the matter is to ensure that it is this collaborative approach and that 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 04:28:35.982
What might you do? I put the motion that the amendment goes in favour. That's Councillor Wilkie, Finzel, Lawrence and Wegener and Stockwell. Those against? Councillor Wilson Councillor and Councillor Phillips. The amendment is carried and therefore becomes part of the end of the motion. Have we come to the end of the bill of amendments? Amelia Lorentson 04:28:57.745
I'm going to try one more. See how this goes. That during implementation, monitoring and review of the Destination Management Plan, council officers 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 opportunities. Brian Stockwell 04:29:50.149
Do we have a seconder? Karen Finzel 04:29:51.486
I'll be the second for debate. Brian Stockwell 04:29:53.740
Do we have a third Councillor? Amelia Lorentson 04:29:54.820
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 evidence-based decision-making and help us identify emerging risks and opportunities and refine and review our implementation priorities as conditions evolved. Ongoing engagement. 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 the community backing and key stakeholder and independent advice. Oh yeah happy to speak to that Karen Finzel 04:31:17.495
Thank you Councillor Lorentson um 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 covered and um you know we had to pivot and move in the space so I really think this is good to ensure that we can remain responsive to changing economic conditions and to weather. 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 um deliver approach remaining responsive to changing conditions so I think it's um it's good to add this as an extra layer to ensure that we can pivot in times of changing ever-changing environments so thank you Brian Stockwell 04:32:13.389
The president question to start. Am I reading a partial role description in terms of reference for a destination scripture Council? Old to can't you? Think Kim Rawlings 04:32:28.212
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 think it also states one 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 the plan itself says very clearly plan itself says very clearly that we recognise that you know not everything will work will 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 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. Anyone else wish to talk to this Brian Stockwell 04:33:50.772
As long as Amelia Lorentson 04:33:51.726
You wish to file. Close. Just I think we all know there's some serious local know-how in our community 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 site people from the 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 keeps using that phrase but this is one of the gentlemen two of the guys that sat on the patrol control group they have experience in successful delivering successful destination management plans and it would be regretful 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 Brian Stockwell 04:35:31.595
I put the amendment those in favour. That's Councillor Wilson, Finzel, Lawrence and Phillips. Those against is Councillor Wilkie, Wegener and Stockwell. The amendment is carried and becomes part of the substandard motion Councillors. There being no more amendments, we now are debating the substandard motion to which only Councillor Wilkie has vote. Is there anyone else who would like to do that? Councillor Wilson. Nicola Wilson 04:36:18.841
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 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, and protecting our biosphere. 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 contain leading questions and that's not just my opinion but shared in feedback from the community too. Some chose to make a written submission instead. Counsellors Councillors did not see the survey questions they were released and some have raised multiple concerns about how much we can rely on the responses despite being a statistically valid sample. The written submissions which were lengthy are barely mentioned in this final version although some of the feedback might be 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 challenges ahead alongside an economic framework and risk management framework to supporting the plan. We get to the actual plan on page 29 after a lengthy introduction and that sort of ends on page 38. The plan itself is based on four principles 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 what does look like which I would like to have seen as the guiding principle for the document rather than really focusing on regenerative tourism because I don't really see where we have tangible inroads into the top priorities being community well-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. Of cases 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 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 capacities 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 and regenerative activities this that measures 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 programs it's not about their success of destination 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 measure whether that 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're just also we've been put 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's future most of us were in meetings all day Friday and again we're 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 to write amendments it was one of my priorities to get it the DMP last year and I just don't really I don't know if I 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 04:42:03.040
Come down I've come to really like the plan largely because it's courageous. In the past Noosa has taken many very courageous actions and this is one in the long 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 um I reflects news through. I believe this plan reflects noosa's 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 04:42:59.862
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 with 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 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 stunning coastline. Conversations with neighbours and the deep 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. Here we are today at a church. Point. At an intersection that demands magnification and readjustment to safely inform and facilitate unprecedented change socially, economically and environmentally. Both 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. Are a part of our collective story. But the current model asks too much 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 visitation are absorbed by ratepayers alone. When young people inherit congestion instead of connection. When community wellbeing is treated 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 Custodians, young people, local businesses and visitors are all heard. Fairness becomes 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 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. Over fragmented decision-making. It gives equal voice to residents and visitors. It ensures those who benefit also contribute. Places community 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. So let us stand 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 feels like home. Because when we lead 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. Thank you. Unidentified Speaker 04:48:32.465
Yes, Ma'am. This is great. Okay, Jessica Phillips 04:48:40.899
So at the very heart of this role, we are public not servants. Advocates are not advocates for a particular world view and not champions of one sector or one group. Public servants are entrusted to make decisions on behalf of the whole community. That responsibility demands more than good intent. It demands humility, balance, and a willingness to challenge our own assumptions. When this DMP began, it was presented as a community document, a way to bring people together around how we manage tourism, protect what makes Noosa special, and plan responsibilities. This playing responsibility for the future somewhere along the way I believe it has changed, and I really did want to have a crack. Today, what sits before us no longer feels like a document that's shaped equally by the full breadth of our community. Because it feels like it's been morphed into something that serves a different purpose and one that sits uncomfortable with me. And my moral compass seems to be extremely high. Documents the 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 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. Comments, 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. Also want to address the community survey that underpinned this document. Engagement is so important, but how questions are framed matters just as much as how people respond. Survey language must be crafted to have open questions that lead participants to open answers. 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 implications. 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. 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. That's and in the 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 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 from my policing background because I'm a mum because I'm a local because I'm direct grounded maybe I'm not interested in the fluff the titles or the photos maybe all of us each at of the 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 if-worn camera 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 staff and people while I deeply respect the 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 of what I owe the community I'm not interested in reports and frameworks simply because they've taken time to repair prepare because my responsibility is to the people that I represent and those people including those 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 the day I'm going to go home I'm gonna look my kids my husband and this community and say look me in the eye and say I acted every single day with integrity that's the standard that I'm gonna hold it myself to for a while. Brian Stockwell 04:54:31.756
My own thing. Amelia Lorentson 04:54:33.297
Is there any so Councillors. Can I speak? I was going to speak. Oh excuse me. No go ahead I thought you opened. No you moved to the motion. Excuse me. Brian Stockwell 04:54:48.217
3,000 Or so people involved and what he 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 intricacies of survey method and have some assumptions and say one question had too many variables in it, etc. But blind Freddie could look at the results and say what do our you 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 community involvement that we've got in this process. I know we have come with high standards and expectations but 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 eyes, but 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 within territory, you have 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. 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 ten days ago. I spent probably a day and a half in doing that, providing feedback. We've all had that opportunity. And yes, there will come a time when we need to make a decision. And that is local government, you get an agenda, and you take time, you read it, and you adopt the position. I don't feel the 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 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 how 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 were the ones that evolved big elements involved their governments and evolved how they do it. And that's what this plan does. What this plan does. But there is some bold things in here. And I think it's really clear that the four key areas that we're saying are new. Day visitor management, we've clearly identified what we're do that's different to try and address the issues associated with day trips. And everyone knows that's going to be probably the hardest one to make meaningful changes until there is society societal change around this. The use of the private motor vehicle. We did over the final stages of the plan come up with the for love of Noosa concept which really to me was a really good one saying whether you go down the end of 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 for love of Noosa program is picking up on elements not just for the visitors but for residents some of the concepts that I put many years ago in this place. 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 you know the new focus on hinterland regeneration what we see the hinterland doing is providing the large 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 into the visitor economy so he's 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. That this is a shared issue. It's one where it's not just Council working with a destination management organisation. Marketing, sorry, destination marketing organisation. Marketing should. Is one element of what could help lead to a new culture within the visitor economy and a 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 moving forward. So I understand the individual issues that have been raised today where improvements could be made. 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. Think that's it. And Councillor Lorentson. Amelia Lorentson 05:00:41.882
I why don't you can I just 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 1234567 got up. That alone highlights the issues for me raised around the robustness of this plan. Keep going back to our obligations. To our residents is to ensure that we manage and protect their 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 asked to do 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 rigour required for a 10-year strategic plan. 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 and again, endorsing a plan without the necessary rigour, 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 referenced the rigour 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 recently the 2032 Olympic and paralympic forums that was hosted by the Noosa Chamber of commerce. There's new opportunities that have emerged through the Queensland 2014. 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. In 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 frames prioritisations accountability for delivering and again I note that you know it's been said around this table over the last five hours that the draft 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 the proposed outcomes depend on state government reform or cooperation from other agencies including short stay accommodation visitor contributions, transport initiatives and managing 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 endorsing the plan without rushing it. 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 05:05:47.540
Thank you. Frank Wilkie 05:05:52.987
Look, after a very extensive series of workshops where all Councillors were taught through the structure of the plan, had ample opportunity to have input, around and understand it. The final draft for 10 days to pour over and make suggestions and improvements with staff. I'm really sorry that after all that, they some of them only see confusion, risk, uncertainty, fear of offending supporters and wording they don't like. What I see is a Amelia Lorentson 05:06:29.010
Fantastic. Point of order, Chair. Yes, what's your point of order? Of a-- offending, what were the words, Mayor Wilkie, risk of offending supporters. I take offence to that, I think that's personal and out of Brian Stockwell 05:06:42.218
My. I didn't know that. 31. I didn't- Frank Wilkie 05:06:44.309
Thank know I heard that Brian Stockwell 05:06:47.564
Not- It's not directed at the Councillor Frank Wilkie 05:06:49.064
So--- This is what I heard about wanting to-- Brian Stockwell 05:06:52.304
No, Councillor, it's up to me. Acknowledge what you're saying, but I don't believe it hits the benchmark in terms of that point of order. Councillor Wilson, have you got another point of order? Nicola Wilson 05:07:01.824
Yeah, factually incorrect that we got the--- No, no point of order. We got it on the Thursday. Brian Stockwell 05:07:06.484
So, Councillor, you cannot use a point of order to correct what you perceive as a factual error. Thank you. Frank Wilkie 05:07:14.667
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 it's not about us. It is about-- the best long-term interest of the broader Noosa community now and into the future. I don't 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 plan that seeks to preserve the natural beauty that makes Noosa what it is, makes it the livable 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're well aware and ought to be responsibly preparing for the challenges that we face. To vote against this plan and to do business as usual, knowing the population increases in South East Queensland, with the Olympics on the way, is to be negligent. 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 these, what the amendments involve. Councillors, I 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 the 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. We have but we heard it said, it's not what we say, it's what we do and how we vote that shows what we really stand for. And I think that's really true. This is a. Plan that's, even though you may not agree with it, I think you must know in your heart of that it gives Noosa the best chance of facing a future where population pressures and visitation is only going to become more and intense. And to do nothing is to go backwards. Of course with a plan as ambitious as this and as wide-ranging and cast as wide a net there is bound to be the high chance that we're not going to agree on everything in it the wording but the framework with the establishment of the Destination Stewardship Council be refined 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 you you're here for the betterment of the community you want to be a Council that does things not delays things so this Destination Management Plan is a good step forward and I would like to especially thank the staff who have been saintly in their patience response to information requests in the integrity with which they've handled the work with which they've handled the 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 05:12:01.807
Put the motion. Those in favour? That's Councillor Wilkie, Finzel, Wegener and Stockwell. Those opposed is Wilson, Lorentson and Phillips. The motion is carried. Thank you and well done. You very next item is confidence. So we are dealing with the not-for-public-release environment that you proposed last proposed land purchase. Referred from the Planning & Environment Committee. If we have a stand-by motion to move to a stand-by motion. Moved by Councillor Phillips. Phillips. Stand-by? Seconded by Councillor Finzel was it? Yes. Thank you Mr Chair. Jessica Phillips 05:13:08.013
The discussion is adjourned. Congratulations. Brian Stockwell 05:13:12.403
Item 9.1: Environment Levy proposed land purchase any discussion? No? I'll put the motion those in favour. That's unanimous. Brian Stockwell 05:27:24.380
Okay, so we're now back in open session and we're dealing with item 9.1 and I will move and I'll read it out because there is a slight change from that which was in the Planning & Environment Committee agenda that's not a comment. Oh yes, there is. It is at the change, so it's not a report by the coordinator of conservation environment to the Planning & Environment Committee dated 9th of December 2025 and b authorised and commit. Negotiations with the owners of their or agent regarding purchase of subject property as detailed in this report. If purchased by Council, utilise funds from council's Environment Levy. If purchased Council, undertake necessary establishment actions for security and biosafety. If purchased by Council, undertake necessary investigations and actions to pursue biodiversity and carbon offsets over the property. And five, where relevant and to the satisfaction of CEO into agreements and arrangements for the property to receive biodiversity and carbon offsets. I'm happy to that. Seconded by Councillor Lorentson. Not much we can take, but I think the 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 that's great. Meeting, but I think my time is up. Related Noosa Council Meetings
← Browse all Noosa Shire Council meeting transcripts
