General Committee Meeting, 9 June 2026
Date: Tuesday, 9 June 2026 at 10:00AM
Location: Noosa Shire Council Chambers , 9 Pelican Street , Tewantin , QLD 4565 , Australia
Organiser: Noosa Shire Council
Duration: 06:36:07
Synopsis: Active Street halted with grants reallocated, Tourism Noosa deed approved on casting vote, Botanic Gardens masterplan adopted, Noosa Junction land exchange endorsed, Biosecurity plan to consultation.
Meeting Attendees
Committee Members
Brian Stockwell Karen Finzel Amelia Lorentson Jessica Phillips Tom Wegener Nicola Wilson Executive Officers
Chief Executive Officer Larry Sengstock Director Community Services Kerri Contini Acting Director Corporate Services Margaret Gatt Director Development & Regulation Richard MacGillivray Director Infrastructure Services Shaun Walsh Apologies (Did Not Attend)
AI-Generated Meeting Insight
Key Decisions & Discussions Peregian Beach Active Street Stage 1 will not proceed in current form; CEO to seek reallocation of SEQ Liveability/Active Transport grants to practical works (paths, stormwater, parking, street trees) and report ASAP (Item 7.1; 01:59:52–02:12:18). Tourism Noosa Funding & Performance Deed 2026–2029 approved for $2M p.a. (CPI capped 3.5%), with a balanced scorecard KPI framework and up to $350k performance adjustment on the second instalment; carried on Chair’s casting vote (Item 7.12; 05:43:59–05:44:20). Noosa Botanic Gardens Masterplan adopted to guide 25-year upgrades (pathways, entry, living collection, accessibility, Friends facilities), informed by Phase 2 engagement (Item 7.11; 03:42:27–03:55:10). Legacy Plot Reservation Management Policy adopted to reclaim unused cemetery reservations older than 25 years via a transparent, legally-vetted process with a “safety net” reserved plot (Item 7.8; 03:16:18–03:26:09). Sport4All report noted; Council to consider future funding for an organisation‑wide Access & Inclusion function and framework when budgets permit; proposal to immediately fund a permanent Inclusion Officer did not secure a seconder (Item 7.9; 03:27:22–03:35:05). 2026–27 Community Grants endorsed across multiple streams (Projects, Facilities, Equipment, Events; Signature Events), leveraging high community ROI (Items 7.2–7.7; 02:42:35–03:15:05). 2026–27 Fees & Charges referred for a further report due to State RTI fee updates and admin corrections (Item 7.10; 03:40:44–03:41:34). Noosa Biosecurity Plan 2026–2031 approved for public consultation; risk‑based management of invasive plants/animals across tenures (Item 7.13; 05:45:02–06:01:46). Env & Climate Change Grants split into two reports for Ordinary Meeting to manage conflicts (Item 7.14; 06:10:32–06:15:57). Planning applications decided under delegation for April 2026 noted (Item 7.15; 06:16:41–06:18:01). Confidential land rationalisation at Noosa Junction: Council endorsed a market‑value land exchange framework and authorised CEO actions; exception to tender relied on s236(1)(c)(v) LGR 2012 (Item 8.1; 06:31:58–06:36:40). Contentious / Transparency Matters Peregian Active Street debate revealed strong local opposition vs. regional safety/transport benefits; community trust, survey access, and “opportunistic funding” were flashpoints (Item 7.1; 01:31:02–01:40:12). Meeting closed to discuss legal advice on Active Street under s254J(3)(e) LGR 2012; later reopened (Item 7.1; 34:05–34:21). Chair disallowed a question during cemetery policy; dissent motion lost 4–2, raising process sensitivity (Item 7.8; 03:23:03–03:25:09). Tourism Noosa deed passed on Chair’s casting vote after multiple accountability amendments failed (Item 7.12; 04:27:49–05:19:03, 05:43:59–05:44:20). Confidential land deal closed under s254J(3)(g) LGR 2012; public resolution emphasised no fettering of future DA assessment and no net loss of public parking (Item 8.1; 05:59:25–06:36:40). Legal / Risk Grant risk: staff confirmed potential need to repay or seek scope change if Active Street is cancelled; CEO tasked to pursue reallocation with SEQ funds bodies (Item 7.1; 06:38–07:47, 01:47:09–01:48:10). Governance: Capital Works Executive process cited as oversight for contract scope/costs; regular updates to all Councillors added by amendment (Item 7.1; 09:11–10:22, 01:22:49–01:25:35). OIA/Conduct: Query raised about potential mayoral influence and OIA process; CEO noted determination pending and separate from Council procedures (Item 7.1; 01:28:41–01:30:57). Cemetery policy rests on legal advice; Queensland lacks a clear statute, so a defensible local policy with notice/claims pathway adopted (Item 7.8; 03:16:18–03:21:36). Tourism Deed: clear separation of deliverables (Schedule 1) vs. KPIs (Schedule 2) and simplified funding adjustment model (Schedule 3); CPI cap 3.5% (Item 7.12; minutes pp.12–13). Land exchange relied on LGR s236(1)(c)(v) exception (land-for-land, public interest, sound contracting); express non‑fetters of planning function recorded (Item 8.1; 06:31:58–06:36:40). Conflicts of Interest Nicola Wilson (Vice President, Noosa Arts Theatre) and Brian Stockwell (President, Noosa Lions FC) declared prescribed COIs on Facility Development grants; left; Acting Chair appointed; neither voted (Item 7.4; 02:59:57–03:03:50). Brian Stockwell declared a declarable COI on Env/Climate Grants (unsuccessful applicant); left on CEO advice; item split to two future reports (Item 7.14; 06:02:06–06:15:57). Active Transport & Community Infrastructure Peregian Active Street’s governance tightened (CWE updates) but ultimately overturned in favour of reallocating grants to practical local works aligned with community feedback (Item 7.1; 01:22:49–01:25:35; 01:59:52–02:12:18). Awareness campaign for “Active Street/Coastal Pathway” must secure TMR/QPS endorsement to align messaging/signage/enforcement with road law (amended and carried) (Item 7.1; 01:28:17–01:30:30). Botanic Gardens plan emphasises accessible promenade path and living collection stewardship; CPTED and water-quality sensitivities near Lake Macdonald noted (Item 7.11; 03:42:27–03:55:10). Tourism Governance & Community Impacts Deed reframed to align with DMP and Roadmap; quarterly reviews and annual plan/KPIs enable adjustments without “set-and-forget” rigidity (Item 7.12; 04:12:12–04:13:25). Amendments seeking a roles & responsibilities framework, a Peak Demand Management Plan, and auditable “no day‑tripper targeting” marketing KPIs were debated and lost (Item 7.12; 04:27:49–05:19:03). Members emphasised lack of empirical congestion data to apportion impacts; call for clearer Council/TN accountability and datasets (Item 7.12; 04:55:26–04:58:24). Environmental Concerns & Biosecurity Biosecurity Plan advances risk‑based control across tenures; fire ants not detected in Noosa but nearby; landfill and rapid‑response protocols active (Item 7.13; 05:50:56–05:52:53). Discussion acknowledged herbicide controversy vs. weed pressure and long‑term ecosystem protection; plan proceeds to GoVocal consultation (Item 7.13; 05:56:44–06:01:46).
Official Meeting Minutes
GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING | 9 JUNE 2026 General Committee Meeting Minutes Tuesday, 9 June 2026 10:00am 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” Page 1 of 18 GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING | 9 JUNE 2026 MINUTES ORDER OF BUSINESS 1 DECLARATION OF OPENING The meeting was declared open at 10.03am. 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 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 Infrastructure Services Shaun Walsh APOLOGIES Cr Frank Wilkie 4 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES 4.1 GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES DATED 12 MAY 2026 Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Jessica Phillips Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener That the Minutes of the General Committee Meeting held on 12 May 2026 be received and confirmed. Carried. For: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None Page 2 of 18 GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING | 9 JUNE 2026 5. PRESENTATIONS Nil. 6. DEPUTATIONS Nil. 7 REPORTS DIRECT TO GENERAL COMMITTEE 7.1 PEREGIAN BEACH ACTIVE STREET - STAGE 1 PROGRESS UPDATE AND NEXT STEPS (Deferred from the Ordinary Meeting dated 19 March 2026 - Item 12.2) The following material was presented to the meeting in relation to this item 2026-06-09 ATTACHMENT 1 to Minutes of General Committee 9.06.2026 Peregian Beach Active Street - Further Information 2026-06-09 ATTACHMENT 2 to Minutes of General Committee 9.06.2026 Peregian Beach Active Street - Outline of Councillor Involvement 2026-06-09 CONFIDENTIAL - NOT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE - ATTACHMENT 3 to Minutes of General Committee 9.06.2026 - Peregian Beach Active St - Further Community Feedback - Confidential in accordance with Section 254D (3) of the LG Regulation 2012 - this is not publicly available as it contains information that is confidential to the local government. Motion Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener That Council: A. Note the report by the Project Officer to the General Committee meeting dated 16 March 2026 regarding the Peregian Beach Active St - Stage 1 project status including key findings from the community consultation activities and proposed design amendments; B. Delegate authority to the CEO to finalise, negotiate and award the construction contract for the Peregian Beach Active Street – Stage 1 Project, including approval of all contract variations within the approved project budget, for the purpose of expediting delivery enabling project completion by the required State and Federal grant funding timeframes C. Note that whilst the project is grant funded, financial reconciliation is not finalised, with additional costs arising from additional community engagement and project scope changes; D. Support the development of an “Active Street” and “Coastal Pathway” awareness and education campaign across the shire to raise awareness of the safety and active transport benefits associated with Active Streets and the ultimate delivery of the Noosa Cycling and Walking Strategy and Noosa Transport Strategy; E. Support the CEO to submit available grant funding applications for Stage 2 of the Active Street/Coastal Pathway extension to commence design and construction as soon as practicably possible. Page 3 of 18 GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING | 9 JUNE 2026 Procedural Motion Moved: Cr Jessica Phillips Seconded: Cr Amelia Lorentson That the meeting be closed to the public pursuant to section 254J(3)(e) of the Local Government Regulation 2012 for the purpose of discussing legal advice obtained by the local government for Item 7.1 Peregian Beach Active Street. Carried. For: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None Procedural Motion Moved: Cr Nicola Wilson Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener 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 Nicola Wilson Against: None Amendment No. 1 Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That Item B be amended to read: That any Delegate authority to the CEO to finalise, negotiate and award the construction contract for the Peregian Beach Active Street – Stage 1 Project, be brought back to Council for approval and that no contract be awarded until all outstanding design matters identified in this report have been resolved and brought back to Council. including approval of all contract variations within the approved project budget, for the purpose of expediting delivery enabling project completion by the required State and Federal grant funding timeframes; Lost. For: Cr Amelia Lorentson Against: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Amendment No. 2 Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That B be amended to read: B. Delegate authority to the CEO to finalise, negotiate and award the construction contract for the Peregian Beach Active Street – Stage 1 Project, including approval of all contract variations within the approved project budget, for the purpose of expediting delivery enabling project completion by the required State and Federal grant funding timeframes noting that regular updates through the Capital Works Executive process will be distributed to all Councillors. Carried. Page 4 of 18 GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING | 9 JUNE 2026 For: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None Amendment No. 3 Moved: Cr Jessica Phillips Seconded: Cr Amelia Lorentson That Item D be amended to read: D. Support the development of an “Active Street” and “Coastal Pathway” awareness and education campaign across the shire. to raise awareness of the safety and active transport benefits associated with Active Streets and the ultimate delivery of the Noosa Cycling and Walking Strategy and Noosa Transport Strategy. Any implementation of the campaign must be subject to formal endorsement by the Department of Transport and Main Roads (TMR) and the Queensland Police Service (QPS), including confirmation that the proposed messaging, signage, and enforcement approach align with relevant legislation and road safety requirements. Carried. For: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None Motion Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener That Council: A. Note the report by the Project Officer to the General Committee meeting dated 16 March 2026 regarding the Peregian Beach Active St - Stage 1 project status including key findings from the community consultation activities and proposed design amendments; B. Delegate authority to the CEO to finalise, negotiate and award the construction contract for the Peregian Beach Active Street – Stage 1 Project, including approval of all contract variations within the approved project budget, for the purpose of expediting delivery enabling project completion by the required State and Federal grant funding timeframes noting that regular updates through the Capital Works Executive process will be distributed to all Councillors. C. Note that whilst the project is grant funded, financial reconciliation is not finalised, with additional costs arising from additional community engagement and project scope changes; D. Support the development of an “Active Street” and “Coastal Pathway” awareness and education campaign across the shire. Any implementation of the campaign must be subject to formal endorsement by the Department of Transport and Main Roads (TMR) and the Queensland Police Service (QPS), including confirmation that the proposed messaging, signage, and enforcement approach align with relevant legislation and road safety requirements. E. Support the CEO to submit available grant funding applications for Stage 2 of the Active Street/Coastal Pathway extension to commence design and construction as soon as practicably possible. Lost. Page 5 of 18 GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING | 9 JUNE 2026 For: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener Against: Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Nicola Wilson Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That Council: A. Note the report by the Project Officer to the General Committee meeting dated 16 March 2026 regarding the Peregian Beach Active St - Stage 1 project status and determine that the project not proceed in the current form; B. Direct the CEO to engage with the Southeast Qld Liveability Fund and Active Transport Fund to determine whether available grant funding can be reallocated to deliver practical infrastructure improvements in Peregian Beach South or alternatives, including but not limited to pedestrian footpath connections, stormwater infrastructures, formalised parking and street planting, consistent with the priorities expressed by the community throughout the engagement process; C. Direct the CEO to report back to Council as soon as possible. Carried. For: Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener The meeting adjourned at 12.15pm The meeting resumed at 12.45pm. 7.2 2026-2027 COMMUNITY GRANTS PROGRAM - COMMUNITY PROJECT AND SIGNATURE COMMUNITY EVENT GRANTS - SUMMARY Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Tom Wegener Seconded: Cr Amelia Lorentson That Council: A. Note the report by the Community Connection Manager to the General Committee Meeting dated 9 June 2026 outlining the summary of the 2026-27 Community Project Grants, out-of-round Three Year Signature Community Event Grants; and B. Approve the allocation of the remaining 2026/27 Community Project Grants budget to Quick Response grants and emergent grant requirements that may arise throughout the year, subject to sufficient funds being allocated in Council’s adopted 2026/27 Community Grants Program budget. Carried. For: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None Page 6 of 18 GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING | 9 JUNE 2026 7.3 2026-2027 COMMUNITY PROJECT GRANTS PROGRAM – PROJECTS Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Karen Finzel Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That Council A. Note the report by the Community Connection Manager to the General Committee Meeting dated 9 June 2026; and B. Approve the 2026-27 Community Project Grants Program - Projects as outlined in Attachment 1, subject to sufficient funds totalling $61,916.10 being allocated in Council's adopted 2026-27 Community Grants Program budget. Carried. For: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None 7.4 2026-2027 COMMUNITY PROJECT GRANTS PROGRAM - FACILITY DEVELOPMENT Cr Nicola Wilson "In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009 - I inform the meeting that I have a prescribed conflict of interest in relation to Item 7.4 - 2026-2027 COMMUNITY GRANTS PROGRAM - COMMUNITY PROJECT GRANTS (FACILITY DEVELOPMENT) as Noosa Arts Theatre have been recommended as a recipient of a facility development grant. I am the senior Vice President of Noosa Arts Theatre. As a result of my conflict of interest, I will now leave the meeting room while the matter is considered and voted on." Cr Nicola Wilson left the meeting. Cr Brian Stockwell "In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009 - I inform the meeting that I have a prescribed conflict of interest in relation to Item 7.4 - 2026-2027 COMMUNITY GRANTS PROGRAM - COMMUNITY PROJECT GRANTS (FACILITY DEVELOPMENT) on this agenda, as I am the current President of the Noosa Lions Football Club who are recommended for funding. As a result of my conflict of interest, I will now leave the meeting room while the matter is considered and voted on." Cr Brian Stockwell left the meeting. Committee Resolution Moved: Cr Tom Wegener Seconded: Cr Amelia Lorentson That Cr Phillips appointed as Acting Chairperson of the meeting due to the conflict of interest declaration by Cr Stockwell. Carried. For: Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Tom Wegener Against: None Cr Brian Stockwell and Cr Nicola Wilson having declared conflicts of interest were ineligible to vote. Page 7 of 18 GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING | 9 JUNE 2026 Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That Council A. Note the report by the Community Connection Manager to the General Committee Meeting dated 9 June 2026; and B. Approve the 2026-27 Community Project Grants Program - Facility Development as outlined in Attachment 1, subject to sufficient funds totalling $147,296.32 being allocated in Council's adopted 2026-27 Community Grants Program budget. Carried. For: Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Tom Wegener Against: None Cr Brian Stockwell and Cr Nicola Wilson having declared conflicts of interest were ineligible to vote. Cr Brian Stockwell and Cr Nicola Wilson returned to the meeting. Cr Brian Stockwell resumed the Chair. 7.5 2026-2027 COMMUNITY PROJECT GRANTS PROGRAM - EQUIPMENT Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Karen Finzel Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener That Council A. Note the report by the Community Connection Manager to the General Committee Meeting dated 9 June 2026; and B. Approve the 2026-2027 Community Project Grants Program - Equipment as outlined in Attachment 1, subject to sufficient funds totalling $16,754.40 being allocated in Council’s adopted 2026/27 Community Grants Program budget. Carried. For: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None 7.6 2026-2027 COMMUNITY PROJECT GRANTS PROGRAM - EVENTS Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Nicola Wilson That Council A. Note the report by the Community Connection Manager to the General Committee Meeting dated 9 June 2026; and Page 8 of 18 GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING | 9 JUNE 2026 B. Approve the 2026-27 Community Project Grants Program - Events as outlined in Attachment 1, subject to sufficient funds totalling $32,500 being allocated in Council's adopted 2026-27 Community Grants Program budget. Carried. For: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None 7.7 2026-2027 COMMUNITY GRANTS PROGRAM - THREE-YEAR SIGNATURE COMMUNITY EVENT GRANTS Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Karen Finzel Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That Council A. Note the report by the Community Connection Manager to the General Committee Meeting dated 9 June 2026; and B. Approve the out-of-round 2026-27 Three-Year Signature Community Event Grants as outlined in Attachment 1, subject to sufficient funds totalling $27,000 being allocated in the adopted 2026-27 Council budget. Carried. For: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None 7.8 LEGACY PLOT RESERVATION MANAGEMENT POLICY The Chair disallowed a question from Cr Lorentson. Procedural Motion Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That the Chairperson's ruling be dissented from. Lost. For: Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Against: Nicola Wilson Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Karen Finzel Seconded: Cr Nicola Wilson That Council Page 9 of 18 GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING | 9 JUNE 2026 A. Note the report by the Community Connection Manager to the General Committee dated 9 June 2026 regarding unused cemetery plots (burial and ash interment sites) reserved 25 years or more ago at the Tewantin, Cooroy and Pomona cemeteries; B. Adopt the Legacy Plot Reservation Management Policy, as provided in Attachment 1 to the report; and C. Authorise the Chief Executive Officer to implement the Policy, including the development of supporting procedures, notification processes and record keeping requirements. Carried. For: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None 7.9 "SPORT4ALL" ACCESS AND INCLUSION PROGRAM - OUTCOMES AND LEARNINGS Motion Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Nicola Wilson That Council A. Note the report by the Inclusion Coach to the General Committee dated 9 June 2026 regarding the outcomes of Noosa Council’s Sport4All Access and Inclusion Program; B. Subject to future funding availability, consider establishing an ongoing, organisation-wide Access and Inclusion function to strengthen inclusive practices across planning, infrastructure, services and programs, and support community organisations to sustain and expand participation pathways; and C. Subject to future funding availability, develop a whole-of-Council Access and Inclusion Framework to embed inclusive principles and guide priorities. Amendment Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Nil That D be added to read D. Request the inclusion of funding for a permanent Inclusion Officer role in the future 2026/2027 budget having regard to the demonstrated return on investment delivered through the Sports for All program and the ongoing and growing access and inclusion needs of the Noosa community. The amendment lapsed for want of a seconder. Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Nicola Wilson That Council A. Note the report by the Inclusion Coach to the General Committee dated 9 June 2026 regarding the outcomes of Noosa Council’s Sport4All Access and Inclusion Program; Page 10 of 18 GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING | 9 JUNE 2026 B. Subject to future funding availability, consider establishing an ongoing, organisation-wide Access and Inclusion function to strengthen inclusive practices across planning, infrastructure, services and programs, and support community organisations to sustain and expand participation pathways; and C. Subject to future funding availability, develop a whole-of-Council Access and Inclusion Framework to embed inclusive principles and guide priorities. Carried. For: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: Cr Amelia Lorentson 7.10 2026-2027 FEES AND CHARGES Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That General Committee Agenda Item 7.10 2026-2027 Fees and Charges be referred to the Ordinary Meeting for a further report. Carried. For: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None 7.11 NOOSA BOTANIC GARDENS MASTERPLAN Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Karen Finzel Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener That Council A. Note the report by the Parks and Streetscapes Coordinator to the General Committee dated 9 June 2026 outlining the Phase 2 Engagement summary and the finalised draft Masterplan for the Noosa Botanic Gardens; B. Note the Masterplan's proposed use to inform ongoing future operational and capital works program budgets including sourcing funding from external grants; and C. Approve the finalised Masterplan for the Noosa Botanic Gardens provided at Attachment 1. Carried. For: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None The meeting adjourned at 1.58pm. The meeting resumed at 2.06pm. Page 11 of 18 GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING | 9 JUNE 2026 7.12 FURTHER REPORT - TOURISM NOOSA FUNDING AND PERFORMANCE DEED 2026–2029 Motion Moved: Cr Nicola Wilson Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener That Council A. Note the report by the Chief Executive Officer to the General Committee dated 13 April 2026 and this Further Report to the General Committee dated 9 June 2026 regarding the Tourism Noosa Funding and Performance Deed 2026–2029; B. Note that, in response to Council’s resolution of 16 April 2026, the Deed Schedules have been revised to: i. Separate Agreed Obligations and Deliverables (Schedule 1) from performance measures; ii. Introduce a Balanced Scorecard framework of KPIs in Schedule 2; and iii. Simplify the performance-based funding adjustment model in Schedule 3; C. Approve the revised Tourism Noosa Funding and Performance Deed 2026–2029 with Tourism Noosa Ltd for a term of three (3) years, commencing 1 July 2026 and ending 30 June 2029, for funding of $2,000,000 per annum (ex GST), with CPI indexation applied from the second year of the Term, capped at a maximum of 3.5% per annum, subject to the terms and conditions of the Deed as provided at Attachment 1; D. Note that funding will be paid in three instalments, with the second instalment subject to a performance-based adjustment of up to $350,000, based on Council’s assessment of performance against the Schedule 2 KPIs using the scoring methodology set out in Schedule 3; E. Note that failure to deliver Schedule 1 Agreed Obligations may constitute a breach of the Deed and is managed through the Deed’s compliance and governance provisions, separate from the performance adjustment framework; F. Authorise the Chief Executive Officer to: i. Finalise and execute the Tourism Noosa Funding and Performance Deed 2026–2029, including any minor or administrative amendments required; and ii. Administer the Deed in accordance with its terms. Amendment No. 1 Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That Item C i. be added to read: i. Request the CEO prepare and publish a Destination Management Roles and Responsibilities Framework clearly defining the respective accountabilities of Council, Tourism Noosa and relevant agencies and that Tourism Noosa's Deed obligations and KPIs be reviewed against that Framework. Lost. For: Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips Against: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Page 12 of 18 GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING | 9 JUNE 2026 Amendment No. 2 Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That Item C i. be added to read: i. Amend the Deed to require Tourism Noosa deliver a Peak Demand Management Plan to Council by 31 December 2026, identifying high-pressure locations and periods, specifying actions within Tourism Noosa's direct control to manage visitor demand, distinguishing Tourism Noosa's actions from those requiring Council or other agencies, with annual progress reporting. Lost. For: Cr Amelia Lorentson Against: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Amendment No. 3 Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That Item C i. be added to read: i. Amend Schedule 2 to include the following auditable marketing KPIs, verified annually through Tourism Noosa's advertising platform records be provided to Council as part of the Annual Outcome Report: No paid advertising targeting residents within 150 kilometres of Noosa. A measurable annual reduction in marketing activity directed at day-trip catchments. Lost. For: Cr Amelia Lorentson Against: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Nicola Wilson Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener That Council A. Note the report by the Chief Executive Officer to the General Committee dated 13 April 2026 and this Further Report to the General Committee dated 9 June 2026 regarding the Tourism Noosa Funding and Performance Deed 2026–2029; B. Note that, in response to Council’s resolution of 16 April 2026, the Deed Schedules have been revised to: i. Separate Agreed Obligations and Deliverables (Schedule 1) from performance measures; ii. Introduce a Balanced Scorecard framework of KPIs in Schedule 2; and iii. Simplify the performance-based funding adjustment model in Schedule 3; C. Approve the revised Tourism Noosa Funding and Performance Deed 2026–2029 with Tourism Noosa Ltd for a term of three (3) years, commencing 1 July 2026 and ending 30 June 2029, for funding of $2,000,000 per annum (ex GST), with CPI indexation applied from the second year of the Term, capped at a maximum of 3.5% per annum, subject to the terms and conditions of the Deed as provided at Attachment 1; Page 13 of 18 GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING | 9 JUNE 2026 D. Note that funding will be paid in three instalments, with the second instalment subject to a performance-based adjustment of up to $350,000, based on Council’s assessment of performance against the Schedule 2 KPIs using the scoring methodology set out in Schedule 3; E. Note that failure to deliver Schedule 1 Agreed Obligations may constitute a breach of the Deed and is managed through the Deed’s compliance and governance provisions, separate from the performance adjustment framework; F. Authorise the Chief Executive Officer to: i. Finalise and execute the Tourism Noosa Funding and Performance Deed 2026–2029, including any minor or administrative amendments required; and ii. Administer the Deed in accordance with its terms. Carried on the casting vote of the Chair. For: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips 7.13 NOOSA BIOSECURITY PLAN 2026-2031 Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Karen Finzel Seconded: Cr Nicola Wilson That Council: A. Note the report by the Coordinator Biosecurity to the General Committee dated 9 June 2026 for the Draft Noosa Biosecurity Plan 2026–2031; B. Approve the Draft Noosa Biosecurity Plan 2026–2031 provided at Attachment 2, for the purposes of community engagement; C. Authorise the Chief Executive Officer to undertake community consultation on the Draft Noosa Biosecurity Plan 2026–2031 in accordance with Council’s Community Engagement Plan provided at Attachment 3; and D. Note that a further report will be presented to Council following completion of the community engagement process, including a summary of submissions and any proposed amendments to the Draft Noosa Biosecurity Plan 2026–2031. Carried. For: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None Page 14 of 18 GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING | 9 JUNE 2026 7.14 ENVIRONMENT & CLIMATE CHANGE RESPONSE GRANTS - ENVIRONMENT PROJECT GRANTS (ROUND 21), CLIMATE CHANGE RESPONSE GRANTS (ROUND 6) Cr Brian Stockwell "In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009 I inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter Item 7.14 - ENVIRONMENT & CLIMATE CHANGE RESPONSE GRANTS - ENVIRONMENT PROJECT GRANTS (ROUND 21), CLIMATE CHANGE RESPONSE GRANTS (ROUND 6) on this agenda as I am the current President of the Noosa Lions Football Club who submitted a grant application for a Climate Change Response Grant. Although I have a declarable conflict of interest, I do not believe a reasonable person could have a perception of bias because the application submitted was unsuccessful and is not discussed in the report. I choose to remain in the meeting room. However, I will respect the decision of the meeting on whether I can remain and participate in the decision. After discussion and based on the CEO's advice I will leave the meeting room." Cr Brian Stockwell left the meeting. Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Karen Finzel That Cr Wegener be appointed as Acting Chairperson of the meeting for this item given the conflict of interest declaration by Cr Stockwell. Carried. For: Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None Cr Brian Stockwell having declared a conflict of interest was ineligible to vote. Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Jessica Phillips Seconded: Cr Nicola Wilson That General Committee Agenda Item 7.14 be referred to the Ordinary Meeting dated 18 June 2026 for 2 x further reports - separating the Environment Project Grants & Climate Change Response Grants. Carried. For: Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None Cr Brian Stockwell having declared a conflict of interest was ineligible to vote. Cr Brian Stockwell returned to the meeting and resumed the Chair. 7.15 PLANNING APPLICATIONS DECIDED BY DELEGATED AUTHORITY – APRIL 2026 Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Tom Wegener Page 15 of 18 GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING | 9 JUNE 2026 Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That Council note the report by the Development Assessment Manager to the General Committee Meeting dated 9 June 2026 regarding applications that have been decided by delegated authority for April 2026 as provided at Attachment 1 to the Report. Carried. For: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None 8 CONFIDENTIAL SESSION 8.1 CONFIDENTIAL - NOT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE - PROPOSED LAND RATIONALISATION - LANYANA WAY LOT 2 ON RP889596 AND NOOSA DRIVE LOT ON RP884396 CLOSURE OF THE MEETING TO THE PUBLIC Procedural motion Moved: Cr Nicola Wilson 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 a commercial matter proposed to be made by Council and in particular, the potential commercial negotiations in relation to Item 8.1 PROPOSED LAND RATIONALISATION - LANYANA WAY LOT 2 ON RP889596 AND NOOSA DRIVE LOT ON RP884396. Carried. For: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None REOPENING OF THE MEETING TO THE PUBLIC Procedural Motion Moved: Cr Tom Wegener Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips 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 Nicola Wilson Against: None Committee Recommendation Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Amelia Lorentson That Council note the report from the Acting Property Manager to General Committee meeting dated 9 June 2026; and Page 16 of 18 GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING | 9 JUNE 2026 A. Authorise the Chief Executive Officer to provide landowner’s consent, if required, to enable lodgement of any future development application involving Councilowned land affected by the proposed Land Rationalisation Process; B. Note that the provision of landowner’s consent and the actions authorised under this resolution: do not constitute approval of any development application; do not bind or fetter Council in its role as assessment manager; do not commit Council to completing the land exchange; and do not authorise any works on, or transfer of, Council land prior to completion of all required approvals, agreements and settlement conditions. C. Note that the proposed Land Rationalisation Process: is intended to facilitate land tenure outcomes that support implementation of the Noosa Junction Framework and Character Plan; supports opportunities for future housing outcomes consistent with Council’s Housing Strategy and broader planning objectives; will result in no net loss of existing public parking; is intended to improve future access arrangements associated with the planned public road connection; and supports increased public realm and green space outcomes within the precinct. D. Agree to facilitate a land tenure rationalisation process involving: Council-owned land located at Lot 2 on RP889596, Noosa Heads, including a 363m² portion of the existing driveway; and adjoining land located at 99 Noosa Drive, Noosa Heads, Through a market value land exchange whereby: a 363m² portion of the existing driveway within Lot 2 on RP889596 is transferred to the adjoining landowner for amalgamation into the adjoining land; and part of the adjoining land is transferred to Council. E. Pursuant to section 236(2) of the Local Government Regulation 2012, resolve that the proposed disposal of part of Lot 2 on RP889596 proceed other than by tender or auction in reliance on the exception under section 236(1)(c)(v) of the Regulation, on the basis that: the consideration comprises land exchanged for land; the disposal is in the public interest; and the transaction is otherwise consistent with sound contracting principles. F. Authorise the Chief Executive Officer to undertake all actions necessary to implement the Land Rationalisation Process, including: negotiating and entering into agreements; preparing and lodging survey plans; finalising Infrastructure Agreements; securing easements, access arrangements and road dedications; facilitating title and tenure arrangements; and completing the transfer of land interests. G. Note that all costs associated with the Land Rationalisation Process, including legal, valuation, surveying, lodgement and stamp duty costs, will be funded by the proponent. H. Note that any future development application affecting the subject land: will be assessed independently under the Planning Act 2016 by the relevant assessment manager; and Page 17 of 18 GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING | 9 JUNE 2026 remains separate from the Land Rationalisation Process. Carried. For: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None 9 MEETING CLOSURE The meeting closed at 4.38pm. Page 18 of 18
Meeting Transcript
Brian Stockwell 00:00.200
We sit here on Kabi Kabi country where for many thousands of years Kabi Kabi looked after this place and it's part of our role to keep doing that on their behalf and we acknowledge the role of elders past, present and the future are for caring for country. Have an apology so in attendance we have Councillor Wilson, Councillor Wegener, Councillor Lorentson, Councillor Finzel. Cllr Lorentson, Cllr Finzel, cllr Phillips and the Mayor has given his apology as he is officiating at a world environment day function which have state government representatives. In which I state move on to item 4 which is the confirmation of the General Committee Meeting minutes of May 2026. I think Councillor Phillips was the mover and Councillor Wegener was the seconder. Do we have any discussion? I put the motion. All those let's carry in favour? That's carried unanimously. We have no presentations nor do we have deputations so we move on to section 7 and item 1 in that section is the Peregian Beach active street stage 1 progress update and next steps which was deferred from the Ordinary Meeting dated 19th of March 2026. Item 12.2 if we can invite the relevant staff to the table. Shaun Walsh 01:33.001
Good morning Councillors. Good morning. Procedure I just want to firstly table three items to be attached to the Minutes of the meeting. These have been distributed in advance to the meeting to the Councillors. Attachment one is a an update on background to the actual March report including updates from the liveability survey as well as updates on the program to inform Councillors decision. Attachment two which was requested by Councillors is a rundown of Councillors involvement in the pigeon beach active street from the original project inception that goes in some detail and then attachment three is a confidential attachment which just further documents community submissions and requests that were received since the March report so Councillors have a full rundown of all submissions received from the community about the project. I'll table that at the meeting title but then I'll hand over to Lindsay to give the overview of the project obviously. Lindsay 02:32.483
Thank you Shaun. Good morning Councillors. This report provides a project status update and recommendation for the Peregian Beach active street stage including background to the project, an outline of findings from recent community engagement and current project parameters. The project is 100% funded through the South East Queensland liveability fund and active transport fund. To has undergone date the project is extensive planning and consultation which started in 2020 with the coastal pathway corridor study. The reviewed existing paths, identified safety gaps and assessed possible routes while ensuring community alignment through a Project Reference Group. It was further analysed in the 2021 Noosa cycling and walking strategy and implementation plan, whereby the community was invited to have their say and similar engagement with a Project Reference Group was carried out. 2022 Noosa liveability survey further highlighted the community's desire for improved active transport across the Shire. Project specific activities included three public pop-up information sessions in April and May of 2025, multiple Councillor briefing workshops in 2025. A pop-up at the Boreen Point Ordinary Meeting in November 2025, two further pop-up information sessions in January of this year, a public workshop in February and numerous one-on meetings with representative groups and impacted residents. Feedback on the progene Peregian Beach act active strength project was mixed. While the majority of questions and points raised by residents in group discussions were harshly negative towards the project, many residents and stakeholders supported the underlying core objectives, such as slower traffic, safer pedestrian movements, and improved walking and cycling connections. The report includes extensive attachments in the form of community feedback on the proposal, and as a result of the extensive consultation and ensuing feedback, a number of changes have been proposed to the initial design in response. The report also seeks in principle support for continuing to invest in stage two subject to future budget allocation to achieve connectivity to the Peregian Beach village and an investment in a broader education and awareness program on the benefits of active transport to support delivery of the Shire-wide coastal pathway corridor a key component of council's cycling and walking strategy. The Peregian Beach active street project addresses long-standing issues with existing south Peregian Beach infrastructure. It resolves the current parking congestion caused by vehicles lining both sides of the road which has effectively created a one-way traffic situation. The project delivers a safe and dedicated pedestrian pathway, ensuring residents and visitors no longer need to walk on the roadway to reach their destination. The design incorporates traffic calming measures and reduced vehicle speeds, improvements previously requested by the community and improved stormwater infrastructure kerb and channel for better stormwater management. We acknowledge that not all residents share the same view of the project, however we respectfully ask Councillors to consider the full range of safety, accessibility infrastructure benefits when making their decision today. And the long term value this project represents for the WADA wider community. Amelia Lorentson 05:48.602
Thank you. Brian Stockwell 05:50.151
Thanks. We have questions? Amelia Lorentson 05:55.611
Thank you very much. Report states that there's approximately $150,000 being spent to date. Can staff confirm the exact amount expended to date across both the South East Queensland liveability fund and active transport fund and whether any of that expenditure would need to be repaid to the funding bodies if the project does not proceed? Nicola Wilson 06:22.404
So the active transport fund only funds the construction side of things so most of the expenditure today would be towards the liveability and yeah it's my understanding aiden that if this project doesn't go ahead then we would have to be up for the cost. Aiden 06:39.735
Yes we probably have to get back to you on the exact expenditure to date as it's sort of moving on each week and we could be required to pay back that grant funding if the project didn't go ahead we would be seeking I guess a change of scope from the grant body to fund the design works to date but we'd have to come back to you on that. Amelia Lorentson 07:12.127
Can you cancel that too? Sorry, cancel. So Council resolves not to proceed with the act of street design as presented can you just can explain what are alternative projects or works would be eligible for funding under the South East Queensland liveability fund criteria and you sort of mentioned in the report is it streetscape footpath and improvements, do a bit of this. Shaun Walsh 07:41.319
The grant criteria for the South East Queensland liveability fund was about collaboration with our neighbours to create regional benefits and the pitch for this one is it connected in with the Sunshine Coast pathway. So it showed direct regional benefits of people moving between our Shire and to Sunshine Coast area and vice versa so that's the key criteria. It has a fairly broad criteria because the other project funded under that is also Cooroy. The Cooroy Sports Complex upgrade which is actually operating as a regional facility providing gymnastics for a broader region than just Cooroy. So it's a fairly broad criteria. To say whether be transferred to other projects or not, I don't know the answer to that. Brian Stockwell 08:29.200
Questions? Amelia Lorentson 08:33.960
Okay, I'm happy to move sorry, I do have quite a few questions but the last one I'll ask today is that recommendation be asked Council to delegate authority to the CEO to finalise and award the construction contract including all variations within the approved budget. Given that the budget reconciliation is not complete so what safeguards are in place to ensure that the Council that we're not exposing ourselves any financial risk beyond the grant funding do you want me to answer that? Shaun Walsh 09:13.894
Operates in support of the capital works program the Capital Works Executive which is made up of delegates from the Councillors and the CEO where final project costs and scope are presented to delegates to the CWE. Those Council delegates and the CEO can always refer matters to the general Council. So our governance terms around the Capital Works Executive fundamentally support what you've asked for to actually ensure that they're safeguarded in terms of scope and expenditure. Amelia Lorentson 09:42.919
So does that, probably the question I'm really asking is in terms of government's oversight. Are we satisfied that there will be enough Council oversight given that we're unsure of how much over budget this project needs. Budget this project may potentially cost? Shaun Walsh 10:01.446
So I think that the Capital Works Executive is actually a really good exemplar of corporate governance. So it's made up of the executive of Council and three elected members. So the Capital Works Executive can also defer things to the full Council if they're uncomfortable making a recommendation or proceeding with expenditure within the delegation. Of the CEO. Jessica Phillips 10:21.424
Question please. Thanks. Just in relation to the community engagement and the broader Shire-wide awareness campaign, can you explain to me is there a budget for that? Will pay for that sort of campaign? I know that it says there's collaboration with QPS and TMR, but just wanting to know at what stage that's at. Shaun Walsh 10:41.571
Yeah. So remember that this report was prepared back in March. Ideally, because the matter's been deferred and we didn't presume to actually proceed with a budget initiative. So, but on the event that this is decided to Council to proceed, we'd be looking to actually fund it out of the Sustainable Transport Levy, which is geared up towards actually actively encouraging people for active transport movement. So, and there's a report scheduled for the next round of meetings for Council about the Go Noosa Program and also the movement and connection plan. So we have a funding mechanism but Council would still need to decide that they wanted to use that funding mechanism for that program. Amelia Lorentson 11:21.787
Thank you very much. When I read the report, there seemed to be a lot of uncertainty, lots of investigate, explore, in principle support. My questions, what parts of the project are actually clear and confirmed? What's still unknown? And what safeguards are in place so that if there is a decision today to support the recommendation that it's not interpreted later as full approval of the project of in its current of the current concept Aiden 12:00.506
Yeah so I suppose through the PCG and the CWE governance process, the project team has been working within the approved scope. As part of the community consultation, it became evident that additional works were CWE governance process, the project team has been works were required for this to be supported by the community. And to fulfil the community's request. That work is outside of the approved scope. And so in this report we propose to investigate doing that additional work, noting that we would take of the additional scope through the CWE for approval. So I suppose that's probably where we investigate rather than include in the scope straight away. Subject to budget approval. We'll also be seeking. We've received an extension of time from the funding bodies since this report was prepared in March. If this. Recommendations are approved, we would seek a change of scope through the grant funding bodies as well, in the hope that they would fund the additional work. So we're also leaving the door open there I suppose to other channels of funding for that additional scope. Thank you. Karen Finzel 13:26.427
This is a really complex matter and I'm glad that it's been clearly articulated today that we need to widen the I'm glad that it's been scope of this study, especially in terms of addressing, you know, whether the community have had, you know, conflicting ideas around this and there's been a lot of conversation around that process. Especially in terms of addressing, the scope to this study that you talk about? What does that require today? Do we need an amendment or a motion to this to seek that Through the Chair to the CEO or is that just going to automatically roll over and move into that scope without us making a decision? Around today. Shaun Walsh 14:08.262
Under the, we discussed under the terms of reference for the Capital Works Executive which consists of three Councillors and the executive, every time there's a change of project scope we actually have to report it through to the Capital Works Executive to ensure that there's that control. So the resolution B, delegated authority to the CEO, allows the CEO to present you know all the matters to the capital rights executive works executive for their first consideration. Brian Stockwell 14:36.540
Can I, if I can just clarify the some of the from recollection the scope change included doing more works in adjacent streets to avoid the concerns about rat running, was there other scope changes of any significance? Aiden 14:53.719
Yeah so for example the local area traffic management in neighbouring streets design work is required to understand the total cost for construction we haven't undertaken that additional design work as yet noting that would come out of council's costs if this out. Go ahead so we put that on pause we've got quotes to do that work and that's the sort of further investigation the other scope is looking at car parking additional car parking realignment of car parks what else is it now I think it's covered on page two of the report page two yeah the softer colour palette so increased four miles car parking formalised investigating softer colour palettes widening of the existing ball through lorikeet park inclusion trees of additional street tree planting additional signage u-turn movements at Lorikeet Drive and Pitta Street so intersection design investigations Brian Stockwell 16:11.642
Out did you say there was a supplementary Karen Finzel 16:14.132
Oh yeah there was just following off of that thank you for that in terms of like what the State would address with further investigation where in that does it address the process of community engagement further community engagement around that where does it go back to community after you've done that scope because that's about infrastructure and expenditure so we address the community Shaun Walsh 16:39.416
So all our programs have ongoing community engagement that's how we set up. Significant you know database of digital door knocks and community updates so we'll continue to ratify that we'll continue to operate that program some of the design interventions will require some discussion with specific residents and the like we've been very attuned to one-on meetings as documented in the attachments to the report that outline how many on-site meetings we've had with various people and we'll continue with that program. Jessica Phillips 17:12.829
Thank you. Just in relation to of Coast capital works grant funded, I'd love to be able to understand transferring it into OPEC's budget what the cost of maintenance and ongoing if that was done as part of any scope so the residents can understand the ongoing cost Council of the project. Shaun Walsh 17:38.535
Probably could answer that is that we have a number of failed assets in that streetscape including some of the pavements as well as the kerb and chain link so which is already costing us in terms of maintenance quite significantly to try and maintain that in a reasonable order. Need some residents would say that the actual assets have failed in terms of kerb and channelling. So when you renew an asset like replacing asphalt and kerb and channelling, the initial access rate is actually fairly low. So we actually anticipate that the asset maintenance cost will actually reduce. The initial years of the asset. We have an asset renewal budget for asphalt and kerb and channelling and footpaths which is applied to our budget every year and that renewal budget is prioritised. So I actually think that this is a bit of an interesting case because you know we don't have a footpath. We don't have we kerb and channelling which is probably fit for purpose anymore. We've got failed pavement. So there will be asset maintenance costs which should have already been there and these are fairly standard asset classes. The only one that might be a bit different is probably the street pavement coloration and applying a specific cost for that, but that's a technique we use elsewhere in the Shire and we have a specific line mark in the budget. Amelia Lorentson 18:52.064
Terms of active street projects, I understand the project down in Caloundra has been paused and I received information on active street projects overseas in cambridge and UK. Can you give us an example where it has worked successfully? Aiden 19:12.023
Yeah, so the active street that we've designed or worked with the consultants to design is based off feedback that's come out of WA. They rolled out a program of 10 to 15 active streets. And then put together some guidelines based on their learnings of what went well and what didn't and partway through design one of the changes we made was the additional speed bumps or local area traffic management chicanes and that sort of thing which was based off the feedback we from WA so I think they're probably happy to share some of those examples which I think we've put in some of that's the material is available on council's website as Shaun Walsh 19:59.183
Well and also influenced by I think it's Avenue in the Gold Coast which do access the one-way street and also a shared bikeway experience if you ever use the Gold Coast ocean road. It's a much earlier version of the method but it's regarded highly successful by the residents when they're actually riding on the Gold Coast from surface prowess to burlington's. They actively use shared street experiences with cycles. I think if you actually look at our FAQs on our project website, we actually referenced examples from around Australia of active streets used. Amelia Lorentson 20:39.053
Just in terms of the community feedback, did we separate when we collated all that information and feedback, did we separate or understand which feedback came from those directly impacted, those living in south cooridgen, and can we. And what was the overwhelming response where they supportive or objecting of the proposal, those directly Bridget? Impacted, those living in south cooridgen? Shaun Walsh 21:14.078
I can't think we can answer that, Councillor, but we have provided copies in the attachments to the report of every submission received and every bit of feedback for you to make an assessment of yourself about community distaste or support for the proposal. Brian Stockwell 21:31.129
Any other questions? I'm happy to move. Amelia Lorentson 21:35.932
My last question, it's probably a question I'm going to be asking for every report in terms of fees spent on consultants. Do we an have idea an of how much? We've spent on we've spent on consultants in preparing this report and the information attached and again, a question I'll probably ask with every report, could it have been done in-house? Aiden 22:00.218
I don't consultant have the exact cost for the consultancy. I remember when we got the proposal, it was much cheaper than we expected, so it's definitely a value for money design, so that's done through ADG consultants. We could do that in-house, but it would take up most of our design resources for a significant part of their time, so we'd be very limited in how much work we could do outside of that project. We've done is we allocate a designer to review the plans when they come in, and then they can spend more time on other projects, so sort of trying to get the best yield out of our team, our small team. Shaun Walsh 22:46.329
Thank you very much. I think it's fair to say that the vast majority of costs are actually internal staff costs. The project management, the design review, and also the stakeholder engagement, they weren't outsourced, they're all in-housed. It was just supported by that external design expertise to document the plans. So, and that's consistent with the model, you know, when we have a capital works program between 50 million. And we have to figure out how do we enable the design to occur in the most efficient process. Nicola Wilson 23:12.236
And in regards to the report as well, it was done in-house. There might have been like a few advice we received from traffic and transport engineers, but it was mainly in-house. Jessica Phillips 23:21.503
Thank you. Just one final question, if that's alright. When looking at the design, was it ever challenged around the grant never existed, what the actual needs around if the of that community is, talking about the infrastructure that's ageing, if Council were to just fund the project purely from our. CapEx budget with the design potentially be the same or different because of the grant? Shaun Walsh 23:58.113
Probably the first thing to note is that if we proceeded with resealing the whole of that road we're actually going to increase vehicle speed because at the moment the patchy nature of pay the pavement is actually slowing vehicles down. And we've also got liability issues associated with vehicles parking on both sides of the street causing one-way congestion and inability for cars to traverse through and pedestrians walking on the road because there's no choice. So we could roll out a conventional program underneath a capital works program of a footpath and a kerb and channelling and a road but it actually wouldn't solve the issues that the residents are facing at the moment. So this is about future-proofing the design for generations to come. Aiden 24:38.029
Could you just add corridor assessment that was done in 2021 was based on trying to find the best corridor route and the best treatment option regardless of how it was funded so that was used on the basis for the grant funding. Sean said Shaun we said we could do it a kerb renewal an asphalt renewal program if we wanted to go through and just do a pathway it's likely that we would end up with a very similar result in some of the spots where we we've taken a pathway the roadside of the kerb and adjusting the kerb around to save some trees or to avoid retaining walls or underground services so the footpath design would be pretty similar to what we've got as an active street design if we went just did the footpath by itself okay, Brian Stockwell 25:29.172
I'll move the staff recommendation. Seconded by Councillor Wegener. So Councillor this has been an extensive process and you see in the documents were tabled this morning dating back to the corridor study back six years ago where this was selected. It is a project that's created a lot of community discussion both concerns and support. Think our decision is based on something that the Director has highlighted that this is a project that was prioritised based on its regional significance. So what we have to balance up is both the local, concerns and support within that area that is subject to construction but also the broader Shire-wide and regional implications of the project. As such I'm going to refer to the letter we received from the Sunshine Coast bicycle users group because I think it makes a really good of where I think the key areas for support for the motion are. For those who don't know, the Sunshine Coast bicycle users group advocates for safe, accessible, active transport infrastructure. They have carefully reviewed pristine the bridging active street proposal and believe it delivers substantial benefits not just for cyclists and pedestrians but for the entire Peregian Beach community and the broader regional active transport network. That the bicycle users committee people from new local to Noosa who have many years experience in active transport planning. The writer of this particular letter had many years in state government at some of the highest levels in state government so they were very knowledgeable and educated a project lot. Their summation was the represents exactly the kind of evidence-based forward-thinking infrastructure investment that our region desperately needs. They suggest it is the right project, in the right location, at the right time. It addresses a critical gap in the regional active transport network, delivers measurable road safety improvement for all users, provides public health benefits, enhances property values and neighbourhood amenity, improves equity and accessibility for all community members, and is supported by robust evidence and professional planning. So for me, their argument is convincing. And I think it supports what staff have been telling us through this process, therefore I believe that our support is to proceed to the next step and take advantage of the significant grant funds available to achieve not just a renewal but the upgrade of assets that are currently unsafe. Poor condition and do not serve in either the local community or the users of the beach or the cycle network at all well. Amelia Lorentson 28:41.985
Question to the chief and maybe a question to the CEO. I had understood that we needed to determine if there was any influence in terms of the mayor's conflict, that needed to be determined before we could proceed to the recommendation. Can I seek clarification please? My understanding was that was a important because the decision for the Councillors was to determine whether or not the recommendation that's before us today should proceed or whether it has been compromised if there is any influence that was exerted by the Mayor that led to this decision again just clarity I'm confused while we've progressed with the recommendation without that determination so Larry Sengstock 29:37.770
So I think as so we as we know that matter is still being determined is still very still in process so we don't have a final response but I think it's up to the group that the Council was to that is potentially a consideration or not or they're two separate matters in terms of whether there was or wasn't but in terms of getting that any response or any determination of that has not been received at this point in time Brian Stockwell 30:13.610
If I can just add I didn't circulate recirculate a the legal advice that we received on the 18th of March just before the meeting we bound by confidence in that matter but the key impact of it was that the suggestion is it should have a negative impact on council's futures deliberation. I think the question was more about the OIA. Is an assessment of an individual Councillor, it's not an assessment of council's procedures. So the OIA, the matter has been referred to the OIA and that's respected to Council will be, they will not keep give guidance about the conduct and that's what I understand. Jessica Phillips 31:01.739
I have some questions that probably that I see Diana is in the room but I am wondering whether or not I can ask them given that we're not in confidential, but I have some questions. That write. I would like to raise just to cover how I feel about it. Brian Stockwell 31:20.910
So if well one of if there is matters that want to go to legal opinion, then we should actually move into a confidential session. So is your questions likely to go to a legal opinion? Would you like to move the motion to go into committee um we'll just get the right wording. Amelia Lorentson 31:46.736
That might not be the correct wording. So are you moving it in for reasons not to discuss Unidentified Speaker 31:51.084
The just to go to confidential. Brian Stockwell 31:54.408
Yeah, yeah. It'll be I'll leave it up to you. No, I don't think that would be the right reason. It would be discuss matters subject to confidential legal advisement. Brian Stockwell 34:05.641
Were wait, have said? You happy with that? Jessica Phillips 34:06.526
Yes, that the meeting be closed to the public for sure to section 254J3E of the Local Government Regulation 2012 for the purpose of discussing legal advice obtained by the local government for item 7.1 bridgian beach active street. Brian Stockwell 34:21.681
So moved Councillor Phillips, seconded by Councillor Lorentson. All those in favour? That's unanimous. All those of you who aren't staff or Councillors, I ask you to move outside and we'll open the doors again when the competition is over. Karen Finzel 01:14:08.354
I know, to do some grounding. It's very important. Unidentified Speaker 01:14:10.422
It really is. Give us a little release there. And then this is a little that's why I do it. Brian Stockwell 01:14:21.115
Paisley. I'll come for that. Nicola Wilson 01:14:25.154
I'll give you my Facebook phone number. Good. Thanks. I wish you don't. It's all right. I'll be inside. Brian Stockwell 01:14:47.640
We're all right. Go from here. So welcome back. Councillors, we have a motion in front of us and only I have talked to it. Do we have other Councillors wishing to talk? Councillor Lorentson. Amelia Lorentson 01:14:57.171
I'd like to move some amendments, please. First is delete B of the recommendation. And replace it with B, that any construction contract for the Peregian Beach active street stage 1 project thank you. The bridge and Peregian Beach active street stage 1 project be brought I've just got to mark the changes as opposed to what it is. So we're not doing that. Any construction contracts for Bridget and apple street, the sturgeon project be brought back to Council for approval and that no contract be awarded until all outstanding design matters identified in this report have been resolved and reported to Council. Brian Stockwell 01:17:02.129
And cancel that probably Councillor, I would think your additions would also require that to delete the last clause after the comma. Amelia Lorentson 01:17:14.538
Is that right? Yep. Thank you. Brian Stockwell 01:17:24.781
Do we have a seconder for the amendment? Amelia Lorentson 01:17:27.804
How about a second? Councillor Phillips a second, Councillor Lorentson. So I sort of raised this before in terms of when I read the report there was just a lot of uncertainty, the investigating principle. Lots of unresolved design issues have been identified in the report. They include the Pitta Street intersection, the land tenure south of Warwick, keat park. Keep park yield investigations, you know how much, how many car parks we're going to lose. CPTED safety concerns and I just think it's prudent, I don't think we should be delegating the contract award authority to the CEO before these matters are resolved and if we do that. Just basically removes Council from the decision entirely and given the level of community concern I think we should retain oversight of the decision rather than handed off and that's why I'm putting forward this amendment. Do the Councillors wish to how speak? Do councils wish to speak? Brian Stockwell 01:18:50.529
Can I close it? Nicola Wilson 01:18:51.962
I think I understand the intent but I'm just not sure it's the appropriate way to deal with that because all contracts are signed by the CEO. We don't have any authority to do that so I'm just not sure whether it's through the contract or whether it's just appropriate through the CWE process and then the CWE can elect to bring back to Council at the time. I just don't think we can be involved in a contract. Amelia Lorentson 01:19:32.145
I look kind of like can I clarify that the amendment is not about contract, it's about resolving outstanding design matters identified in the report. Those have got to be resolved and brought back to Council before we go out to contract. Nicola Wilson 01:19:56.157
I don't, I'm just saying the contract is coming for a horrible load. Brian Stockwell 01:20:11.286
So the initial B was. Us in order to explore a delivery project completion by a required state and Federal grant funding timeframe. Well, I think the advice previously has been that you can't guarantee any extension. Are we likely to be, if this is to proceed, having time there? A very short timeframe to get this awarded? Shaun Walsh 01:20:41.357
See you. Firstly, the council's meeting cycle would make this quite difficult. So, to are we meet the project deadlines and the grant deadlines we'd have to call a Special Meeting to keep that rolling. I'm also concerned that any intent to not award a construction contract would be disingenuous to the market, you know, so about going to market. It's something that then Council doesn't want to award. It doesn't put us in a good reputation in terms of the overall construction industry at the moment and it's incredibly competitive in terms of pricing. But, you know, I think that to me if the report noted that regular reports would be provided through the formal CWE process and, you know, advised of councils like updating on progress, that's standard process and I'm very happy for the resolution to read that. Could I request that you drop me with the wording then, please? So, thought process is that P should stay as is. But we could add the additional words noting regular updates through council's Capital Works Executive process to the full Council. Amelia Lorentson 01:21:55.576
And I appreciate and that be shared amongst all the Councillors, not all of us sit on this CWE? Shaun Walsh 01:22:02.247
Yes, I'm happy to commit to that because there are matters that we regularly do update the full Council that come through the Capital Works Executive because we think it's in the best interest of the full Council thank you I'm happy with that amendment Brian Stockwell 01:22:15.933
So we have to deal with this one first anyone else wish to talk to the amendment I put the amendment those in favour that's Councillor Lorentson and those against that's Councillor Wilson, Wegener, Finzel, Phillips and Stockwell. Is there another amendment? Amelia Lorentson 01:22:33.605
Yep, so stay with B, maybe project completion by five of the required state and Federal grant funding time frames and note Brian Stockwell 01:22:49.013
That I wrote down the words noting regular updates through the Capital Works Executive process and that this be distributed to all Councillors. Unidentified Speaker 01:23:08.320
Been tipped with I've interpreted your words quickly, haven't I? Thank you. Amelia Lorentson 01:23:17.124
Councillor Phillips is seconded. I'll just check the wording Unidentified Speaker 01:23:22.120
For you. Sure. Dean. The B is intended to remain as is, but this is additional wording. I don't think so. Brian Stockwell 01:23:49.421
I watched what's the beginning of that? Is that the end of that? Did I miss the beginning of it? Shaun Walsh 01:23:52.940
Yeah, what I noted is that Amelia Lorentson 01:23:56.349
The B should stay as is with this additional wording. Shaun Walsh 01:24:01.924
That's true. Thank you. Amelia Lorentson 01:24:06.629
Now I think you've gone to a different one. No, it's B please, not C. Delegate authority to the CEO to finalise, negotiate, award the construction contract for the Peregian Beach active street stage 1 project including approval of all contract variations within the approved project budget for the purpose of expediting delivery enabling projects completion by the required state and Federal grant funding timeframes and noting that regular updates through the Capital Works Executive process will be distributed to all Councillors. Unidentified Speaker 01:25:18.760
Thank you. Capital is the executive process. Amelia Lorentson 01:25:31.660
Happy to move, thank you. Brian Stockwell 01:25:35.843
Councillor Phillips. Phillips. Councillor Finzel Councillor Lorentson. Littleton. Amelia Lorentson 01:25:49.340
I A right read. Won't reiterate what I've just said before, but I just think in terms of governance, that we must ensure that we discharge our governance obligations in terms of oversight, and in the context of this issue is of huge community concern. Brian Stockwell 01:26:09.940
Do others wish to talk to the amendment. Karen Finzel 01:26:11.760
Just seeking clarification, the process around how we're going to do the regular updates given we do get the Minutes post those meetings, is that another process that would be introduced? Shaun Walsh 01:26:30.346
I think we could, so the Minutes are distributed from the Capital Works Executive, but I certainly think we can be more forward in being really clear about the nature of discussion and being much more fuller in the Minutes to ensure that it addresses all of these scope items. I can commit to providing much fuller minutes or much further clarity on all of these outstanding design issues. And you could, for example, if there was reports or plans that went to CWE later? Yes, we can certainly distribute, so I can certainly commit to be fully sharing the full information. Minutes? Yeah. Not just the Minutes but the reports and the changes of scope or commitment of scope as outlined in this report. So the current minutes are not what I'm referring to, it's actually providing a much fuller information. It'd be another report? Not a report, an update or a briefing. Just emails? Yes. To supplement the distribution of the Minutes. Brian Stockwell 01:27:28.408
Yeah, the other councils wish to discuss. Closing Council order. Closing, Councillor Lorentson? No. Those in favour, that's unanimous. So that becomes the substantive motion. Councillor Phillips? Jessica Phillips 01:27:44.774
I just have an amendment to D, and I've just sent it to how did you send it to me? Just via email. I sent you two, but the one at 11:24. Amelia Lorentson 01:28:15.601
Is this an extra item? Jessica Phillips 01:28:18.245
No, just taking out D and changing D. Similar wording, but I've just rewritten it and included something. I'll read it a little bit. Out. Support the development of an active street and coastal pathway awareness and education campaign across the Shire. Any implementation of the campaign must be subject to formal endorsement by the department of transport, Main Roads, TMR and Queensland Police Service confirmation that the proposed messaging signage and enforcement approach align with relevant legislation. Requirements. Brian Stockwell 01:29:33.845
Okay, do we have a seconder? Seconded by Councillor Lorentson. Councillor Phillips. Jessica Phillips 01:29:39.279
I think this is pretty straightforward for me. Whenever we're looking at education or campaigns that are road related, I think it's really important that it aligns with the governing bodies that are there to fulfil legislative enforcement and action that would be required once changes to roads. It's not a Council thing to go and do compliance around the streets. Ultimately, I just think that anything should always align with whatever the messaging is. Coming from the other two bodies that oversee it. I shouldn't change the intent too much of D. It's just adding that I think they should be. It should align with. What they would endorse in safety and strategies with road safety. Brian Stockwell 01:30:30.911
Anyone else wish to talk to the amendment? You want to argue with yourself to close? Okay, I put the motion of the amendment. And that's carried unanimously. It becomes part of the motion. We've have we got any other Councillors wishing to talk to the motion as it stands? Councillor WILSON. Nicola Wilson 01:31:03.061
In the report and some of the discussion today we've heard about potential reputational risk with funders if the project doesn't go ahead but I'm more concerned with reputational risk in our community if we proceed with a project that many affected residents are against the reputational risk with funders can also be looked at another way when Council makes a submission for a project before community consultation without knowing if the project will be supported by the community and therefore whether the money is actually the project is not supported by the community the State government could have allocated funds elsewhere I do not feel compelled to continue the project just to save face with funders even though I do understand that risk but I do want to support residents and their many voices while I'm comfortable with the intent of a project to improve liveability and safety applying for active transport funding meant the outcome was predetermined before community consultation in the report it says the Peregian Beach active street project was scored in the 201 to 300 priority band moderate within the Walking and Cycling Strategy it was initially not scheduled for the 10-year implementation plan however opportunistic grant funding to align with regional liveability and active transport provided to consist of grant submission the concept of opportunistic funding concerns me concerns grant money from state and Federal governments is not free money, it's taxpayers' money, and we don't have unlimited access to it, hence this project covering only 800 metres without any commitment in further stages to access the village. Grants also don't cover maintenance over the life of the asset, ratepayers do. So I'm concerned about this project being so highly prioritised just to be able to access funding without first getting community support. Some of the works, like the stormwater and road repairs and the kerb and channelling, can be taken under council's capital works program without the need for the cycle path or loss of parking. A petition was formally tabled with Council raising concerns about parking loss, traffic congestion, safety and requested that the project be halted entirely, requests for additional consultation and route options review. There's been extensive community consultation and I thank everyone involved with that. Pop-ups, whoop. Surveys, submissions, petition, one-on meetings, but the feedback from the affected residents has been overwhelming, negative. There is support for some aspects: street repairs, traffic calming, but generally active street treatment. Those groups in favour don't live in the affected streets. Well, while I understand the concerns over losing grant money, I just don't think that outweighs the concerns and risks that residents have raised, and there needs to be much more transparency over the design and route before I can support this. Thank you, other Councillors? Amelia Lorentson 01:34:03.620
I'm happy to speak to this. I will not be supporting the report and I'm going to explain it on the basis of what residents have actually told us. This is not a debate about whether Peregian Beach should have better footpaths, improved streetscapes or safer pedestrian infrastructure. Residents support that. They pay rates for exactly that. Good streetscape investment should happen regardless of this project and regardless of today's outcome. That's not what is in dispute. Is whether this specific design, an active street project on these residential streets in south cooridgine has been properly assessed, properly consulted on and properly justified. One resident that I've spoken to has attended every consultation session, every pop-up, every coffee chat, every walk shop. She's written to me in detail. She has never previously opposed a Council proposal. She's showed up every step of the way on this particular project because this project directly affects her family's daily life, their safety, their property access, and in her words, their liveability. We've also received correspondence summarising the views of over 94 people surveyed locally. 62 residents in south Peregian, more than 30 from Peregian springs. Of those, only two supported the project. Councillors, this is not a divided community. This is an overwhelming signal that something, has gone wrong in housing. Has gone wrong in how this project has been developed and presented. When I read the report before us, it gave, in my opinion, it gave prominent weight to submissions from cycling advocacy organisations. Those organisations have a legitimate voice, but they do not live peace. In the streets. They won't be affected by the daily reality of reduced parking, constrained road widths, or a path design that raises genuine safety concerns for children walking to school. Their support the report also proposes to address safety concerns raised repeatedly by residents through additional signage and speed humps. When I read that I've got to be honest, I wasn't inspired by confidence. Signage doesn't Resolve conflicts created by the physical layout of a constrained shared space. It doesn't CPTED concerns about sight lights throughout Lorikeet park that were raised by residents' children and it appears not properly escalated within the project team. We've been advised in the report that more than half of the grant funding can be reallocated to other projects if this design does not proceed. That's significant. It means we're not facing a binary choice between this proposal and nothing. There is a genuine alternative. Redirect the funds, do the streetscape work residents actually want, and go back to the drawing board on the root question with a process the community can trust. The risk of proceeding as proposed is not just a design risk, it's a public trust risk. This community has watched a consultation process with less than 24 hours notice for the first information session. They have attended meetings during work hours and raised concerns that were not recorded or escalated. They have asked for survey data and not received it. Proceeding now on this report sends a message that none of that matters. And finally, I'm going to just add, when we see this level of conflict from a project, it should have told us something. We've had petitions, we've had formal objections. We've had residents attending every single consultation session. A community that kept showing up at every session, kept raising the same concerns and kept being told the project was continuing anyway. When a project again generates this much opposition this early from people it's directly intended to serve, something Councillors have gone wrong. Not with the residents, with the process. There was no general genuine community buy-in. Not because this community is difficult or opposed to progress. They've told us clearly what they want and what they're willing to support but they were never brought along. Decisions were made, funding secured, designs developed. And then the community was consulted. That's not how trust is built. The people most affected by this project are residents of south Peregian who will live with it every day, whose street amenity, parking, safety and access will be changed. Most of them have said that they've been the least heard throughout this entire process. That's not good enough and it's not what this Council should be endorsing today. Our job is not to deliver projects, our job is to deliver outcomes. Community actually wants and needs. Those are not always the same thing. We work for our residents, they do not work for us. I ask that everyone really think about supporting this recommendation in front of us. I'm sorry, really think about not supporting this recommendation in front of us, not supporting it. I will not be supporting it. Brian Stockwell 01:40:13.730
Thank you. Anyone wish to speak to the motion? Jessica Phillips 01:40:20.743
I'm going to just really briefly, I didn't write anything down so I'm just been listening to the conversation and also the confidential session as well that we had on it. I love a good plan I think it's really important to have plans to help us stay on track I think community have made it pretty clear that they would prefer some outcomes rather than more. Plans I guess is what I hear a lot of but it ultimately when I sit back and listen it always comes down to like a process that gets us in this position and we hear constantly that assets are failing and we need asset renewal we need to maintain what we currently have and then I think what happens is that it gets traction and we think okay there's a grant for that we've just got to change the scope to apply for the grant and I wonder if we just should maybe think if we were just spending our money because I'm with Councillor Wilson taxpayers pay our grants anyway so it's not like it's coming out of our pocket anyway so I don't I try to think okay even if it's a grant which has helped that's one thing but it shouldn't be the only thing it should be whether this was identified as a critical piece of work there's ageing assets but listen to maybe we should to what I constantly hear which is just go back to the basics and fix what we don't need shiny we don't need the community just wants some basics done and maybe that would help take away some of the time delays in building a plan that fits a grant and we could have just got on with it and fixed the basics so I think loud and clear I hear it every day this community they would just like the simple things done well and done right and done in time rather than waiting for money to be you know from state it just to me isn't where we should be looking great if we've got it and it comes part of the process later on but the very first buy-in should be the community that are most impacted by any project that we deliver and I don't think that they were, they felt buy-in and I think it's got a broader it becomes a broader issue when it comes to reputational damage on us as a Council because we're not taking not able to do it on our own. Community on our journey with us. They're being left behind and saying can you just come back to where we're at. So unfortunately today I won't be supporting the active street in front of us. Brian Stockwell 01:43:24.938
Councillors. Karen Finzel 01:43:30.518
I'll speak quickly. Look this has been a very complex situation but throughout this term I mean I think this has been not something that we're unfamiliar with. I think we sit at a point in for social impact is very much on the local and political agenda. I think what's happened now that I think process and systems are not currently aligned with where our community wants to go. Our social responsibility and we are here to measure that today how that impact affects all of us including how we reach our community health and well-being, how we support environmental sustainability and how we actively address social issues in support of our local communities and legitimise their voice in the space. I think we're at a discord right now where there's a misalignment between our aspirations of a community where would like to be and where we arrive so that is the challenge that I think is as leaders in our community who've been voted here to find that balance to give equity to all. I think this is a challenging decision. Before us for all the matters that were raised around the table. I think we have to constantly be asking the question the social impact. We have to examine the social impact ecosystem. To lead effective board governance and I just think that's the challenge. I know we've got decisions around how we spend the money, how we deliver the new infrastructure, how we listen to the people, how we best provide leadership for our broader community and the other complexities that believable will use. For legal matters we not bring into the table today but have to be worthy of our consideration as leaders in this community. So I'd like to in closing thank everybody who has contributed to this process. To firstly the community that turned up, to the staff for the work that they've provided to the funding opportunities that have been presented yeah I think we have to look at risk versus opportunities and what's it's before us today is a very challenging decision but thank you everyone for their input. Amelia Lorentson 01:46:18.782
Can I ask a question please? Just a question just in terms of if the recommendation doesn't proceed today in terms of the South East Queensland liveability fund and active transport fund, will Council be determining there to. Are still opportunities for Council to still use that funding. I think it's partial funding, about $800,000. Will Council determine whether that available grant funding can be reallocated to deliver infrastructure improvements that the community actually want if this recommendation falls through today. Shaun Walsh 01:47:09.733
I'll have to take that on notice, Councillor. One of the thoughts would the active transport fund the footpath. That's a reasonable ask. Could the South East Queensland could the liberally relief fund be transferred across to the other program that we've got running? So they're reasonable questions, but I'll have to take that on notice and provide further advice to Council. Amelia Lorentson 01:47:28.928
Can I maybe rephrase that question then? In terms so in terms of actual risk, so there's $880,000 from the South East Queensland liveability fund and there's $785,000 from the active transport fund. Which funding is at risk and which can be reallocated to other projects infrastructure projects? Shaun Walsh 01:47:53.214
I can't speak on behalf of the funding providers. They may elect to not redistribute any of that funding and redistribute it to other grant funders across the State. You know, we can ask the question, but I can't give any assurance that they'd be happy to redirect that funding to projects within Noosa Council. Thank you. Brian Stockwell 01:48:12.856
WRIGHT, do you wish to talk to the motion? I'll close. So, Councillors, our job is to develop strategies and implement them. This project is the ultimate outcome of a strategy in the 2017 Transport Strategy where we said we want to move people, not necessarily cars. We then went to the cycling and walking strategy and that had clear priorities and it had been mentioned that this particular section was rated at between 201 and 300. Councillor Walsh wouldn't have been aware that there was a large discussion around that prioritisation about, well actually if we put a range of different small links together, that increase the priority? Because there's a number of cases in that strategy where that would be the case. And the report clearly identifies that if we look at this as the first stage of three projects leading into the village, that the project would actually rank number 28. Heard from staff that the reason it was chosen is because the funding available is for regional projects, for ones that benefit and link and there's very few opportunities in our cycling and walking strategy where we can demonstrate that if it's not on a state corridor, bikeway, walkway. But I do think there's room to review because we have been urged to think about the basics and the basics are that we have a failing pavement that will need to be replaced. The basics are we don't have any footpaths so we've children and people walking the pavement. We've got children, elderly people walking along there at risk and we have got the basics that in pig surf we have two sides of the street parking informally creating dangerous conditions for anyone trying to walk or ride a bike. So the basics are we have to do something it's not an option so what would we do if we didn't do an active street we'd put in a footpath we put in a new pavement we'd probably add some more street trees we would slow the traffic down to ensure it was safe in project fact we would do this only thing that would be different other than calling it an active street is a little bit of coloured pavement so when we say that we work for our residents we need to think about what this means to the residents of the whole Shire and if we don't proceed now what it means to their residents is that the whole Shire will fund those other works now we've talked about it'll reduce the point suggested will be reduced parking so Councillors the numbers of parks now if accounted it creates an unsafe situation and we've seen elsewhere on the eastern beaches that where that unsafe situation exists our transport team tells us we need to put a yellow line down one side so it's highly likely that once now we know what the situation is that we'll be reducing parking as well we talk about CPTED issues in the park and that's one of the issues that we agreed with okay so we did try and avoid a bit of reserve and put a slight kink in the loop down the bottom near the roundabout on the edge of the Shire and we said okay well perhaps we should just continue with the existing alignment so there is no increased CPTED issues related to this project and in fact with the lighting etc it's likely to improve so Council roundabout on so, Councillors, things we have to look at I don't discount that this perception of many local residents that this development is not in the interests but for those who have studied this and looked at it from global national area there are many benefits to the local residents that those perceptions I think if we proceed will be challenged and so then we have to look at our own role as a Councillor and I reflect back when I did a short course with one of america's leading change management consultants and what he said if you want to be a change agent in this world you have to expect conflict it's not trying to avoid the conflict it's trying to manage it to come up with an outcome that's of benefit to your community and while I don't discount that there has been a level of difference in the views being expressed both locally both at the Shire level and at the regional level I do suggest that if we are going to do our jobs well we will implement our strategy we will follow the most logical one we will follow the one that's a best financial benefit to our ratepayers that's adopting this motion. I put the vote. Those in favour? That's Councillor Wegener and Stockwell. Those opposed is Councillor Wilson, Lorentson, Finzel and Phillips. The motion is not supported. I don't believe we need a contrary motion on that one. We'll move on to the next, oh actually what is the time? Amelia Lorentson 01:53:23.832
Excuse me, pardon the Chair. Can I ask, does our Standing Orders permit an alternate motion in this instance? You'd like to try another motion? I do want to try another motion. You close. Have the floor. That this Council, A, note the report by the project officer to the General Committee dated 9th of June 2026 regarding the parijan beach active streets stage 1 project and determine that the project not proceed in its current form. Parijan beach active streets stage 1 project and determine that the project not proceed in its current form. Me, to the 16th of March regarding the Peregian Beach active street stage 1 project and determine that the project not proceed in its current form. Direct the CEO to immediately suspend all project work pending further resolution by Council. Seen. C. Was that ending? Sorry, I can't hear you. Pending further resolution by Council. C. Direct the CEO to engage with the South East Queensland liveability fund fund to determine whether available their available grant funding. Can be reallocated to deliver practical infrastructure improvements in Peregian Beach south, including pedestrian footpath connections, stormwater infrastructure, formalised parking and street planting, including but not limited. Can I maybe add including but not limited. Where did you want to include in the-- so after Peregian Beach south, including pedestrian footpath, if we could just put including but not limited. Are consistent with the priorities with the priorities expressed by the directly affected community throughout the engagement process. Consistent with the priorities expressed by the directly affected community throughout process. I direct the CEO to report back to Council. We've gained it. Within 30 days with options for grant funding reallocation, a short list of deliverable infrastructure projects and a plan. How would you like to say about that, professor? Was after? What was after infrastructure projects? And a proposed community engagement process for progressing those options. And I'm happy before it's seconded if there are any suggestions with changes of wording to the alternate motion. Unidentified Speaker 01:58:58.461
I'll do chicken Through the Chair. Sorry. Brian Stockwell 01:59:04.509
We'll just get. Were you suggesting of process problems with the. Shaun Walsh 01:59:12.140
Yes. Yeah. Because recommendation B asks us to immediately suspend any current project work pending further resolution by Council. But then resolution C is asking us to do project work. Amelia Lorentson 01:59:24.321
So can I just then maybe delete the project then go straight to B and C. And again, open to any suggestions with changes before it's seconded and argued. Nicola Wilson 01:59:53.502
I think I would reword directly affected residents because that's quite subjective- how would we know who exactly we would include? Amelia Lorentson 02:00:03.323
I'm happy with what's been expressed by community. The affected, the community. Can we just take out directly affected? Thank you. And can I ask a question? It's a question, but maybe so taking take your questions. Out just directly affected? So delete directly affected. Jessica Phillips 02:00:27.384
I'm wondering with improvements in Peregian Beach south, if we don't put a location, given that if there's prioritisations, can staff recommend a different one if the funding body commits. Is that something you would be? Amelia Lorentson 02:00:48.538
In Peregian Beach south but maybe can we preface that with but not limited to any specific geographic location can we I request Shaun if you can help with wording? Verdict voting? Shaun Walsh 02:01:08.969
I think that the challenge we've got with the liveability fund is that they make preference that we actually redirect the funding to other projects in the Shire so it's not limited to transport or Bridget beach so I hear you so I'm just worried about that know, we've got to be engaged with the grant funders about their goals and what they will achieve with the funds I think if you put in the or alternatives yeah that would give us scope if the funding provider came back with another alternative for another project we might have underway think we should be considering that Amelia Lorentson 02:01:45.524
Thank you very much can we add or alternatives after preaching of step each staff and I think everyone around the table for their really good contributions Brian Stockwell 02:01:57.142
So rather than but not going to do any specific geographic location or alternate just put in four alternatives Amelia Lorentson 02:02:22.741
My question to CEO or Director. Infrastructure is, will there be time for a community engagement process and a report back to Council within 30 days or be, um, Special Meeting? Shaun Walsh 02:02:40.416
Um, to the Chair, um, and the CEO. So, firstly, um, we'll be beholden upon the timeframes sure. By the grant funding providers. Um, the liveability fund in particular, uh, 30 days is a holistic 30 frame, normalistic time so we can sometimes get verbal indications, but, uh, not written confirmation. So, I, think it's, and also then undertaking, uh, an engagement an time. That timeframe once we hear from the funding providers as I'm realistic. Amelia Lorentson 02:03:05.320
So can I perhaps suggest direct the CEO to report back to Council, um, as soon as possible, it's the most full stop. So take out all the rest of it? Take and delete the rest as soon as possible. Nicola Wilson 02:04:41.505
Is there a second? Thank Oh, yeah. I'll take a second. I'm going to get stuck in. Brian Stockwell 02:04:48.220
We happy with that? Thank you. As I move, Councillor Lorentson will be seconded by the Council of Phillips. Amelia Lorentson 02:04:58.987
So when a project receives this level of opposition from the community, it is incumbent on this Council to pause and reflect on whether the right outcome is being pursued in the right way. This Council is committed to delivering infrastructure that improves the lives of residents across the Shire. That commitment is not in question. What the motion in front of us recognises is that for this project, in this community, the process has not achieved the community confidence necessary to proceed. And that's failure intent. Not a favour of it's an opportunity for us right now to reset and maybe rethink how we delivered our commitment. I think throughout the whole process, we've learnt not just don't want, but what they do want. They keep telling us better footpaths, connectivity to, for example, Peregian Beach village centre, safer roads, stormwater improvements, street tree planting. And I'm going to use the example of the Austin osprey street footpath. That's a really great example of what practical infrastructure delivery looks like. And that's the standard that some of the residents are asking for. So this motion in front of us, it's not walking away from the funding. It doesn't oppose infrastructure investment in cooridge and beech and in that case anywhere else in Noosa Shire. It doesn't oppose walking and cycling improvements in principle. What it says is that the active street project through this process was built on a foundation that unfortunately didn't bring the community along and shouldn't proceed. This however should proceed. We've been told that a funding extension has been granted and what this motion does is it stops the active street project in my opinion protects the available funding and directs the CEO to identify whether there are practical infrastructure improvements that this community is clearly and consistently asking for. I just think this is a really good way forward to respond to what the community have asked for and to take advantage of some state of some state funding that means that our residents don't have to pay for improvements. So I'm hoping that this is the way forward rather than just killing the recommendation that has been put in front of us. Brian Stockwell 02:08:06.424
Thanks a lot. Nicola Wilson 02:08:09.183
Question Through the Chair. I'm just not sure if this motion is redundant. Would this happen anyway that we go back to those funding bodies and see where we can reallocate funds? Shaun Walsh 02:08:23.928
It's a standard process for us to work with our funding entities to re-scope projects and any of the council's been on a couple of weeks executive have seen how we work really proactively with our funding providers to maximise both their outcomes as well as our outcomes on behalf of the community. Larry Sengstock 02:08:40.733
Can I ask a question of clarity? Sure. My reading of this is that yes we would exactly do what Shaun has just said. There's no question that if we've got funding, we would go back and ask where we can allocate that funding elsewhere if possible. This, the way I read this is there is not a need for or not a request for or consultation with the community because we've already got that. This is a request for us to go back to the funding bodies and see whether they would look at alternative projects within that south Peregian area. And then come back to Council if the funding bodies say yes then we can work through the scope of what that is after that with the community but right now this is all this is asking is us to go back to the funding body and ask whether they would be willing to look at alternative projects. Alternative project in that you know whatever that project may be but a lesser project or a different project probably more to the point in that area is that what you're requesting? Amelia Lorentson 02:09:46.378
That's correct but not limited it's to not limited south Peregian, Peregian, just alternatives Alton alternatives and other locations and I think what the intent of the notice of motion is also to indicate to the community that although the previous recommendation was not supported we are going to proceed with another option it's more a message to the community that we are still trying to deliver genuine practical infrastructure that the feedback has been loud and clear on and letting the community know that we're not killing the project in its entirety Larry Sengstock 02:10:26.329
Through the Chair I can say throughout my career I'm not one that's ever given back a grant willingly so I would be doing everything possible to see whether we can reallocate that grant to some other project within Noosa Council but that may not be the case because of that you know often grant funding bodies have other commitments so there's other bodies that have gone over budget and they need once they get a bit of money back they'll redirect it to somewhere else that's happened in the past but certainly in terms of asking the question and giving them every alternative we possibly can I'm more than comfortable with that would be that's just a of course for us I don't believe that actually needs to be written that would just be a matter of course but if you want to put it as a motion then so be it. Brian Stockwell 02:11:22.862
Anyone else wish to talk to the motion? Lorentson did you wish to close? Amelia Lorentson 02:11:28.081
I was in a meeting with the just, and I respect all the conversation around the table, I understand that this may be BAU but I just think given that premise of the recommendation and the issues that we've raised around the table which is listening to our community, I think there is no better way to tell the community we're listening to them than to formalise BAU in a notice of motion to let them know that are going to, where possible, request reallocation of state funding to deliver infrastructure improvements that they have asked for. I think this is just a really important community message and I hope everyone can support it. Brian Stockwell 02:12:19.790
I put the motion. Those in favour? Wilson, Lorentson, Finzel and Phillips. Those opposed? Councillor Wegener and Councillor Stockwell. The motion is carried. Councillor, it's now 12:15. We've been going for two and a quarter hours. The next items are all a series of grant projects. I am going to adjourn the meeting for lunch and we'll be back here at 12:45. Brian Stockwell 02:42:14.441
So welcome back. We're about to start item 7.2 which is the 2026-2027 community grants project, community project and signature community event grant summary and we have with us Director Kerri. And also community connections manager Alison. I presume Alison you're going to give us the summary. Alison Hamblin 02:42:36.486
Thank you very much Councillors. So first report today. The purpose of today's report is to provide a summary of the 26-27 community grants and three year signature community event grants. And to seek council's endorsement of the proposed funding allocation across the four categories. And those categories being projects, equipment, facility development and events. Now the grant program as you are aware is a really key driver to our situation. Strategic goals for Council and supporting our community organisations and our most valuable volunteers in the community as well. The demand continues to exceed. So the demand that we get for our grants continues to exceed what we have in our budget and we've had over 626. Six hundred and twenty six thousand dollars worth of requests coming through from 42 community organisations for our community project grants. This really highlights what the reason why we need to do a very robust and transparent assessment process as well grants. For this particular round we're recommending 22 projects for funding to the value of $258,466.82 with a total project value of $862,000. So what I'd like to every dollar that we provide to our community project grants and subject to endorsement we're actually getting $3.33 in return so it's a great investment. So again for our three out-of-round signature grants recommended funding for $27,000 we're leveraging a total project value of over $95,000. So if we put that into so it, is every dollar we put in we're getting $3.55 in return. So again a great investment. So the outcome being sought in this particular report is council's agreement to endorse the recommended distribution of grant funding and the allocation of remaining funds to respond to emerging community needs through the quick response grants throughout the year subject to sufficient funds being allocated in council's adopted budget in 26-27 community grants program. Thank you very much. Brian Stockwell 02:44:37.954
I will note I don't think there is an active conflict with this report that I do have a prescribed conflict on facilities but as this recommendation doesn't necessarily approve the actual grant I don't believe I need to formally disclose until we get to that specific item. Wish to ask questions? Amelia Lorentson 02:45:07.758
Just one question in terms of the full list of grant recipients, amounts published and would community actually see the outcomes of there's one, all this grant funding? Terms of outcomes, do we publish them publicly, should we have that full list with the acquittal process intact? Alison Hamblin 02:45:38.429
I'll answer the first part of the question. So post Ordinary Meeting, all our successful grant applications are published on our website under each category. Each application then has to go through an acquittal process once they've completed the project and we have talked about amongst the team as well as looking at how we can actually deliver those outcomes back to the community in that longitudinal process. We only have a four-day-a-week grants officer in place as well. We do try and promote those benefits to community through our community grants newsletter, social media, etc. But it's definitely something that we could look at as a holistic approach. Amelia Lorentson 02:46:13.688
So in terms of those that apply year after year, can be captured can be captured also in terms of delivery outcomes and in progression? Alison Hamblin 02:46:22.566
Yes, that's something certainly we would like to look at, yes. But yeah, every grant application does need to do an acquittal process and so we do capture those but we haven't actually publicly put that there. Out. Kerri Contini 02:46:33.559
Just to add to that, these are project grants so they are single year projects they're not funded not a year so this is just a single year project so while it might be a an organisation might apply in multiple years therefore very discreet projects. Jessica Phillips 02:46:54.851
How do you capture the data that comes through from the information of grain? Grants I would imagine could potentially paint like a broader picture that maybe things that Council would need to know for like state grants or at or external advocacy pieces through LGAQ or like I'd love to know is there a way to just understand not just the project but out of 42 community facilities is there trending I'm sure like volunteers had have come up but it'd be just great to see how it would feed into another strategy that we would have Kerri Contini 02:47:35.995
So the grant the program is to support councils range of and ordinarily this would be supporting a community strategy but our community strategy is not currently up to date so it's supporting more of our strategies like our Corporate Plan our sport recreation strategy, so it's aligned to those and the priorities that come out of those we certainly capture where we see prevailing themes and for a lot of these organisations we're engaging with them allison's team brad's team paul's teams are engaging them with regularly around their priorities so that we can advocate up through for example, state government. But also to be able to understand is this something that Council should be funding or are there other funding avenues and that's part of the role is to look for example at maybe sport and recreation grants or gambling alliance grants there's often community because organisations, you know, naturally where their local level of government and so they think of Council first and our role is to help see where else we can obtain funding for the community Amelia Lorentson 02:48:54.972
Thanks a lot it's working there were 45 applications received 25 were recommended for funding the unsuccessful applicants are they considered to be quick response for the funding Alison Hamblin 02:49:13.945
Quick response grants are for those grants that are either emerging or time-sensitive so and they're only up to $2,500 so if an application is unsuccessful Ordinary Meeting we provide written detailed feedback to those applicants and also speak to them over the phone as well so they can progress an application whether that would be through Council or that be through an external source hence why networks we hold our grants nibbles nights for example too so they know about all the other external grant opportunities available and then we have a whole lot of grant search tools too that we provide to them and it may be letters of support as well for external grants. Kerri Contini 02:49:52.589
Some of them, Councillor Lorentson, might be a quick response if it was a very small amount and it fit the criteria, they may well be. There are a range of reasons why people aren't successful, often we see it's because they're not meeting the technical criteria of the grants and so the team will work with the work with the organisation to help improve that grant application for a next round Alison Hamblin 02:50:21.617
We actually did our data analysis as well we found that the ones that have been unsuccessful actually didn't consult very well with our community team so that's and something that we're really encouraged to really encourage too so if you are unsuccessful you do work with a member of our community development team or sport and active team or arts and cultural team to develop a decent application so whether that's for Council or for another external body give it the best chance of success. Brian Stockwell 02:50:52.000
Would someone like to move the recommendation? Councillor Wegener I think just pipped it to Councillor Lorentson and Councillor Lorentson seconded it. Tom Wegener 02:51:02.076
I just think this is one of the best, if not the best, aspects of Noosa Council that we have supporting that. And supporting community organisations with equipment. The $3.55 return from $1 is very, very low. I think that the impact for the community is very far-reaching. And a sense of community and trusting our local government and working with each other to make the whole better. It's just so important. All these projects are so well done. I personally would love to see more budget allocated next year towards these grants. Unidentified Speaker 02:51:45.302
Anyone else? Amelia Lorentson 02:51:49.007
Just to add to what Tom just said, when I read the reports in terms of the grant funding that we get, look at it from a different lens. This is not about managing people or administrating or micromanaging organisations. It's simply about backing people in this community who give back so much. And I think that's something we should celebrate. That we've got a Council that helps empower people to do really great things in this community and fill gaps that this Council can't. That empowering community builds better thank you. I always say there's something more than just the numbers that we're delivering. Alison Hamblin 02:52:39.341
Absolutely. Supporting our valuable volunteers is what I've always said. Tom Wegener 02:52:46.990
Are you happy to close? I'll close and just say, you know, Thank you. Very much, Kerri. Thank you very much, Alison. Thank you to the team. You should have passed that on to us. Alison Hamblin 02:52:57.531
Some of the team behind us. Brian Stockwell 02:52:59.794
Really great. Thanks. I'll put the motion all in favour. That's unanimous. We then move on to the specific types of community grants and the first one is 2026-27 community project grant program projects and a quick snapshot of that. Alison Hamblin 02:53:16.639
So the outcome being sought in council's agreement is to approve the recommended project grant allocation to the five community organisations in attachment one to this report to the value of $61,916.10. Subject and 10 cents subject to the confirmed to the adopted 26-27 Council budget for community grants. Brian Stockwell 02:53:37.492
Move Councillor Finzel second Councillor Phillips sorry do you want to move in? Councillor Finzel yeah Finzel you have the floor Karen Finzel 02:53:45.402
Yeah thank you to the team and the staff that have like engaged and had to go through the rigorous process and a big thank you to all the community groups and the people that took the time also to send their application in so I think this is a fantastic opportunity to further embed those opportunities into our community to be able to contribute to building thriving communities that are connected to each other in place so I think it's really important in terms of our health and well-being and living in a thriving community. That these grants are available for the community to put forward their own ideas and their own thoughts around what would benefit their group and their community so thank you. Jessica Phillips 02:54:33.435
Going to speak to this one. After 10 years as a police negotiator most of my work was in suicide intervention and so I wanted to highlight more for the community these projects because there's a few that really stood out to me. Makeshift mateship project, men's health um, in there. Noosa, I think it's called grab life by the balls and I just want to say that I think it's really great to see us supporting men's mental health. For many years I've seen health. Funding and opportunities for women's health and sometimes I've seen some gaps in our men's mental health and so seeing that on here actually made me feel really good so I'm very happy to support that but also the whole list of these projects and I'm just going to read them out just for community outreach project the safer spaces pilot program with red frogs young people project another thing that I think is just incredibly important think and one you look at that list anything no wonder we know how much those volunteers do but these programs will probably change lives so I'm really grateful to support it thanks for bringing it to us Allison Alison Hamblin 02:55:56.098
A little bit of plug we've actually got grab life by the balls coming to Noosa Seniors to support our men as well oh that's great yeah Amelia Lorentson 02:56:01.429
Thanks fantastic could you let us know when that's happening I'd love to come along Brian Stockwell 02:56:06.017
Like to say that just like they get the award for the best project that I've had for a couple of years. It's just to reflect the diversity in that little group there is quite reassuring and it shows the strength of the community relationships and support services available across both the Coast end and the hinterland which is great. Amelia Lorentson 02:56:38.007
I want to just pull out the making lives matter, the community outreach project. Is just one of those communities that work under the radar and who are doing such incredible work in our community and do don't spell it out and they don't make a lot of noise about it so I'm really encouraged and happy that they've actually applied for some funding. I actually love the detail of the project description so it's not just the getting allocated just under 20,000 but what that funding will actually deliver in terms of hours. 439 hours of direct outreach support to those that are vulnerable in our community and linking them to local services etc and they've been doing that for years and need support so that's just really encouraging and this is the stuff that makes us or me sleep really well at night knowing that we're delivering not just a return on our dollars but a social return back to our community. Kerri Contini 02:57:54.592
This project received a near perfect score and it is in recognition of the work that making lives matter, their gradual expansion and in filling a need that you know there's not many other people in this space who have done that and they have. Amelia Lorentson 02:58:15.749
I remember years ago Kerri going there and I don't think this was part of their vision. It just happened and they just couldn't turn people back. Nicola Wilson 02:58:25.571
They've recognised what Kerri Contini 02:58:26.982
The needs are and tailored response to that. Importantly, from our perspective, they connect in with the other community organisations. They're not working in isolation. It's fair to say, you know, we direct a lot of people there support and who would fall through the cracks through other traditional services, so it's really pleasing to be able to recommend this one. They're all very worthy projects, but they're doing some very important work. Brian Stockwell 02:59:02.404
Okay, anyone else? Fitchell, Finzel, would you like to pose? Karen Finzel 02:59:07.134
I think it's all been said, but I think just in summary, it's really reflects a diversity from, you know, art through to young people through to, you know, vulnerable people in our community. So, I thank you to everyone that applied and also to the staff that worked through the process to bring us here today. So thank you. Brian Stockwell 02:59:27.983
Okay, put the motion. Those in favour? That's unanimous. Alison Hamblin 02:59:33.811
One of my amazing staff has just texted me and she said grab life by the balls, we'll be at Noosa Seniors tomorrow from 10:30 to 12:00, thank you very much. Amelia Lorentson 02:59:43.285
I'm going to try to make it up. I appreciate that. Thank you. Brian Stockwell 02:59:47.917
Okay we now up to item uh putting item 4, which is the community product grants program facility development, and Councillor Wilson, you wish to declare a conflict of interest? Nicola Wilson 02:59:57.881
I do. In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009, I inform the meeting that I have a prescribed conflict of interest in relation to item 7.4, 2026-27 community grants program, community project grants, facility development, as Noosa Arts Theatre have been recommended as a recipient of a facility development grant. I am the senior vice president of Noosa Arts Theatre as a result of my conflict of canoosa as interest, I will now leave the meeting room. Matter is considered and voted on. Brian Stockwell 03:00:28.504
Thank you. And I will follow up under the same section as local government. I inform the meeting that I have prescribed conflict of interest in relation to item 7.4, the 26-27 community grants program, community project grants, facility development on this agenda, as I am the current president of Noosa Lions Football Club, who I recommend for news alliance today. Funding as of. My conflicts, I will now leave the meeting room while the matter is considered and voted on. Jessica Phillips 03:00:51.304
Did we need to appoint a Chair? I'll treat later. Okay. Yeah. Larry Sengstock 03:00:59.662
Given the Chair is the only one left in the room, need to appoint have a nomination please? Alison Hamblin 03:01:05.877
Yes. I'll do it. You're willing to do it? Closest. Larry Sengstock 03:01:11.257
By Tom and seconded by Councillor Lorentson. All in favour? That's unanimous. Councillor Phillips, you're in charge. Jessica Phillips 03:01:21.299
Oh no. Alison Hamblin 03:01:23.102
Okay, so discussions or questions? Yeah, so this relates to our facility development category. So the outcome being sought is council's agreement to approve the recommended facility development grant applications to the nine community organisations one to in attachment 1. The value of $147,296 and 32 cents subject to funding confirmed in the adopted 26-27 community grants program budget work I just want to worth noting for this particular facility development that all applicants must put in a minimum of 50% towards the grant so that could either be in kind their own cash at bank or an external grant opportunity so it's worthy that for the nine applications that we're proceeding. Thank you. Any questions? Amelia Lorentson 03:02:18.135
Not a question Through the Chair just yay the Noosa Women's Shed connection to sewage networking. And completion of kitchen, bathroom, toilet facilities. I know the ladies there will be jumping for joy. Are you moving the motion as well then Councillor Lorentson? I'm happy to move the motion. Thank you. Jessica Phillips 03:02:34.915
I'm happy to second. And is there any discussion? Amelia Lorentson 03:02:40.539
No, just again, you know, to the staff involved, you know, this is a rigorous process. It's not just a tick and click I know that you guys go through robust criteria assessment and I think we see that in the standard of applicants that are successful and also probably what I see most is the equity and fairness and the diversity of applications so I just want to just take the opportunity to thank the staff and acknowledge the hard work that comes in. To this point thank you all Jessica Phillips 03:03:24.206
Thank all you those in favour that's carried noting the two out of the room thanks. I will fix that. Good job. Amelia Lorentson 03:03:35.422
Good practice. Where are your colleges? August? Yeah, I think so. Nicola Wilson 03:03:48.400
Walk welcome back. Thank you. Brian Stockwell 03:03:51.349
Well done to the Chairperson. Thank you. Okay we then move on to item 7.5 which is the 2026-27 community grants project grant program for equipment. Over to you, Alison. Alison Hamblin 03:04:07.347
It is the equipment category so the outcome being support sought in council's agreements to approve the recommended equipment grant allocation to the three community organisations in attachment one so Cooran School of Arts, Cooran Organic Garden and Ridgewood Community Hall to the value of sixteen thousand seven hundred and fifty four dollars and forty cents again subject to funding being confirmed in the adopted 2627-27 happy budget for community grants. Happy to move. Brian Stockwell 03:04:35.154
Moved Councillor Finzel, seconded Councillor Wegener. Wegener. Councillor Finzel, you have the floor. Karen Finzel 03:04:41.254
Oh thank you look I think again this is fantastic especially for our hinterland community groups that are well represented there because I know how much they like work really hard in their small communities to get equipment and you know benefit the community with things coming their way especially I have to mention Carters Ridge they've been slugging they've out there for some time and they're trying to grow their community engagement and bring people on board so I think it's really lovely to see this you know it's a small amount of equipment but I think that will create a huge change for their small community that actually is growing when we see people moving out to hinterland so it's really wonderful. And they're really supporting those events and growing that community out there so yeah I really support this I think every little bit counts when you've got your community groups working hard and the volunteers and giving these opportunities through the equipment program to just get that one small thing that might you know be instrumental in creating a really large impetus for that community to thrive so yeah I'm really happy with the recommendation and as always the process it's rigorous and stands you know scrutiny so I think in terms of using that money to benefit our community I wish there was more. Thank you. Amelia Lorentson 03:06:08.634
I'm surprised about in terms of equipment. My question is how do we reach out to the community groups that may be in need of equipment because you know we're looking to community groups requesting stuff. Do we make them aware that we're very funny specifically. Kerri Contini 03:06:30.674
There's probably, there's two aspects. I'll let Ali talk to the promotion of it. But what we've certainly seen is that one of the larger categories that's coming through the quick response is for equipment. For example, if a fridge breaks, it's hard to wait for a year for a funding program. So for the main grant. So we're seeing those come through quick response, which helps explain why there's fewer of them coming through the annual round. But Ali can talk about the promotional side of it. Alison Hamblin 03:07:04.425
Was I was just going to add to that, though. Of organisations that do request equipment, we look at the RSL, we also look at bendigo bank, the gamley community benefit fund, they all seem to support equipment versus some of the other categories that we look at as well. But yeah, in terms of promotion, we're very active in that space, as you're aware, so it's through our grants networks and neville's nights, it's through our community connecting newsletter, social media, and all the other forms of press, and obviously the team are very active in supporting our community organisations too. Amelia Lorentson 03:07:37.226
And in terms of a quick response grants, do we publicly publish? Alison Hamblin 03:07:45.374
Yes, so every month our grants officer publicly proposes who has been successful in our quick response. It's all up to date on our website. Excellent, thank you. Yeah, and we've had some great applications through that. Kerri Contini 03:08:00.337
That helps people in a promotional, as well as from an accountability perspective. It helps in the promotion too, so that people can see, "Oh, those types of things are the ones that are successful in funding." Amelia Lorentson 03:08:13.558
They set a good team plan for how they're going to do it. Alison Hamblin 03:08:16.623
Yeah. Yeah, but Council grants, we tend to not push the equipment as much because there are other external grants available, so rather than, we push more the infrastructure projects, programs, where they can't access other grant opportunities. Brian Stockwell 03:08:33.522
And I'll talk to it. I think for many years, corran was after a community garden and it's great to see the corran organic because what's, over the last little flourishing an egg. On excellent, the hill there is it just does show, just does reflect the corran community. I had one query, just looking at the corran school of arts, that one, I can see the benefit of it, have you run it by whatever heritage provisions need to be considered? Kerri Contini 03:09:07.088
So so that was part of the of assessment. The process, and it will be, although it's not a special condition, it will be part of the process that it respects the heritage of the Cooran hall. Brian Stockwell 03:09:18.236
Yep. Okay. Others? No? Councillor Finzel, would you like to close? No, I think that's all that we've said, thank you. I put to the vote those in favour. That's unanimous. We then move on to the next item, if I scroll down, will be events, I think, is the community project grants program Alison Hamblin 03:09:41.320
Yes, for events." Category. So the outcome being sought is council's agreement to approve the recommended grants, event grants allocated to the five community organisations in attachment one to the value of $32,500 subject to funding being confirmed in the 26-27. Council adopted budget. So those are events. Brian Stockwell 03:10:06.048
Move Councillor Lorentson and second to Councillor Wilson. Councillor Lorentson, you have the floor. Amelia Lorentson 03:10:11.334
Just when we run through the list, new north artists run initiative, Tewantin Noosa RSL. Tewantin Noosa sub subbranch, the anzac day commemoration 2027, Noosa international Surfilm Festival, the story, the Noosa multicultural music and dance festival, and Kin Kin community group, their Christmas party. Every application speaks volumes about what we value as a community, which is our arts. I want some milk. Our arts are now community, and I love that we are supporting Kin Kin community Christmas party. These are events that bring community together and are supportive. Um and our support like you know I that often what we contribute, there's still got to be just enormous efforts from these community groups in terms of raising the gap in funding that we help but don't totally support the occasion so thank you to all these organisations for their efforts in fundraising to bring these really great events to Noosa that support our residents. Alison Hamblin 03:11:31.927
And often all run by volunteers always yeah great Brian Stockwell 03:11:37.301
Others wish to talk to the motion? Okay we're happy to put the motion. Those in favour? That's unanimous. We now move on to item 7 in this category which is the community grants for the three years signature community events grants which are the more significant Alison Hamblin 03:11:55.856
Ones. Yeah so just to let you know these applications will see you were received out around, of round but met the criteria circumstances so as per our grants policy. These grants support the delivery of significant high-profile community events over a multi-year period and approval will enable these events to continue delivering strong and economic benefits to Noosa. So the outcome being sought is council's agreement to approve the recommended funding allocation to the three community organisations outlined in attachment 1 to the value of $27,000. So I'll list those for you noosa's show, Peregian friends and family for their Peregian Beach carols, and the Tewantin Christmas carols here at the RSL park. Karen Finzel 03:12:42.698
Do we have a mover? Okay, yes, second. Thank you. I think that was cancer fizzle. And Councillor Phillips is the seconder. Councillor Finzel. Yeah, look, I think this is fantastic in terms of when we're focusing on our volunteers and community groups who have worked in the past. These three-year signature events are fantastic because it gives you time for planning. They know the funding's in the pipeline, so it really frees up the community volunteers and the committee members to actually really you know drill down on what they want to deliver in the community. So I think it's really fabulous to be able to promote the three-year signature community events and the community can put it in their calendar. They look forward to it coming and if there's schools involved and you know other broader community members it's all they know what's coming they know what's ahead of them and it's a really great one for bringing the community together and they're real celebration so it's fantastic that this three-year signature event still provides that opportunity and forward planning for our committees and volunteers so thank you. Jessica Phillips 03:13:45.184
I'm going to speak to it on the Tewantin oh and all of them are worthy obviously but I just want to mention Tewantin Christmas carnival because there is um well favourite from my kids but also their rides are free and I think in this day and age where everything seems to cost me money with young kids it is such a great event I think every child needs to have it you know feels very violently ill after going around and like it's a part of memory setting so you know I hope they never stop that thing that goes around the big swing but also I just I think it's really like when anyone now wants money from people they have stuck to their values around giving some free rides so kudos to them because I know that my kids just basically know everyone there and it's an event where it just feels very much like everyone comes together so yeah, it's great one to support all of these and I think same as Councillor Finzel said it's good that they can sort of plan ahead and having three years to sort of know that there it must help the volunteers not to have to think every year are we going to be able to do it so yeah very happy to support it. Brian Stockwell 03:15:05.169
I was thinking about my recollections of the Tewantin Christmas probably sold you little glowing lights from the scouts. I remember one of the first times that my son went and it was the big semi-trailer with the slippery dip and you have to walk up these stairs with the tiny little I have to admit I do suffer from vertigo. He'd tell her up and I was holding the chain all the way up. So that's my memory of freaking out in the back of a truck. But anyway, they are all good community events. Anyone else? No, I think it's all been said. Okay, I've got the motion. Those in favour? That's unanimous. Thank you. And we are now up to 7.8, which is something completely different. That's the legacy plot reservation management policy. And we have the same two people. Alison Hamblin 03:16:02.141
Completely different. Yeah, absolutely. It's completely different. So hats. Brian Stockwell 03:16:06.287
We acknowledge Troy at the back. Everyone knows. Don't need to introduce him because he's a social media star. Alison Hamblin 03:16:12.418
Always troy's our amazing cemetery supervisor. So thank you, Troy. So the purpose of today's report is to seek council's adoption of the legacy plot reservation management policy which sets out a clear and respectful process to review and, when appropriate, return unused cemetery plots reserved more than 25 years ago back into active use. So this matter now, this matters now for a few key reasons. Firstly, the Tewantin cemetery has reached capacity for new traditional burials, making it better use of existing land an immediate priority. Secondly, are more than 200 unused reserve plots across our cemeteries that are currently unavailable to the community. Thirdly, historical arrangements didn't require plots to be used within a timeframe, creating inefficiencies and limiting options for families today. Finally, Queensland does not have a clear legislative framework in this area, so we've sought legal advice and are now proposing a consistent, transparent and defensible local approach to manage this responsibility, which is in line with what other Queensland councils are doing. So the outcome being sought council's agreement to introduce a fair, well governed process that allows us to identify long unused plots, making unreasonable efforts to contact families and return unclaimed plots to community use. So before we go into discussion, I must say that plots are already getting returned back to Council without this process as such, but this gives us an opportunity to look at additional plots where we already know that families may have passed or those families actually don't need to utilise those plots, so it actually gives us that administration process that's very transparent and. To be proactive rather than reactive. Correct, yeah. Brian Stockwell 03:17:58.770
Okay, do we have any questions or someone wishing to move the motion? Amelia Lorentson 03:18:03.926
I have a couple of questions. Of, you mentioned that we have obtained legal advice in terms of whether the 25 years determined, whether that's the right threshold or not, so. Think I had this discussion with you, Alison, where my parents, when they buy plots of land at a cemetery, which my parents did many, years ago, they do so in perpetuity. There is no. They haven't purchased it, thinking that one day it's going to be relinquished. So my question is, 25 years the right threshold? And is that legally defensible? Alison Hamblin 03:18:47.942
Yes. So we're based on what other councils in Queensland are doing. If your family already has an existing plot, that would get returned to the next of kin if the family has chosen to be buried elsewhere or cremated elsewhere. So to the next of kin. That next of kin doesn't want to utilise that plot. There is that opportunity then to give it back. So we're not taking away from the next of kin or the family member. It's only if the family chooses not to continue. With that plot. Amelia Lorentson 03:19:14.308
Yes. Or if we can't relocate, we can't contact the families. Is that correct? Alison Hamblin 03:19:19.613
So if we're unable to contact the families because they may have passed away or their next of kin is not contactable, we do give a- we're going to give them 90 days contact period as such to make sure that we have done everything possible to make contact with those families. We are going through the channels of looking at births, deaths and marriages as well, seeing who is still around, utilising public notices and also targeted consultation too. Kerri Contini 03:19:49.779
I think, Through the Chair and Councillor Lorentson, the important thing there is that if the person themselves is still alive or they're somebody that holds legal responsibility for that plot, whether next of kin or an executor of an estate, if they wish to retain that plot, that's fine. They're within their rights to do so. This is a process that enables us particularly to track down those ones or go through a process where the person has passed away, they've been buried elsewhere. And either no one has been aware of it or no one has let us know and it enables us to go through a process with a full public notice period to try to identify is there any next of kin or legal representative and then move through a process. To return that. To Council. Amelia Lorentson 03:20:46.695
I note that the policy itself has a provision for safety net. Yes. So if there is a late claimant we're reserving one plot at a time. Yes. So question to staff, should we be considering particularly in Tewantin maybe increasing that minimum safety net to maybe two or three plots? What's your position on that? Especially I just keep thinking if a late claimant says no. lake climate one's mine. What happens to the other how many in Tewantin? So what happens to those people? Kerri Contini 03:21:35.853
So this will given the challenges in contacting people this will be a slow iterative process with the staff that we have so that what we're saying in the beginning there are all the plots that are currently are reserved when reclaim the first plot that will sit aside as a reserved plot as we start to move through some will be returned to us if we had a rare circumstance where someone did then claim say oh hang on actually I've only found out I did want to have that what if it had been used we would offer them the reserved plot and then we would offer them that the plot that we've set aside and then we would put another plot into that set aside so that there's a almost a perpetual plot set aside in the rest we really really don't imagine it happening given the information that's coming through but there would be one plot sitting there continuously if that helps understand it. Amelia Lorentson 03:22:50.030
And my last question in reference to the Cooroy cemetery. If we're at full capacity at the Tewantin cemetery, why did we subdivide the land at the Cooroy cemetery? Kerri Contini 03:23:04.511
Thank you for your question. I'm going to disallow it. It's not relevant to the item. Amelia Lorentson 03:23:09.977
Okay. Please? Can I move to dissent on the decision of the Chair? I think it's really relevant with what the Cooroy cemetery is part of the report, and my question is in reference to long-term planning, long-term cemetery capacity plan. I want to understand, was there any consideration in terms of our planning decisions? Whether the two-on-term Tewantin capacity issue was a factor in the decision to subdivide like kauai, the land in Cooroy? I think it's totally relevant. Brian Stockwell 03:23:58.294
Sure, I'll seek your support in a dissent from the chairman's ruling. I as a seconder? Yes. So, would someone like to second that motion? Councillor Phillips, you have had a chat. My turn to respond is the item we're dealing with is not about symmetry planning, it's about a legacy project that's setting up a system whereby reserved plots are reviewed and reallocated as is necessary. The matter of broader symmetry planning is well beyond the scope of this particular report. So, I put the motion of dissent. Those in favour? That's two, those opposed? Sorry, I should have meant that was Councillor Lorentson and Phillips, those opposed is Councillor Wilson, Wegener, Finzel and Stockwell. So, we've got any more questions or someone wish to move the resolution? It's lost. I'm Karen Finzel 03:25:04.109
I'm happy to move it. Brian Stockwell 03:25:05.081
Councillor Finzel? I'll Finzel, our second, our picture, Councillor Finzel Finzel. The film too? Karen Finzel 03:25:10.040
I want to thank the staff for this. I think it's a proactive approach. I think it's well overdue that we do look at addressing those legacy issues as we move forward, especially during times of when, you know, it's very a sensitive issue. It's a sensitive area and I think the policy gives us really good direction on how to manage that with all the sensitive activities being taken on board but also having a process in place that supports our staff and our community especially given like you said that Queensland does not have that at that broader policy level so I commend the staff for taking those steps to address that moving forward because I think that supports everyone along the way was so thank you and it was a comprehensive report. And including the workshop so so I think the understanding of where that's come from and the reason why that's required at the moment is clear and to be commended. Thank you. Brian Stockwell 03:26:08.669
I'll speak. I think it is an interesting and wide approach because what we're dealing with here is a limited resource and we have identified what is likely to be some historic issues that have artificially reduced the current capacity and that particular issue for Tewantin. So this is a mechanism whereby we can wisely allocate the available space in Tewantin and other cemeteries cemetery we have in Pomona and Cooroy as is needed councillors Councillors? No no? Councillor Finzel wish to close. I'll put the motion those in favour. That's unanimous. Thank you. We then move on to sports for all access and inclusion program outcomes and learnings. We welcome the manager of our inclusion officer. Who would like to do the overview? Kerri Contini 03:27:23.202
I'll start. So this report outlines the outcomes and learnings from the Sport4All. For all access and inclusion program. Delivered from June 2024 to June 2026. The program aimed to build the capacity of clubs, schools and community organisations to deliver inclusive sporting opportunities for people with disability. It also strengthened council's internal capability and approach to access and inclusion. The program achieved significant community impact, exceeding original targets for engagement, training and action planning. Many outcomes extended beyond the original scope, demonstrating the value of a dedicated inclusion role within Council. The program has provided participation, accessibility and partnerships across the Noosa community. It highlights the benefit of a coordinated organisational organisational-wide approach to access and inclusion moving forward. Brian Stockwell 03:28:22.162
Thank you. That was short of sleep. Do we have any questions of Jamila? Councillor Lorentson. Amelia Lorentson 03:28:30.219
So, just clarification. Subject to future funding availability, consider establishing an ongoing inclusion function. Subject to future funding development a whole Council access inclusion framework. Can I ask clarity, what does that actually mean in certain terms? Do we lose Jamila as our access inclusion officer? And amen. Yes, just can I throw that question in? Kerri Contini 03:29:03.613
Thank you Councillor Lorentson. So the program was funded for two years and that funding finishes on the 30th of June so the program will cease at that at point and janella will Jamila, we will be sending her off and saying thank you very much but jamila's appointment will conclude at the end of June. In terms of subject to future funding availability, we would then be seeking through our normal processes to have, to reinstate this function in Council at a future date. Amelia Lorentson 03:29:41.152
I'm going to try an amendment and see how it plays out on the floor. Brian Stockwell 03:29:47.255
We haven't got a motion yet, so we can't amend the motion. We haven't moved yet. I'll move to make matters easy. I'll move the recommendation. I'll second. So, it cancels Councillors, this has been a very valuable process and project, and jamila's done a great job of achieving well beyond what was the anticipated outcome. I really recall a couple of deputations we had at meetings last year, I think it was. We had someone with a disability talking about car parking near the Cooroy promise course, which I thought that was the I best deputation we've ever had and then we had the young fella A range of forms and as the report notes we've got you know populations, every six hour population are now over 60, many aged 50, so age is one where we're trying to get them involved and it's interesting that last night I went to a meeting and we found out that 15 Sunshine coasters, some of them from Noosa, were in the Australian football youth championships recently, like on the weekend, and on the same weekend we had one of our ex-presidents who was representing Australia when he was walking across the border. Australia in walking football, so that chance if you're into sport to keep it going for the whole of your life, to feel included, it's amazing. Post was quite interesting that he never did he think that he would be representing Australia even though his brother didn't play as a 17 year old. So it is a great program and it has many benefits. Councillor Wilson, would you like to try your Amelia Lorentson 03:31:36.412
Amendment now? I will try the amendment and it's a D that Council direct the CEO, to include funding for a permanent inclusion officer role in the current budget, having regard to the demonstrated return on investment delivered through the sport for all program. I forgot, sorry. Okay, let's start again. That Council, that's right, sorry. D, that Council direct the CEO. Officer role in with a return on investment delivered through the sports for all program. And the ongoing and growing access and inclusion needs of the Noosa community. Brian Stockwell 03:33:04.902
I'll do a fine-tune first. The current budget runs out in June 30, I don't think that's what you mean. Unidentified Speaker 03:33:12.121
Future 26/27 budget. Amelia Lorentson 03:33:14.967
Excuse me, we're 26th. So what are we? Future 26/27 budget. Nicola Wilson 03:33:23.181
It's permanent, it would go beyond that. Brian Stockwell 03:33:29.203
The next one is CEO doesn't make the decision about the budget we do. Amelia Lorentson 03:33:39.680
I'm happy to change the request that Council include funding for a permanent inclusion officer role in the upcoming budget having budgets regard to the demonstrated return on investment delivered through the sports for all program in the ongoing and growing access and inclusion needs double EDS of the Noosa community. So request Council include it's that Council request Council no D request delete the CEO just request Council inclusion but if you're just adding a D it starts with that Council include funding Brian Stockwell 03:34:46.944
The amendment lapses from one to a second now. Okay, do anyone else wish to talk to the motion in front of us? Amelia Lorentson 03:34:59.146
I don't wish to close, I've put the motion notes in. Brian Stockwell 03:35:01.870
I'll speak. Amelia Lorentson 03:35:02.571
Oh okay. I'm going to start with an apology. To the people in our who live with a disability. To the clubs and schools who invested in this program in good faith, and to Jamila who's delivered extraordinary work in this role. I'm sorry that this amendment has not matched your effort or your trust. I've been volunteering and under section, before someone calls a point of order, under section 11.4 of our Standing Orders, I am able to share a story that arises from the agenda item in front of us and I'm going to share a personal story. I've been volunteering with the seawolf-Smitha program now for 13 years, making sure that children with disability have the same chance to learn Surf Lifesaving skills as every other child in this community. In 2022, I fought for an all-access beach mat. It took years to achieve something that should have been obvious. The Noosa seahorse inclusion foundation, which myself and a few other members of the community built one reason because we were tired of watching people with disabilities being marginalised in their own community. We started raising our own funds, providing wheelchairs at the visitor information centre, at surf clubs, helping people with disabilities buy their own cars, bringing First Nations people from Cunnamulla and people with geographic barriers to Noosa to allow them the same opportunities we have to enjoy our ocean. I also sit on the SLSQ, the State disability workshop for surf life save in Queensland. Two years ago, Surf Lifesaving Queensland established a dedicated diversity and equity strategy and appointed a full-time officer for their first time in surf life save in history. A state peak body understood you that you cannot inclusion embed without dedicated resourcing and yet here we are. For roughly $70,000 of council's own money over two years, this program engaged 25 sporting clubs, trained 150 people, delivered wheelchair basketball, adaptive skateboarding, walking basketball and more. And embedded inclusion into Council planning in that has never happened before. The report tells us that the most significant outcomes were never in the original scope. They happened because a dedicated person like Jamila with lived experience was present and empowered to act. You cannot replace planning that with a self-reliance. Social policy or a committee. Noosa's median age is 50.5 years. 36% of our population is over 60. Nearly 30% live with a long-term health condition. This need is not going to diminish. Every year without a dedicated inclusion function is a choice. To let this momentum fade and to tell people who experience barriers to participation that their access is subject to budget availability. And value of your living. I've been generally encouraged by the steps this Council has taken in this space and this program was a real first step in the right direction but to say that I'm disappointed that there is no funding to continue is an understatement and I'm putting on record today that this Council must find a way to fund an ongoing access and inclusion function not as a nice to have but as a commitment to this community and I'm not going to stop pushing this and I won't sleep at night until this happens. Community are watching us and just simply they deserve better than us than the decision that's been made today. Brian Stockwell 03:39:21.620
So Sir, in your speech. Anyone else wish to talk? I will close. So I acknowledge Councillor Lorentson's long-standing commitment and volunteer in a volunteer capacity and advocacy for people with a disability and appreciate that the speech she just gave was in relation to the amendment that you didn't keep going. In part in that there's no decision today about whether to include or not include anything in a budget we haven't been put before us yet what has been recommended is that we acknowledge the work in the project so so what we're waiting for today isn't in regard to whether or not to have a more permanent role that matches what has been happening with this project it's simply to acknowledge the outcomes and the learnings. I'll put the motion those in favour. That's five which is Councillor Wilson, Councillor Wegener, Councillor Finzel, Councillor Phillips, Councillor Stockwell and those against is Councillor Lorentson and the vote is carried. We then move on to item 10 and that is the Fees and Charges and we have Director Margaret Gatt here and manager of finance. Margaret Gatt 03:40:44.421
Good afternoon Councillors you would be aware whilst this report is contained within the agenda post the agenda being published on the website we discovered or we were made aware by the State government for right to information that there'd been a change to some of their fees that would have an impact on our Fees and Charges register and so therefore I've spoken to the CEO and seeking the chair's consideration that the report proper needs to be amended to include those right to information fees and also some other administrative areas that we uncovered post the publication of the agenda so formal seeking formally Brian Stockwell 03:41:38.964
So the I'll move the suggested motion which is the General Committee agenda item seven point ten twenty six twenty seven Fees and Charges be referred to the Ordinary Meeting for a further report so I have a seconder Councillor Phillips no need to discuss that we know the reason for it anyone else wish to talk those in favour that's carried unanimously thank you and next item is 11 which is the Noosa Botanic Gardens master plan we welcome Director Shaun Walsh and our parks coordinator geordie lascelles good afternoon Karen Finzel 03:42:29.286
Councillors. Geordie Lascelles 03:42:32.936
Pleased to present the Noosa Botanic Gardens draft master plan for adoption. The Noosa Botanic Gardens on the Lake MacDonald is a treasured amenity space for residents and visitors. It has a substantial botanic collection in a stunning waterside setting. It's increasingly recognised for its value for both Cooroy and all of its residents. It's evolution to date has been largely incidental, originally involving evolving from a community initiative. And the significant opportunity to improve the setting and recognise the botanic collection, as well as improve visitor facilities to make the space more accessible and comfortable for all. In addition, ageing infrastructure and substandard pathways require investment to rectify established effects the draft plan was prepared by landscape architecture consultants with key inputs from an external stakeholder group Councillor Finzel was the Chair and Councillor Lorentson was on as well sorry Councillor Phillips as well yep thank you and an internal working group and also informed by a two-phase community engagement program there who had contributed. Was over 250 people had contributed and helped to guide the development of the plan through a series of pop-ups, activities at the gardens and at Cooroy, surveys and targeted discussions with groups including the friends of the Botanic Gardens, the wedding association and also on-site meeting we had with the Kabi Kabi People aboriginal corporation as well. Summary of all the submissions received through both of the phases of engagement are presented in the report for council's consideration. The preparation of the draft master plan has been iterative over the last 24 months considering diverse feedback and provides a revised vision and objectives with a realistic long-term plan for upgrades and improvements over the next 25 years ensuring the gardens botanical legacy and ongoing value to the local and broader community the vision that's in the draft is to cultivate a vibrant botanic garden that reflects the community values working with nature now and for the future major features of the plan include a preservation enhancement of the botanic collection creation of an improved visitor experience an entry experience improved facilities for the friends of the Botanic Gardens creation of a primary grade accessible wayfinding pathway around the gardens improved activity zones that support a variety of uses as well as cultural heritage considerations such as the community cultural reflection zone. The plan will be a key platform to prioritise available future operational funds as well as attract grant funding from multiple sources. The plan has a staged framework to guide operational decision-making, investment prioritisation development. Future projects will be analysed to determine the whole of life costs prior to the commencement and it is recognised that many of these are long life assets and replacement of aged infrastructure. The plan provides a strategic framework for future planting, and collection development through the living collection management plan that also informs the detailed design stages of the master plan implementation. Present. I think Council can be proud of this plan and the way it will guide the gardens which are so valued by our community and it's proposed that draft plan be approved by Council. Brian Stockwell 03:46:25.123
Thank you. Karen Finzel 03:46:26.725
Happy to move. Brian Stockwell 03:46:27.886
Moved by Councillor Finzel, seconded I think by Councillor Wegener. How do you stand up? Councillor Finzel you have the floor. Karen Finzel 03:46:33.071
Yeah, thank you for this report and firstly I would also like to thank the staff that have worked really comprehensively on this and if we want to look at exemplary community engagement and how Council conducted themselves through this process to ensure our reputation and that the voice was given to our community through a rigorous process that was respectful needs to be acknowledged. And I think it's really wonderful today that can come before us to make the decision around a draft plan that will inform our community over the next 25 years about how we look after and protect such a valuable asset in our community. And I'd also like to thank all the community groups that were representative at the table it was a really rigorous process around the course of that and also mindful of the extra time given at the end of the process for people to actually have their last say around that so I think it was a great opportunity to really work hard on this at every level and it is reflected in the report today so I'm pleased to support this and it's been a really wonderful process that has really given equity and voice in my opinion to every stakeholder at the table and to the broader community so thank you to everyone involved including the Councillors that were also at the table and for their contribution thank you Amelia Lorentson 03:48:04.649
This gets a lesson this I just really want to make mention of the Friends of Noosa Botanic Gardens we had a great stakeholder reference groups and really great contributions for those on the round roundtable but in particular I really want to just speak just briefly about the Friends of Noosa Botanic Gardens they've been pushing for this master plan for now for over ten years. Of teenies. Shall we not? Making submissions, joining reference groups, mapping collections, identifying species and keeping the pressure on us as a Council to deliver what we're looking at I think my take home from the many consultations is that the friends reminded me, and I think to the whole group, about the soul. Of this place, the Noosa Botanic Gardens, and reinforced in us that the soul of Noosa Botanic Gardens actually rests in its living collection. And there were when we did go off track. We weren't capturing what was actually said around the table. And the friends pulled us in. So I want to acknowledge that. And I also want to acknowledge the process which allowed us to be pulled back that genuinely helped empower people in this process. So thank you to the friends and to the stakeholder group and to the residents. This is a community asset. It is a big asset. Botanical garden and we've just got to remember it's not just a park it's so much more and particularly to those who nurture it every day. Brian Stockwell 03:50:07.332
Awesome. Nicola Wilson 03:50:10.062
Following a great process on this one. By all accounts it's been a really positive experience for everyone involved and it's a really special place that we all want to care for and preserve and I hope now that we can start to deliver on some of the projects within the master plan. Thank you. Jessica Phillips 03:50:28.292
This has actually been the first major project that I've been involved in from its early stages to this point. And it's been a really valuable experience. One of the things that I appreciated most was seeing a range of voices around the table in the stakeholder group. There have been different opinions, different priorities and different visions for the future of the Botanic Gardens. I still believe that there are many people in our community who wouldn't even realise that Noosa has a botanical garden but yet for those that have visited they note that it is a very peaceful place in our Shire. Throughout this process there has been a strong message that the gardens should be cherished for what they are. For me, one of the most important aspects of the plan is the inclusion of community infrastructure and gathering spaces. And as our community grows, places where people can come together, connect and enjoy the great outdoors. At the same time, I feel we should never lose sight of what makes the gardens special in the first place and that's the preservation, restoration and stewardship of the gardens themselves and it must always remain. A priority. I also want to acknowledge the friends of the Botanic Gardens who dedicate an extraordinary amount of time, effort and care for the place. They are a reminder that some of the most significant contributions to our community come from small groups of passionate volunteers working very quietly behind the scenes. I was grateful also want to add that I that the stakeholder group took on board some feedback that I presented around SIP 10 principles when designing with safety in mind. Whether it's through the pathways, the facilities and the open spaces, safety should considered as part of good design. And as a parent who spends a lot of time in parks and community spaces, I know how important it is that these places feel welcome, functional, well maintained and safe. I think this master plan is a thoughtful plan. It respects the character of the gardens, provides a pathway for the future and recognises the importance of both environmental stewardship and the community connection. So I appreciate all the work that's going in today and pleased to support it. Tom Wegener 03:52:45.153
So Tom. Yeah, just like that. Reiterate comments that are made around the table today, it's just a fantastic job. It's one of the things that I've seen as a Councillor for the past six years, start from beginning to end. And of course it started a long time before, but I'd love to see the persistence of the friends and the staff. Consultants and working together to bring this project to fruition to this plan going out. Really good, thank you. Brian Stockwell 03:53:15.873
It's good to have a really good strategic direction lot botanical there for Campbell gardens. This is one that we talked a lot about volunteers. This is a garden that was started by a joining neighbour who had a access handle to their lakefront house, which had a dump, an old dumpy side in which they thought it might be better to have and make it a garden. And they championed some of the early work, got the great funding for the bicentennial gardens, which we, the community basically planted, got the funding for. The amphitheatre. What set out here is a really good direction going forward. I just thought as the debate was going on, does it reflect its situation? And one thing, it has one reference to it, and that interface with adjoining land uses and owners to be managed, including protection of the lake's edge. One thing that want to your won't ask for any changes, but we have to remember, it sits beside our drinking water, and from an agro-ecological perspective, the management approach we have to the gardens, which leads to the species selection if we're going to change it, is one where we have to take particular care apply nutrients, pesticides, and any organics, because I'm not quite sure what the water quality status is now, but when Council used to run the Lake MacDonald casualty care group, it was a water body that had high levels of nutrient in it. So it's just one thing to think about is, let's focus on what we want to achieve out of the outcome, but also reflect that we know where it sits, and that's right adjacent to the water that comes out of our taps. Anyone else? I forget who moved it. Was it Councillor Finzel? Karen Finzel 03:54:56.463
Yes, oh, yes. Thank you. I think that's it's all been said, and I hope that for future come, it is something that we can be clearly proud of, and yeah, taking care of our place and being good stewards of what's before us. Thank you. Brian Stockwell 03:55:10.873
Put the motion. Those in favour? That's unanimous. Amelia Lorentson 03:55:14.283
Through the Chair, can I request a five-minute comfort break, please? Brian Stockwell 03:55:19.334
I think that's reasonable. We'll have a five-minute. We'll make it. Brian Stockwell 04:03:08.366
Right, I'll just so welcome back and our next item of order of business is the further report on tourism 2020. Noosa funding and performance deed 2026-2029. The author is our CEO. And you'll be giving the executive summary or we'll? Larry Sengstock 04:03:35.423
Yes, I'll provide the introduction and then Anthony and I. Can answer questions as we. If you want to come. Thank you. Sorry, I'll take the report as read but I'll give you the quick executive summary. A report on the Tourism Noosa funding and performance deed 26-29 was presented to the General Committee on the 13th of April 2026 and considered by Council on the 16th of April 2026. At that meeting, Council resolved not to adopt the deed in its then current form and requested further refinement of schedule KPI's appointment of a Councillor to the working group and that a revised deed and KPI framework be presented to the June meeting round. This report, this further report, responds directly to that resolution and presents a revised Tourism Noosa funding and performance deed and updated schedules. Procedures for Council consideration: focused the working group, process was undertaken including Councillor input to review and restructure the performance framework. The revised deed restructures the original schedule 1 separating its combined deliverables and KPIs into two distinct schedules. 1: agreed obligations and deliverables and schedule 2: performance scorecard or KPIs. In CEDRAL addition the original schedule 2 performance adjustment methodology has been revised and simplified into a new schedule 3 performance adjustment calculation which introduces a clear scoring model linked to the scorecard. This revised structure clarifies the distinction between mandatory obligations and performance measurement, introduces a balanced scorecard approach to measuring outcomes across financial management, industry capability, destination positioning, and sustainable management, and simplifies the performance-based funding adjustments through a points model. The revised deed retains the core funding model of $2 million per annum ex GST for a three-year term with CPI indexation and a performance-based adjustment of up to $350,000 applied to the second instalment on council's annual assessment of performance. This schedule seeks Council consideration and approves approval of the revised deed and schedules. Thank you. Brian Stockwell 04:06:01.201
Have any questions? Councillor Lorentson. Amelia Lorentson 04:06:06.049
Can CEO identify any KPI the current schedule 2 scorecard that directly measures whether Noosa residents are better off as a result of Tourism Noosa activities funded under this deed? Unidentified Speaker 04:06:26.088
I think if I go back to I guess what we've put together is a whole combination of KPI so I think to take one in isolation would probably be unfair almost because it's a balanced scorecard so Councillor I think in response I would say that the combination of the balanced scorecard is certainly there to ensure that Tourism Noosa deliver a balanced outcome for the community across the social outcomes economic outcomes and I think if you go to schedule one certainly there's a very clear expectation around what the DMP alignment looks like and there's a long list including demand management congestion management etc so I think what you have to do to answer that question is to look at them all together and all together certainly all the work has been done with Councillors Councillor Wilson's contribution and the working group is to absolutely put the community at the heart driven by the DMP you'll see DMP alignment mentioned many times which is obviously the guiding principle strengthened and behind all of this so I think that's been strengthened. The community outcomes the demand management congestion management is the balanced scorecard so I would say the combination of all these and the fact that Tourism Noosa have to deliver business plans marketing plans strategies to Council to us aligned to the DMP and that must answer the congestion management challenge Amelia Lorentson 04:08:08.518
So maybe I should rephrase that question the deed as it stands refers and the KPIs and scorecards it's about organisational activity the question I'm asking is community benefit what independent mechanism exists under the deeds that verifies that the expenditure is delivering community benefit rather than organisational activity or business as usual show Unidentified Speaker 04:08:36.800
Again I go back to schedule one and two together and clearly that to be deliver deal deliver on the deed and then the KPIs and the schedule Tourism Noosa must deliver these all actions these actions aligned at MP the DMP and the DMP are the community outcomes so visit demand actively managed tourism actively contributes to environmental protection regenerative outcomes those are all the benefits to the community to the environment and to the economy so that's probably can respond otherwise I'll take our notice on her on a specifically answer to your question Amelia Lorentson 04:09:25.082
Okay performance scorecard includes and I'm just going to use this as an example again maybe still asking the same question I'm going to rephrase it the performance scorecard includes KPIs for social media engagement website traffic so how do those measures demonstrate that tourism is being managed in the interest of the Noosa community so I'm going back to what we're measuring and going back to my previous question is how are the two linked Unidentified Speaker 04:09:59.227
Yeah I think in that quadrant three which is really where the destination positioning is again trying to really balance but to your question where are the KPIs that says to live in the community there's a specific measure around the visitation to tourism for good which will actually be for the love of Noosa and DMP aligned and that evolve over time so measuring the actual I guess engagement with that aspect of tourism noosa's marketing again I take it to the deliverable which it's pretty it's quite difficult to have individual measures and we've certainly had a first year go at this and this is reviewed annually as we all know and if you look at the third kit sorry the bottom deliverable which is a KPI which is the delivery of an annual destination marketing plan that embeds the general guiding principles of the DMP DMP again that is where we all get I guess input into our Tourism Noosa delivering on the expectations and the outcomes for the community Brian Stockwell 04:11:14.300
Do we have any other questions? Jessica Phillips 04:11:16.944
I do. Maybe just for people listening and for myself, just some clarity on if there's an acknowledgement that there's unintended consequences from DMP being the alignment, what mechanisms does Council have to call back and maybe redirect TN to something because let's say an unintended consequence is that the suffers just being a devil's advocate what's the mechanism Councillors have to say this isn't working we're going to shift a different direction Unidentified Speaker 04:12:12.000
I think that is it is the maintaining flexibility while giving Tourism Noosa in the community certainty is a difficult balance I'm certainly I think the working group has worked really well to have those quarterly and annual reviews so every quarter you'll see in schedule one action one the number one is every quarter Tourism Noosa Sir and Noosa Council sits down and reviews what's going well what's coming up and how are we meeting expectations and is there something we need to respond to so that's a quarterly operational there's a quarterly report annual reports on your plan strategies so I think the answer to today's is not a set and forget deed and relationship legally we review every year we can reset schedules and performance measures so I totally agree that there's a lot of uncertainty and for all of us and so this isn't this certainly not structured to say that's it for a year or three years it's three months while providing some certainty for the organisation to do the job that's how it's structured Brian Stockwell 04:13:25.711
Terms of London long Amelia Lorentson 04:13:26.795
Time in front of me I've got cause 4.2 and the deed once established the Destination Stewardship Council may provide strategic oversight important guidance to the parties for adjusting agreed obligation KPIs under course 4.1 in order to align with the DMP principles and priority actions however the parties are under no obligation to adopt implement or otherwise incorporate any guidance provided by the Destination Stewardship Council can staff explain what purpose the Destination Stewardship Council serves if its recommendations carry no obligation to respond, act or explain a I decision not to act? Larry Sengstock 04:14:11.473
Want to see the wider aspects. We're still developing the terms of reference for the stewardship Council, but in my understanding the stewardship Council is still an advisory body, it's not a directing body, so therefore it's still a decision of Council and staff in terms of what's recommended to go forth. So that could be can into when we do develop the terms of reference for the stewardship Council that can certainly be considered in that. But that's my understanding at this point in time is the stewardship Council is an advisory group Jessica Phillips 04:14:49.446
I've got a clarifying question because it's still yeah answers spinning in my mind a little bit so three month mark as Councillors though I won't be able to influence if there is an unintended consequence because it won't come back to Council will it? It'll be start a staff process once it's gone through this Larry Sengstock 04:15:13.934
That's potentially but if there is a certainly there's something that requires Council to have an involvement or to make a decision or to redirect or change then absolutely we'd be brought back but the three month is really a checking mechanism and if things are going well then we continue with this if there's something that's a serious consequence and certainly we'd come back to Council for a decision. The city. Unidentified Speaker 04:15:37.998
Through the Chair can I, we talked about it briefly and the way I see that maybe working for Councillors is that through the CEO potentially just as a normal course of business that there is an expectation that as we go through quarter by if there's particular issues that are evident or you've been approached about that they are actually channelled through the CEO as a bit more of a formal part of the quarterly review so I fully see that you have the opportunity to input again getting that balance to look to let the organisation go and deliver the marketing plans the outcomes. The outputs and but every quarter every Councillor should have the opportunity to feedback through the CEOI would be normal course of business to feed into a formal quarterly meeting of Council Jessica Phillips 04:16:30.163
I've got a question perhaps but Councillor Wilson because part of this may be just an explanation more on the performance scorecard Nicola Wilson 04:16:41.434
So that balance scorecard approach is something I've worked on a lot in my corporate finance days for example with celtics it's used widely in performance management for companies departments and also individuals so it kind of cascades down through an organisation and I've also taught this approach in business performance and subject of the chartered accountants program. The traditional balance scorecard quadrants are financial, customer, internal processes which would cover things like governance and safety and learning and growth so these weren't all directly relevant for TN so we adapted it to be a bit more suited to TN and more aligned to the services that we're requesting under the deed and the Roadmap. Balance scorecard is useful because it looks at the entire organisation focusing on just one area such as financial results. It's balanced because each quadrant carries equal weight in the scoring but also in the focus that management must bring in every area to meet strategic goals. So all areas of the organisation in every quadrant need to be working together. If one quadrant fails it brings the others down too. It's also important that all KPIs and targets drive the intended behaviours. So for example a cut in expenses to meet a profit goal might cause a drop in service delivery and loss of members or reduction in member satisfaction. So if TN can hit the member based targets it should help them to meet their financial goals as well. So this approach helps us to view TN holistically not just as a marketing organisation but to measure the importance of industry development, member services, the visitor information centre and how they all need to be performing together at the same time. Brian Stockwell 04:18:28.344
Thank you. Other questions? Councillor Lorentson? Amelia Lorentson 04:18:33.770
Probably again I'm looking at the deed in front of me and the first part of the deed recitals a I.e. tourist news. Noosa established as a not-for-profit company limited by guarantee in August 2001 to manage the marketing and promotion of Noosa as a tourism destination. The organisation is evolving its role as a destination management organisation so it's so going from marketing to promotion and evolving into a DMO. I've got a possible amendment that I might move up but I'm a little bit confused how we can hold all my questions how can we hold tourism Noosa are accountable as a DMO without this defining what destination management means in terms of who's responsible for what. Like I said I've got an amendment that I probably want to just play with. The CEO. Larry Sengstock 04:19:36.404
So part of this deed and part of the deliverables reject. Is for them to review their structure and review what they stand for and how they operate so that what that's I think is what that's referring to is that is it's that evolving into a DMO but what that actually stands for, what it is, something that would come through as part of the evolution of their structure organisation is. And of what the organisation actually delivers. And that would be in line with us because it's part of this team, so we would be part of that exercise, if that makes sense. Amelia Lorentson 04:20:16.568
So, I'm confused because I would have thought that the DMO framework would start with Council. To me, there is a question coming. So, the defunds Tourism Noosa to attract and shape our visitors, but it's Council that's responsible for roads and parks and planning, etc. So, where is that clearly defined and why we're leading that role to tourism research? Should that not be something that we should be working towards, a destination management framework? Larry Sengstock 04:20:53.583
Absolutely. I'll take this on notice, Councillor, if that's okay, to come back to you with an answer. Like I said, I've got it. Amelia Lorentson 04:21:01.843
I'm going deal with my roots. Larry Sengstock 04:21:02.006
Want to be able to know specifically what the definition is, so that I can bring that back to you. It's true. It's not in the definition. No, it's not in the definition, and I need to just find that for you. Brian Stockwell 04:21:12.509
Hey, okay. Councillor Wegener. Could I try to answer that question? Yes, Sir. Would you like to try and answer that question? Tom Wegener 04:21:21.701
I think it's the destination management. You need to talk about how good what you're talking about. It is to talk about how great Noosa is. Council can sort of do that, but it's not because you're talking about yourself. You need a side organisation that actually promotes you as an organisation. You can't do it both yourself. That's okay. Brian Stockwell 04:21:47.967
I think you're going yeah, that's exactly what I was going to into a wonderful debate that you can say. Amelia Lorentson 04:21:55.551
And I'll start with maybe an amendment. Brian Stockwell 04:21:58.303
We haven't moved the motion yet. Would someone like to move the motion? I'll move it. By Councillor Wilson, seconded by Councillor Wegener. Councillor Wilson, you have the floor. Nicola Wilson 04:22:08.449
Alright. Um today we we're revisiting the TN funding deed and KPIs. The Roadmap was adopted in December 2025, which committed Council to $2 million plus CPI over three years. The DMP was also adopted in December. Regardless of our individual views road the Roadmap, the DMP, and the funding amount, these are the frameworks we're now working towards. The Roadmap seeks TN to evolve over three years, and the DMP seeks a shift towards regenerative tourism. This is what we're asking TN to deliver and what the performance payments should be linked to. As stated in the report, Council provides two million dollars per annum to support delivery of agreed services, including destination marketing, visitor servicing, industry development, partnerships, research, and insights. These are being measured by the KPIs. I understand that members of the community want to see changes in tourism in Noosa. Fewer cars, less congestion, less STA accommodation, easier parking, but these are not TN's remit. TN is not a traffic management agency and nor can it influence property owners in how they use their property. Giving TN a KPI around, for example, the number of day trippers is like giving McDonald's a KPI around obesity rates. They are not wholly for the problem or the solution, so can't control the figure. Visitor numbers, stays, spend, et cetera, are items we will continue to measure and monitor, but we can't set a reasonable target or attach it to a performance payment specifically for TN. What can do? So what can TN control? The messaging that goes to our current visitors and our future visitors, TN's members, the community, and the broader industry. It can elevate and support. And local businesses that are making the shift to regenerative tourism, for example promoting local goods in the visitor information centre. TN is being asked to review its strategy to align with the road map and the DMP, noting that its current strategy from 2020 2023 refers to regenerative tourism long before the DMP came around. It will then align its annual business plan and marketing plan to the strategy as it does every year with input from the board. Council will have visibility over the strategy, business plan and marketing plan. In year one these plans deliverables. In year two we may choose specific metrics from those plans to become KPIs. The balanced scorecard approach means we're looking at all parts of the organisation to ensure council's funding is also balanced across the various services. Destination marketing, visitor servicing, industry development, partnerships, research and insights. The information centre's expenses are significant in the budget but it's also a significant asset for visitors and locals and for supporting local business. So it's important that it's financial viability is managed along with TN attracting more revenue for its members and becoming less reliant on Council funding. These are addressed in quadrant one. Quadrant two has KPIs around services to members including education in regenerative practices. The measures are based around value for members in maintaining membership figures, net promoter scores and increased understanding post-training. Quadrant three is about the Noosa brand positioning. Marketing continues to be important but with the messaging now focused on regenerative experiences and attracting more overnight visitors. TN can control its messaging and target two specific audiences but it can't control shares that information with other people and it can't control what consumers of that information will do with it. Also can't control people doing hashtag Noosa on their holiday photographs which are then seen by everybody locally. We both see changes behaviours but may gradually change the type of visitors we see in the next one to three years. If we see a drop in engagement in the content as the messaging shifts, TN will need to adapt in order to meet these KPIs. In the current economic climate see lower engagement with higher spend activities, so a hold steady target is still challenging, as well as the impact that AI is having on the way we access information. Quadrant four is future focused. Training the independent agents in the experiences Noosa offers, and profiling local businesses engaged in sustainable practices, and an independently measured scorecard in sustainability for TN. This doesn't mean other information won't be collected or reported, and we know that important to the community. TN reports quarterly to Council, and the insights reports tell us about changes in the industry and visitor trends. We will still monitor visitor numbers and spend, and look for ways to deal with congestion and parking. We're also looking at ways to measure community satisfaction, starting with collecting baseline data. This could take a number of years to that data and surveys to monitor the results. We're also not going to see a change in community sentiment overnight. I thank TNC. I thank TN's CEO and board in working with us to reach this point over the last couple of months. We now need to let Sharon and her team get on with delivering what's being agreed through the deed, the schedules and the Roadmap. Brian Stockwell 04:27:43.788
Thank you. Other Councillors would you like to try your amendment Councillor. Amelia Lorentson 04:27:49.456
I've got a few amendments that I'm going to try. First one is that Council prepare a destination management roles and responsibilities framework clearly defining the respective accountabilities of Council, Tourism Noosa, Destination Stewardship Council and relevant agencies and that tourism noosa's deed obligations and KPIs be reviewed against that. Framework. This is one of the ones I sent. Did I not send that to you? Can you show me which one it is? So just insert probably recommendation C and then maybe add a C1. I thought I sent that to you. Is it the first one on that list? I think so. I've just played words a little bit. Just played yeah. So I'll repeat that Council prepare a destination management roles and responsibilities framework clearly defining their respective, the accountabilities of Council, Tourism Noosa, the Destination Stewardship Council and relevant agencies and that tourism noosa's deed obligations and KPIs be reviewed against framework. Is it taking out those first few words prior to execution? Yes, take out prior to execution and request. Brian Stockwell 04:29:25.406
I'm going to need some Amelia Lorentson 04:29:27.159
Informed advice. And delete the last words prior to execution. Brian Stockwell 04:29:51.324
Are you happy that's the right word now, Councillor Lorentson? Amelia Lorentson 04:29:54.121
Yes, happy. Any suggestions to tweak it Brian Stockwell 04:29:59.642
To city, yeah. The CEO, the appropriateness of this at this stage rolls around. Which rolls around the reference to the Destination Stewardship Council. As that action hasn't come before Council. Amelia Lorentson 04:30:21.048
So I'm happy to delete the Destination Stewardship Council. Think the intent is that we actually need a framework. We're asking tourism New South Wales. Asking Tourism Noosa to evolve into a destination management organisation without really that destination management is not one organisation's job. And I just. That's. The intent. Thank you, everyone. Second. Councillor Phillips. Councillor Lorentson, you have the floor. I okay. Um yep so I think it's just really important that we understand from the onset that destination management is a shared system, and it involves multiple parties, multiple levels of governance, they and they all have different responsibilities and different. Levers. Tourism Noosa shapes the visitor, who's marketed to, when and how, and then Council builds and maintains the roads that carry the traffic, manages parks that absorb the crowds, makes the planning decisions that shape how the Shire grows, and regulates short-term accommodation. Margins. That affects housing availability for residents. State government controls transport networks and environmental regulation and there's distinct responsibilities and I just think they need to be clearly mapped. The problem with the current as I read it is that its language, when you start talking visitor demand management, environmental protection, community confidence in tourism, destination stewardship, that talks about the whole destination management ecosystem and it doesn't it really define where nuisances are. Tourism noosa's accountability starts and ends and where council's responsibility starts and ends and I look at it again from a risk lens and I just think it's potential to create. Risk for both Tourism Noosa and Council. Tourism Noosa could find itself accountable for outcomes it can influence but can't control and Council could escape accountability for outcomes that are. Its own responsibility. Just think the amendment and I met with lots of residents around this but he just sort of made the real point you can't hold Tourism Noosa accountable as a destination management organisation first without first defining what destination management means in terms in of terms of who is responsible for what and again it's just protections both for Tourism Noosa from unfair accountability and it also puts the onus or leans back to Council to be totally transparent about its own role in the destination management ecosystem. Unidentified Speaker 04:33:31.628
I haven't thought about that. Brian Stockwell 04:33:33.328
Okay, sure. So the Council so are they Councillors who would like to ask questions or would like to talk to the amendment? Tom Wegener 04:33:42.455
Council Wegener. I'll speak to the amendment. You said the destination marketing tourism is been doing that for a long time but I've argued the whole time that destination marketing is largely councils work taking care of the parks the mowing the rubbish the cleanup parking transport regulation of food all those things Council does that is our remit and um and but that is destination marketing it is as well it is just it is our it is our destination that's what we do Tourism Noosa is a mouthpiece or a voice for Noosa Council to talk about how good we're doing this stuff that's working with us with destination marketing no Tourism Noosa doesn't pick up the no, news rubbish, but the two are so intertwined that I don't think you can really define it it's in the deed really I don't see this as a constructive piece of work. Brian Stockwell 04:34:50.266
I'll speak to it next firstly the reason we're doing this is this deed starts before the next meeting and it talks about once again trying to amend the date which means we would breach our response. Our responsibilities or we just have to give the money without any deed in the new financial year secondly I think it's based on a misunderstanding of a review process within the deed and the really specific role assigned to TN in the deed. So if we look at the table that starts on page 21 it lists nine ten specific areas it talks about what the obligation is and it goes through strategy and governance, brand and marketing. Capability industry capability and development experience development, visitors. Services, membership and partnership, revenue diversification, research, report and governance and then it talks about what the deliverables. The deed really specifies what we want the role for TN to do as part of this job. The DMP at the strategic level clearly identified by assigning who's doing what as to what the anticipated roles of various different organisations are. So what this deed does is set really clear roles for TN with a request to say what role the to play. He does is set really clear roles for TN with a request to say how are these going to evolve to better align as we go through this three year process. So I don't see, I it to say we have to wait for the deed to identify roles, I think that the deed really clearly identifies the roles that we've asked for, so I don't see any need for it. I think the addition of the balanced scorecard approach just reinforces the specifics of what we're looking for in terms of what we want to measure, but I don't think it moves us forward, I think it moves us back. Backwards. And I can't support it. Others wish to talk much? To motion? Councillor Wilson? Nicola Wilson 04:36:57.581
Yeah, I don't see any need for an extra layer of frameworks to be added here. We've already got too many, I think we've got the Roadmap which says that TN needs to evolve over the next three years so because of that we need to allow a little bit of flexibility in those roles over that three years as we work through which areas of the DMP we can deliver how and we fund that and I and means don't we think that means we I don't I agree that can really destination management needs to be defined in the deep definitions but I don't think at this point we can say exactly what role Tourism Noosa has in that given that we're on this evolving pathway over three years. We've already got TN's strategy, TN's board having governance over TN, a Roadmap, a DMP, a deed, schedules, KPIs. I just think we need to stop and let them do the work. Brian Stockwell 04:37:54.060
Okay, Jessica Phillips 04:37:55.140
I'm just going to speak to support it based on intention because one of the things I like about it is looking at accountability of Council so through this whole process one of the things that I found during reflecting of the process from day one has been my feeling of closed governance loops where there's not enough accountability on everyone involved to be resident focused I completely agree demand congestion a demand management, congestion that's management, not that's not don't think news Tourism Noosa can influence that in ways that would community would see but our role we've got to find the data instead of sort of making decisions still based on so many complex like feelings it's to me it's still we've two years in and I'm like traffic data from there's so many things that would help us make this not so murky if we just had black and white evidence in front of us other all of the noise that came in you know election process pro around don't fund Tourism Noosa it all of that would be so much of easier if it was clearer on what our role is and what their role is and it's so murky that I think it confuses everyone I always like to go what is the problem we're trying to fix before I make any decisions still actually don't know if all of us would probably have all different opinions as what we're trying to fix today I think Councillor Lorentson is trying to add some more accountability I can't see that as a negative even if you know the wording isn't perfect I don't see any I couldn't not support anything that gives maybe more transparency I think the one thing is that it's just it's too unclear there's too many opinions anything that makes me be able to answer what's the problem we're trying to fix because I don't know about anyone else but I think it's more murky than it's ever Brian Stockwell 04:40:20.828
Okay, I'll just cancel on some of your declares. Amelia Lorentson 04:40:24.826
Lawson would you like to close? I do appreciate the opportunity to put the amendment at the table. I'm going to start with just some comments not around the table that you know the responsibilities are intertwined. I don't agree with that. In fact, I think totally the opposite. Destination management involves different parties with different responsibilities and different levers. That needs to be clarified and clarity is for Tourism Noosa. Clarity is so that they're not unfair. Being blamed for issues that sit with the SA council's remit. I've just completed the company director's course, so every decision and everything I write at the moment has a governance lens. So we're asking, and I'm also legally trained, so when I go through the deed, the first part is under a definition that we're making a marketing organisation evolve into a destination management organisation. That's great, but we haven't even defined what a destination management organisation is, so to me that just is a governance oversight. It's a risk. So am I doing? What I'm asking here is that we have clarity from the start, so we're not addressing these issues in year one, year two, year three. It's about setting the foundations right, so we're measuring the right things. So anyway, like I said, I've thrown it on the table. I think it's 101. I don't think it's redundant. I think it's governance a obligation. So I'm happy to accept the majority vote across the table. But again, I'll leave you with the quote. The resident who sits in strategy says, "You can't hold Tourism Noosa accountable as a destination management organisation without first defining what destination management means." Okay, Brian Stockwell 04:42:58.489
I'll put the vote. Those in favour? That's Councillor Lorentson and Councillor Phillips. Those against? That's Councillor Wilson, Wegener, Finzel and Stockwell. The amendment is lost. We go back to the original motion. Amelia Lorentson 04:43:20.141
Okay, like I said, I'm just going to try a few amendments today, inserting to recommendation C. Which is the second one? That the deed be amended to require Tourism Noosa to deliver a peak demand management plan to Council by 31st of December 2026 identifying high pressure locations and periods and specifying actions within tourism noosa's direct control to manage visitor demand, distinguishing tourism noosa's actions from those requiring Council or other agencies with annual progress reporting. Do we have a second now? Having to a second. Councillor Phillips, Councillor Lorentson, you have the floor. DMP commits to actively managing visitor demand. Reducing pressure on high use areas and peak periods. It's one of the clearest and most consistently expressed community priorities in the entire DMP consultation process. Yet the current no mechanism that would cause Tourism Noosa to actively manage or moderate visitor volumes at any time or in any location. Tourism Noosa shapes the visitor. It determines who's marketed to, when they're encouraged to visit and what they're told about how to experience Noosa. That's one of the most powerful demand management tools available in the destination management system. And it's a tool that only Tourism Noosa holds. A peak demand management plan puts that tool to work in a structured and accountable way. The requirement is that the plan distinguishes between actions Tourism Noosa will take and those actions requiring Council or other agencies what they they're going to take. To me when I look at amendment A, there's accountable, there's some ambiguity in terms of accountability. So again I talk about this as a protection for Tourism Noosa. It actually looks it actually set it up to succeed because it won't be held responsible for outcomes that's beyond its control. So again we talk about you know they can't control visitor demand. Disagree, I think they can. And a peak demand management plan is a mechanism or a tool that we can actually measure that. So again, open for discussion and happy to accept the decision of the majority. Can I ask a question? You may. What specific actions are within torres and noosa's control? They determine who's marketed to. So if there is, for example, they identify hotspots in, for example, Christmas peak period in Hastings Street, they should have an AI strategy that someone that goes into AI types in what to do in Noosa at Christmas, will tell them, "Go to king markets and have a look at the. Market's going to be. The markets, go and visit Pomona markets on the weekends. Or go to the. Go to Peregian markets, etc. But give them. Or our regional gallery. Or go to Noosaville. And go to our enterprise free centre. Precinct. We have so many unbelievable places. But they. They're our voice. They're the ones that tell people, "At this time of year, it's busy, and let's disperse people into areas that aren't highly visited. So, again, it's. I'm trying to respond to what the community have been very loud and vocal over the whole destination management process that. Risk is during peak demand. That's when our national parks are now free to use and that's when it's hard to get into. So we've got to throw some responsibility back to Tourism Noosa in asking what we communicate during you that period, how you communicate or market during that period and whether that aligns with our dispersal policies. Karen Finzel 04:48:40.385
I just have a question around that. When we look at the schedule that sets out the agreed obligations to be completed by TN under the deed on page 21 it addresses those matters that are being raised I'm just wondering do we need to drill down to something that's specific? It like looks it at visitor demand and actively managed to reduce pressure on high use areas in peak periods, how to move around the destination. I just, I don't know, do we need to be. Drilling down Brian Stockwell 04:49:20.180
I feel like I'll go to the staff if you like, I think it's clear what you're questioning is, does the existing deed cover the issues that Councillor Lorentson. Karen Finzel 04:49:27.988
Yeah, I feel like it's written clearly written down on page 21 or 26 that those things are listed under the purposes of the deed. And then if you go down further, like for example on page 22 or 26, item number six, membership and partnerships, TN are to and proactively engage with local business environmental groups to identify collaboration opportunities to advance the DMP values, principles and actions in the Roadmap and deliver options paper for shared services. So I sort of think. I sent I just don't know how far down our role is today to. Is this like an opportunity or a risk to introduce something this specific, given I feel like it's covered under these obligations? Under the date. Brian Stockwell 04:50:27.438
Anthony, do you have a response to that question? Unidentified Speaker 04:50:30.301
Yeah, yeah, I tend to agree that a version of this, and it's whether it's detailed enough, I think that's the question, is schedule one agreed obligations, and then really it's a list of aligning to the DMP looks like, and so there's a whole list. Not limited to, but here's all the, and it specifically says visit the demand is actively managed to reduce pressure in high demand, high use areas in peak periods, including how people travel and move around the destination. So that's one example of many of what is does the DMP alignment look like and then when you go into schedule two which is the scorecard the responsibility to deliver an annual plan and a marketing plan aligned to the DMP obviously we will be measurement assessment says have you actually enact what it said in schedule one and DMP alignment looks like this your annual plan does it mention demand management has it got an action for our demand management and then the other one Councillor you refer to other specific KPIs in the other quadrants that I guess contribute to demand management I think it's an obvious area that is one of our biggest challenges and Councillor Lorentson at the start asked what does the community benefit well good demand management and a good action plan business plan marketing plan and has to reflect that so that's what we would be assessing Tourism Noosa are on is their plans and then their delivery every quarter Karen Finzel 04:52:00.282
Yeah I guess my question is how critical is it that we actually lock that into a peak demand management plan today as opposed to in my opinion it's covered here but do we need to be I guess that specific? Unidentified Speaker 04:52:20.749
I guess my opinion is we have a tourism noosa's role and you know we're trying to define tourism noosa's role and the deed defines Tourism Noosa. Tourism noosa's role in the wider challenge of demand management peak demand management plan to me is a whole of destination which falls probably more under the Destination Management Plan, scholarship, Council etc so back to CEO on that. Larry Sengstock 04:52:48.735
Through the Chair my position on this is that I think it is already incorporated into the deed if date for getting we get into too much specifics the idea of the deed was to try to keep it a little bit higher level so that we could and it is a document where we work with Tourism Noosa so it's not basically letting Tourism Noosa go off and do their own plan their own marketing plan it's with our advice and our guidance and that's the idea you're there three of the three-month quarterly. Review so that we can look at it and say well is it working is it not working what other things do we need to bring in if it's AI how do we incorporate AI into the planning that's the idea of this to evolve so it's a deed it's not up it's not I think it's covered in here is my opinion Nicola Wilson 04:53:39.240
Can I speak to it? Oh did you want a question? I think to I think trying to throw in additional obligations at this point undermines the work that the working group has been doing. We've had specific representatives from Council and TN to work through all of these things together and to work out if they're achievable, measurable and all of those things. And we did try to keep the balance scorecard quite high level and strategic so that we're working towards strategic goals and not getting too much into the operational, even though there are some that maybe do fall into that a little bit. I do think this is already covered in the data, the bit that Anthony read out. Visitor demand is actively managed to reduce pressure on high use areas and peak periods. We they have already know where the high pressure locations and periods are, I think any of the we don't need more plans. People who are here in January peak period are not being marketed to for accommodation and things because they're already here. They've already responded to marketing a year or two years ago. I don't know if that many people are accessing TN to find out what to do once they're already here. There's lots of other places that can source information as well. So that means that TN doesn't have direct control over all of the information that visitors need. We'll saying in will be seeing and therefore we can't tell if what TN's doing helps to manage visitor demand or disperse people into other areas. It wouldn't be able to prove it in any way. Yeah, so they're getting information from all different places whether it's word-of-mouth marketing because they've been here before. We wouldn't know if TN's messaging actually makes people change their behaviour. Jessica Phillips 04:55:31.399
Can I just say I think although I get the intent I actually think peak demand management almost sits with Council but I understand the intent. I actually think the first amendment would have captured this because it would have been under some framework that would have assisted what I think Councillor Lorentson is trying to do and I'm not speaking for your behalf but it's more around like one of the things that I feel is that the roles aren't clear and community are so I think we'll keep going around until because there's still not clarity but that with clarity the only way you can clear the air for people is actually to say 280 cars that go in Hastings Street this is the rep this is where that car those cars come from they're from Peregian they're from Coolum they're from Sunshine Coast Council they're like we don't actually have none of us can confidently say congestion is from tourism so that's we're going to keep going around until we actually like I understand why you put this because it would have given maybe some data you can't lie with that you can't actually get on Facebook and debate that's not correct if you've got data that says this is how many residents are actually in and out causing congestion we don't know that so I feel like until we know that we will sit here and there will still be continued those people will be in communities still unsure about what is going because they blame Tourism Noosa for traffic congestion and we can't negate that because we haven't invested in any infrastructure helps us determine where our demands are so even though I understand the amendment Amelia I think that actually would sit with up with Council many years ago in developing really clear evidence to support what tourism do what we do because the roles aren't clear and that's why it will continue to be an issue every single election and every year we will sit here and have the same conversation because we can't debate it the other way we've got no data to support either side of the party so I get what I just I don't think it's tourism's role but I know why you're trying to I know what you're trying to achieve but I still I think Council should have done some of this years ago and should be investing in infrastructure that helps us get the figures so we can be on a dashboard and someone can see. Actually you know what some of those residents coming into Hastings Street they're from Cooroy and then you're not gonna be able to winch with that they're all Noosa Shire residents I don't know, is it really that? Sorry I'm done. Brian Stockwell 04:58:27.864
Speak to it I think Councillor Finzel raised the question this is an opportunity or is this a risk and I come from the latter the risk is we just introduced after months of deliberations and refining and defining and specifying a new term called a peak demand management plan so I just asked online what is a peak demand management plan for tourism and it's not what we're talking about what a peak demand management plan just is and it's about to be signed I'm about out, a strategic. Approach designed to manage the high demand for tourism services during peak periods to the plans are crucial for ensuring the tourism destinations can meet the increased demand that's about facilitating the increased demand. I think what we're trying to do and the destination meant we're trying to reduce the impacts on the residents and the environment of peak periods however what it says is these normally include demand forecasting TN in the deed and does very very well is that analysing historical data talks about they didn't we talk about dynamic pricing that's part that's for industry get segmentation understanding the diverse needs and preferences of guests that's something that TN already does talks about adding extra a-ray local took taxis and it talks about making sure you invest more resources to cater for peaks I don't think that's what we're interested in from a dark mine management so one of the risks is introducing these things that may be in the mind of the mover quite clear but when it comes to implementing quite complicated and if you look at it manage visitor demand this is direct call to manage a visit demand and in and I don't think that's really clear as to how what tourism to manage a visit demand and it's probably not what we want to tell you if you want tourism this to assist us to reduce the impact of visitors during peak periods so I can't support it. So close Councillor Lorentson Amelia Lorentson 05:00:35.408
Um again I think people are just not reading what's actually up on the screen the idea is to identify high-pressure locations and periods. Specify clearly what tourism Noosa direct control distinguishing tourism Noosa action from those of councils and other agent agencies so I keep coming back to, you know, whether it's the. Destination management organisation framework whether I'm talking about a peak demand management plan it's about articulating clear roles removing and responsibilities risk not adding risk it's removes the risk moves the risk of being unfairly made to be accountable for stuff that's outside your remit also um again you know my governance like my governance links we're asking people to become a management organisation but we haven't defined what a management organisation we're asking people to manage visitor demand but we haven't defined what peak demand is and I go back to why we've actually revised to be deed and we've revised the deed because the community has asked us to ensure that the accountability measures that we put in the deed reflect the environment.2 million dollar investment over three years so I'm here around the table this is higher level that we're working with Tourism Noosa but I think we've got to also remember that we work for the community and the community throughout this process demanded more accountability that's why this came back to the back to Council not to make it easier but to ensure that the accountability measures again are measurable against the 6.2 million dollars of ratepayers' money in the Tourism Noosa body so again respect the conversation around the table but I think our job here is to ensure that we're actually listening to the community that's put us around the table Brian Stockwell 05:03:02.633
Thank you I put the amendment those in favour it's Councillor Lorentson those opposed its Councillor Wilson, Councillor Wegener, Councillor Finzel, Councillor Phillips and Councillor Stockwell the amendment is lost we've got anyone else who wishes yes Councillor Lorentson Amelia Lorentson 05:03:22.721
So insert into recommendation C that schedule 2 be amended to include the following audible marketing KPIs verified annually through tourism noosa's advertising platform records provided to Council as part of the annual outcome report and one note no paid advertiser advertising targeting residents within a hundred and fifty kilometres of Noosa. I want to delete number two and make two a measurable annual reduction in marketing activity directed at day trip catchments so I'm taking that out. Delete number Brian Stockwell 05:04:28.924
You happy this? That's? Yeah. Do we have a seconder? Jessica Phillips 05:04:39.381
I just need to read it sorry. Brian Stockwell 05:04:40.783
Sure. Councillor Lorentson you have the floor. Amelia Lorentson 05:04:45.089
Again I'm going to start with one of the recommendations I spend a lot of time in community a lot of time in community meeting with residents on all sorts of issues this was an idea that was put to me by some residents and I played with it so I want to start by saying that the current schedule 2 performance scorecard has 20 KPIs. And not one tells Council where Tourism Noosa is directing its paid advertising. Not one measures where the council's money is being spent reaching the visitors the DMP says Noosa wants to attract and not one reflects the DMP central. And explicit commitment to quality over quantity and overnight visitors over daytrippers. To me that's a really big gap in the six point two million dollar funding agreement and I think again I think the KPIs or the amendment in front of us the intent is to try to close that gap. DMP commits Council to quality over quantity. Overnight visitors over daytrippers. Higher value, lower pressure. Day high low tourism that delivers economic benefit to the community without overwhelming its infrastructure, environment and liveability but a policy that's not reflected in the performance framework of the organisation, paid to deliver it is not a policy, it's just a wish. The current scored card doesn't require Tourism Noosa to direct its marketing at overnight visitors and it doesn't prevent Tourism Noosa from spending ratepay money advertising Noosa to people within 150 kilometres who will drive up for the day, use the beaches and roads and drive home without spending a night or contributing meaningful to the local economy. Day visitors use noosa's assets but they don't fund them. And I do have to note day visitors are also good for some parts of the economy and I do want to acknowledge that. Residents fund our assets. Rights. Through our rates. Overnight visitors fund our assets through accommodation spending and the broader economic activity that sustains local businesses and employment. Tourism Noosa is using council's money to attract day visitors from and the Sunshine Coast. It's actively working against what council's own plan says tourism in Noosa should look like. And again, that's the purpose of the KPIs. All the amendment in front of us. So. KPIs in front of us, they're not there to measure visitor behaviour. What I'm asking or the intent behind the amendment is that we've got. An opportunity to measure advertising decisions. The targeting records for every paid campaign Tourism Noosa runs already exists in its own advertising accounts. We can go to the google ads records. And we can find out exactly what geographic areas have been targeted. How much has been spent on each audience. The metas advertising platform does the same thing. So what I'm saying is that information already exists. We can already measure where they advertise. So what I'm asking again is not onerous. We're not asking Tourism Noosa to commission or purchase the data. It already exists and it exists in Council at Tourism Noosa managers and controls and funds with Council money. It so should it be able to be to provided to Council at any time with no additional cost. So, you know, go back to, we get told a lot that marketing campaigns are effective at influencing visitor behaviour, but we need to be measure that outcome against specific KPIs, and that, again, doesn't exist in the performance and funding agreement. So, you know, so what I'm asking is, I think this is an opportunity for us to actually measure whether or not their marketing campaigns are actually effective in influencing our day trippers. Um, and the information already exists. Tourism Noosa has that information. Um, so again, throw it at the table. Uh, and again, I throw at the table that we've got to remember why we're providing. Sitting here revising the funding agreement, and that is because our community has asked us to ensure that the accountability measures that we put in place a commensurate against the investment of a three-year funding agreement. Brian Stockwell 05:10:26.985
Thank you. Would anyone like to talk to the amendment? Councillor Wilson. Nicola Wilson 05:10:32.865
Again I think this undermines the work of the working group this could have been shared with the working group if it was to be considered. You can't really throw in extra KPIs into a balanced scorecard because it wouldn't be balanced anymore. I did receive lots of suggestions from members of the public and I thanked them. I had various conversations as well and I considered everything that I was sent and I brought anything that I thought was relevant and measurable world. To the working group, and I admit quadrant 3 was the hardest one to try and come up with KPIs because all we can really measure is engagement with the material, the content that TN's putting out and not what people do with it. I don't believe TN actually is spending any money targeting residents within 150 kilometres of Noosa already so without a baseline and a target we can't actually add it into the scorecard anyway but I would say that baseline is already zero. So we're giving them a target of zero again which they'd be silly if they were spending money on those people because all of those people already know noosa's here and that they can reach it in a day. I don't that's my name believe they're spending any money on locked-in activity directed at daycare patients. Again, this is something we would have to discuss. We'd share in the working group of where that baseline figure sits and then you would have to have, rather than a measurable, annual reduction, the target would be how much you actually want to spend on that marketing activity. But I don't know if Neil or Larry would have anything to add there, but I believe that's already probably zero or close to it. Tom Wegener 05:12:09.554
Cancel big now. Councillor Wegener. Question. A hundred and fifty kilometres, so, 150 foreigners, the Majestic Theatre in Pomona relies on people from within a hundred and fifty kilometres. Are you saying that will not be able to put an advertisement in for the Saturday? Which kind of movies or things or events that the theatre or the Pomona markets or kinnikin markets that actually want people from that hundred and fifty mile, kilometre base. Because they depend on them. Could on it. Amelia Lorentson 05:12:47.102
I think this is really quite specific to Sunshine Coast and those that are commuting to our, again, we had a visitor management, peak management plan. It's the hot spots Brian Stockwell 05:13:10.267
I don't know what do with this car. I'll talk to it. My understanding is the only time Tourism Noosa has ever directly marketed to the drive market is during COVID. There is the arguments out in the community about, well, any advertising or promotion or following on Facebook or any social media. Will also get people who are within that 150, but it's not targeting them. As was mentioned, the reporting we get from Tourism Noosa quite clearly outlines what each campaign, who it's New Zealand, whether it's Melbourne, we already have that information and I think there's some statements about, there's no way where it's stated that we don't want to do this, I think it's really clear in the obligations that the marketing campaign is to be 100% consistent with the Destination Management Plan objectives and aims and outcomes desired and obviously the DMP does have specific provisions around the drive market. I don't think it's desirable or necessary. Anyone else? Jessica Phillips 05:14:22.139
I'll just reiterate that we wouldn't be having the conversation if we had the data to support the vehicles and management of daytrippers if we knew where they were coming from, it would be an easier conversation. Many of the people that I know that have not been able to afford to now live in Noosa are uh, living in virginian springs. Here, their kids go to school here. Are they a resident? I'd say they are. I don't think we have enough clarity. We won't have enough clarity after today either, so I'll still me be uncomfortable in the process but until we invest in some technology that provides accurate data, we'll continue to have the same conversation in years to come. Karen Finzel 05:15:15.662
So please go. Yeah. Just in terms of like risk, if we restrict no paid advertising targeting with 150 kilometres. And I think it was only through COVID and we would certainly, I mean I'm not 100% sure, but we would have data to show at that time during COVID that marketing to that 150 kilometres coming into our Shire saved many a small business, kept our tourists open to some degree to actually get us through COVID and everybody worked closely together. And everybody worked collectively. You know, to do that, there was a quick pivot by Tourism Noosa at that time to address a health crisis. I, yeah, I am very cautious about limiting that because if we've got a pivot because of some disaster, I think it's prudent that we look at like, how do we then put a measure of protection around in that space when we pivot. If we have something as targeted as like no paid advertising within 150k, if we had that restriction during COVID, we wouldn't like pull through. And in terms of the reduction in, you call day trippers. They're, you know, some of those people that come up in the data are through, they've bought properties here. They might come up on the weekend and travel from Brisbane. I mean, they pay rates here. They are of part of that cohort of people. Who if people are in a car driving up here and using our all our services, our infrastructure, coming to our events, all that. So I think it is a measurable reduction in that activity to day trip catchments, I think. If people again, risk or opportunity, I think too much restriction in that space might now, could lead towards those unintended consequences where we've drilled down that deep on that, we can't pivot if there's a disaster. Amelia Lorentson 05:17:32.839
Okay, I think that's everyone who's talked. Councillor Lorentson, you wish to close. Just in response with Councillor Finzel, we have, of course, a short clause which actually addresses the very issues that we're talking about. If there are any external shocks or forces for. Of COVID, there's opportunities for realignment and agility is the basis of that force majeure. In terms of measuring annual reduction, I'm not talking about day trips. That have homes here they will continue to come here. The wording is very clear, it's in marketing activity directed at day trip catchments. I'm talking about marketing. We're not going to stop people from coming here, but we have an opportunity in this amendment to reduce new marketing actively directed at day trip catchments. Again, probably what I want to say, again, respect the conversation. My job is to work for the community and that's what I'm trying to do in terms of these amendments, but I am hearing a lot in the repetition of we're undermining the working. Group. I think we need to put that in context that we also risk undermining the trust that this community has placed in us as elected representatives, so again, respect the decision of this Council in terms of the amendment that's been thank you very much. Placed in front of us. Brian Stockwell 05:19:03.525
I've put the amendment data in favour. It's Councillor Lorentson. Those not in favour is Councillor Wilson, Wegener, Finzel, Phillips and Stockwell. The amendment is lost. We come back to the initial motion and currently Councillor Wilson is the only one who's talked to it. Anyone else like to talk to the substantive motion? Will. I wrote down three words: articulated, coordinated, integrated. So the coordinated, integrated is essential if we want to get to a sustainable system of delivery around destination management. The articulated is what's really relevant this particular item. Have we clearly articulated the expectations of Tourism Noosa to deliver under the funding agreement over the next three years? And for me it's a resounding yes. I think the improvement that the working group has done since we last saw it have been very good. They've added a lot of clarity. I think Councillor Wilson's opening address was once again a really clear articulation about what we are doing here today, what is the scope of our deliberations and what can we expect out of Tourism Noosa. I do think that the does take the next step in coordination of the coordination between Noosa Council and Tourism Noosa to deliver the Destination Management Plan I think there is good provisions in there to ensure that we will have a coordinated outcome reflecting back that only a few years ago we had this partnership agreement that had very little in terms of any specifications about what the Tourism Noosa would do for the money the Council gave it but that leaves us with the last one integrated and I don't think we're there yet and that's because a key component of getting integration will be the setting up of the Destination Stewardship Council because that's where the design of that if it's done well will integrate the community perspective will integrate the industry perspective will integrate the cancer perspective as well as the broader government perspective in how we sustainably manage tourism to ensure that community values are upheld and the impact on our community on our social and environmental ecosystem such that they are not being degraded and that our economy is still supported by those who visit us and so I think are at a good spot in terms of being able to support the deed and being confident as Councillors that it does achieve the objectives as set out in the Destination Management Plan. Anyone else that like would to like talk? Cancel the webinar. I'll just say quickly Tom Wegener 05:22:09.016
I'd like to thank Councillor Wilson for stepping in and using her expertise to help guide this process and I think that something that Councillors should be able to do is use their expertise that they've come to the Council to do this job, to share their expertise and help guide community in a positive way so thank you I Brian Stockwell 05:22:33.386
That's where he though he can I think I saw a hand over here. Councillor Finzel? Jessica Phillips 05:22:35.756
Oh no. Yes I'll speak to it. Firstly I would also like to acknowledge Councillor Wilson's persistence and commitment through the process. I very much appreciated the work that you have put into it. I'll circle back to my main points. What is the problem that we're trying to fix? I don't think, well actually I know from the moment I started these discussions I've been incredibly clear on what I and don't accept because accept and don't accept because I'm extremely principle based it's the only thing that I have is at the end of the day so when I sit in this Chair I think about Councillors well beyond me and then I feel like I'm just warming the seat so while I'm here six million dollars of ratepayers' money has to be spent incredibly wisely we have an obligation to absolutely four months. Absolutely at foremost it is in our money to spend so that's our own not we it's not our own business so we have six million dollars over three years and what's the problem we're trying to fix would have to probably agree that community feel that traffic congestion is probably the biggest part of why they feel overwhelmed in their town that it's been being sort of taken over with tourism however we can't back that up with anything to negate that it's right or wrong I feel like the decisions for me like my hands behind my back a little bit so I've never had an issue with Tourism Noosa I think that they play an incredible part of our economy do I think that ratepayers should fund it? I think there was a loss in transparency when it went from the levy so from that moment community have wanted to understand more than ever where their money is going and that's because most households now are watching every dollar they're watching their fuel tank they're watching the cost of living and so what they're asking us to do as a Council is be incredibly conscious with their money that's how they feel every time they choose to pay their rate bill instead of going on a holiday they put their utilities up the front and they pay it off or they you go without so have an obligation to them to spend money wisely and I still feel that the part that where I got poured out the most about being able to support this was when it aligned so much with DMP because I still can't like my principles say there's no way I can say that there was errors in DMP and then support funding to go and implement. A strategy that I still don't think has been tested that would be I wouldn't be able to sleep at night because that questions every part of my integrity. I didn't support DMP because I don't think it's been tested I don't want a governing board an external I don't want charism Noosa to be responsible. For it because I think we haven't tested it enough to know I think we're asking Tourism Noosa to pivot from where they've traditionally been without any evidence to support why we're asking that and although I see it happening all the time and it's probably the way local government works for me I feel that we can't endorse the strategy can't ask and someone else to deliver it because there's clarity no clarity in her in who's responsible for if it fails or if it succeeds so I'm still incredibly uncomfortable about the process how I got here to this point I've got no issues making decisions that's never been something that I've worried about but I need to go home and sleep soundly that's pretty much the test for me so unfortunately today I still just don't feel you've I think you've done so much work absolutely and staff like it's nothing to do with that I just I'm still not comfortable from this day one and I haven't been able to influence the decisions in any way for me to say that I had a role or I had a voice at the table because nothing that I brought to any of the workshops around Tourism Noosa or DMP have actually been listened to or implemented. So my hands behind my back so the only way I can stand up for the residents is by not voting for it which is really difficult if I to be put in that position that's all left is my hand at the end of the day. Brian Stockwell 05:28:22.279
Wegener or, oh no I have Councillor, yeah Councillor Wegener I have you at, no I haven't weggenard. Got you speaking or Councillor I have three words, I said thank you, and Councillor Lorentson. So, Councillor Lorentson. Amelia Lorentson 05:28:39.273
Yeah I'll speak, today what's in front of us and what we can measure. To is 6.2 million dollars of rate-paying money to Tourism Noosa and I think what I'm I've been you know again reading the performance deed. We're giving that money based on performance that's going to be measured almost entirely on its own internal activities. Social media engagement, website traffic, membership numbers, training attendance. Indeed, reports submissions. Keep coming back to none of those measures tell us whether a Noosa resident is better off and that's the question that the community have been asking us. Go back to the desk. Destination stewardship. And the amendment that I'll try to put through. That was our community voice. It was a mechanism that was built into the deed but according to the deed it can still be ignored without explanation or consequence. The community that participated in the DMP process participated on the understanding that the invoice would shape tourism governance in the Shire. That's what they were told. And the body established to carry that forward, the Destination Stewardship Council, according to is the deed, it's still purely advisory. After today, when a resident comes up to us and asks us, and they will, whether the $6.2-point million shimmy dollars that we're committing today is going to make tourism work better for this community, I don't know about you, but I'm not going to have a straightforward answer. We have organisational activity metrics, that's what's in the deed. We'll have social media numbers, that's in the deed. We'll have response submissions, that's in the deed. But we won't have what the community has asked for, which was an independent measure of community experience. And that was my attempt through all the many failed amendments that I've put through. We're not going to have auditable evidence that council's money is being directed at the right markets. We won't have a clear map of who's responsible for what in the destination management system. I'm going to put on record, I am not going to be supporting this motion, and not because I'm against tourism in Noosa not succeeding, and not because I believe tourism is bad for this community. Tourism done well that can happen is one of the best things can happen to a place like Noosa. It sustains local businesses, our neighbours, mums and dads, it supports local employment, my kids, and it generates the economic activity that flows through to every corner of this community. Done well, tourism is good for everyone. But tourism done well requires accountability, it requires a performance framework connected to community outcomes. Requires honesty about who's responsible for what. It requires a community voice to be genuinely heard and it requires an organisation receiving two million dollars a year of public money to prove its value in terms of where the whole community can see and verify, not just parts that already believe in it. That was the standard that I was trying to move today and unfortunately the strangford did not support it. So I cannot in good conscience support a deed that falls short of it. And I'm going to. Close by reiterating. What I said part of the amendment discussions. A lot of mention was made about we can't undermine the can't undermine the working group. We can't undermine the working group. Again, we've got to remember who we work for. And what we are potentially undermining is, again, the trust this community has placed in all of us around this table. Remembering that $6.2 million is money that my husband works seven days for. I work seven days for. So unfortunately today, I cannot support the deed in its current form. Karen Finzel 05:34:00.448
Oh, this is really complex. This is a really difficult, challenging decision. I mean there was decisions prior to today that were ratified by Council that now I have to respect that I did not support. So, to start I guess with a clean slate and the matter before us. Is about the funding deed. What I generally don't support is status quo. I mean I think it's been a rough ride to get to this point without a doubt. It was an election campaign as we the community at the time didn't want that money spent on tourism given the impacts and I understand that. When we look at it from my perspective around, I can only speak for myself, around that addressing status quo, we have tried to attempt with the tools we have before us to address the status quo and that goes right back to taking it out of the levy on the rates because that initially was set up in my opinion to from what I was told was because it was an emerging industry and this cash was constrained to help build that now that served us for 25 years we got to this point in terms of addressing status quo and looking at it through another lens with robust and rigorous debate around what is before us it still has not been in my opinion been a clear cut off here start again now Councillors that moment was gone that moment came before we went to that meeting in December where now, did not happen so we've arrived here today trying to go through these murky waters and collectively between our community taking on board their voice which matters I'm here because of their voice I take that seriously and I work hard to engender that trust in my community we've looked at the other stakeholders all the people that sit around the table the business owners the small business owners the schools everyone in this Shire is affected by tourism in one way or the other we've talked to our peak body which I challenged on more than one occasion at this table around a definition were they an LTO were they an RTO and here today we've got Councillor Lorentson asking again for a definition as we head into a DMO it's we couldn't do that. Really unfortunate that do that I mean I looked up online I can tell you a DMO what is it it's a destination management organisation maybe public private or hybrid entities that promote a location and work with its stakeholders to build a rich experience as well as a long-term value for residents and business we are living in complex times change and being facilitators of change is our role as leaders in our community today none of this in is straightforward yes we need data yes we do the best of our ability with what sits before us to make these very challenging decisions in a very movable landscape it is like shifting sands from day to and I feel for the families in our community right for the single parents those that are living you know in a car those people are trying to budget send their kids to school and live on a single income in one household we've got so many challenges before us there is no easy answer in how to make these decisions I feel like we're emerging feel like in this space of tourism it is a sector that we cannot ignore it is a sector that in my opinion we can't just like cut off and go like cut that off we have to work together as a collective and I think we're inching towards that even though there's deficiencies in this how it's presented and how we've arrived here it has not been a straight line and in my experience life is not a straight line it is messy it is like we expose our weaknesses we've got to look at our strengths we've got to balance risk and opportunity is a is real challenge. And the other challenge and I'm going to say it because I think that like the Mayor yeah he had other obligations today but I think to you know also make this decision without the at the table when we're talking for leadership around the table and you bridge Brian Stockwell 05:39:10.403
Your five minutes and you're straying into territory that's not related to the motion Nicola Wilson 05:39:18.599
Okay cancer Wilson thank you for the comments around the table and I do agree with the challenges that we've had in this process I've been quite vocal about that previous meetings about the steps that led us to this point including a decision over a one-year agreement into a Roadmap for three years so personally I didn't support the DMP for the Roadmap but I do respect that now a Council decision and that regardless of how everyone votes today we're still committed to giving tourism Noosa for two million dollars per year regardless of whether you agree with this thing so working with that I'll repeat a few things I said at the start whenever um I've used road map our views on the Roadmap and the DMP funding amount we are stuck with that decision of two million dollars over three years and what we've been working on in the working group this last few months is trying to just make the best of that and try and develop some KPIs that lead us towards the strategic goals that two million dollars are used to support delivery of agreed services including destination marketing, visitor servicing, industry development, partnerships and research and insights. With respect it's not about finding out whether the community is better off as a result of tourism but I would love for someone to suggest a KPI on that um because we'd happily add it in but um from all the different suggestions I got from the community there was nothing that we could use to measure that so I do welcome feedback on that but it's not actually what we're asking Tourism Noosa to deliver on um but we have had conversations that say that we will look for ways to set some baseline data over community sentiment and absolutely measure that over time but right now it isn't something that we can measure because we don't have a baseline or a methodology um in um terms of the marketing um while we might not be prescriptive in the kpis about how much money is spent where Council will have visibility over the marketing plan um which does specify the campaigns it's normally a summer campaign a winter campaign maybe a couple of others um sort of activity based potentially so we will know exactly what those campaigns will be in advance and know where that money is being spent um but we are moving into uncertain economic times and TN will have to adapt to conditions to support their members and support the industry so we can't be too restrictive on where they can spend marketing spend if as the year progresses and we get updates things have changed and they need to divert their spending somewhere else that's TN at the end of the day is a separate entity with its own CEO and own board and they have to make those decisions to make sure that they're supporting the industry and as well as the community if we see a drop in engagement because people are not spending money on holidays anymore because they don't like the regenerative messaging then TN is going to have to adapt to that. We need to give them the freedom and flexibility to do that. In terms of making two references to undermining the working group, what I mean by that is we've spent two months looking at many, possible KPIs and trying to get this balanced approach, and that compared to throwing a suggestion in at the last minute to decide on the fly, I think that's unfair to the process. Was one thing. And as I said, I have received many suggestions from people that have been tested with the working group and the community as well in the conversations. So I think I will end I'm certainly not excited to be in this position either, but we have tried to make the best of what we've got and come up with something that gives us some strategic direction for the next year, noting that only the first year we will revisit for the second year and to get on actually with it, so yeah. Signing the deed and letting TN get on with the job so that we can actually assess their performance instead of them spending all their time on the deed. Brian Stockwell 05:43:51.152
Think it's Amelia Lorentson 05:43:51.813
A good thing. Thank you. I put. Sorry, you said too late for me to ask another question. Brian Stockwell 05:43:55.357
Yes. No, it is too late. It's too late. Okay, thank you. I put the motion. Those in favour? Councillor Wilson, Wegener and Stockwell. Those is Councillor Lorentson, Finzel and Phillips. And I use my casting vote to for. The motion is passed. We now move on to the biosecurity plan 2026/2031. Which services. 2031, which is our managing environment. Thank you. Here we go. Ben, a quick overview, thank you. Ben Derrick 05:45:00.465
Thanks very much Chair, afternoon Councillor, CEO. Firstly I'll offer an apology for Director Rawlings who's engaged with the minister for environment in a few of my portfolios this afternoon. The draft Noosa biosecuring plan 26 to 31 has been to go guide the coordinated management of invasive plants and animals across Noosa Shire over the next five years. The plan responds to council's obligations under the biosecurity act 2014 and supports the delivery of council's Corporate Plan and Environment Strategy by biosecurity risks to biodiversity, agricultural productivity, community amenity and public safety. The plan has been developed to adopt a risk-based, evidence-informed approach to prioritising invasive species management across all land tenures. It includes actions focused on prevention, early detection and rapid response containment of established species and community capacity building to support shared responsibilities for biosecurity outcomes. Preparation of the draft has been undertaken with targeted stakeholders including Queensland Department of Agriculture and Fisheries which is biosecurity Queensland, QPWS, Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service, Sunshine Coast Council, Gympie Regional Council, SEQ boyer, SEQ Catchments, Queensland Rail and Noosa District Landcare group. The biosecurity plan applies the biosecurity act at local levels. And covers roles and responsibilities of Council and other agencies and private landholders, processes for reporting of invasive species and management processes, Shire-wide risk assessments to establishing priorities for managing invasive species, reasonable and practical measures prevention, eradication, containment and asset-based protection depending on the extent of infestation and management feasibility, methods and timing for management of invasive species, management tools and support. Regulation and compliance and information capture. The commonwealth scientific and industrial research organisation, which is Australia's peak research organisation, identifies pest plants and animals as the key threat to Australia's biodiversity. And comparative our diverse and comparatively university. Comparatively well conserved environmental. Values in Noosa are under particular threat due to our accommodating subtropical climate. Accordingly, the draft Noosa biosecurity plan is a critical tool for us to be able to manage our biodiversity values into the future. And I say the recommendation that we've put forward is this is a draft that we are seeking Council approval to undertake broad scale community consultation, which should be through GoVocal. We've engaged with relevant stakeholders up to this point. We've been well engaged with land holders through delivery of the current biosecurity plan and so we're seeking the opportunity for all residents of Noosa to be able to have a say. Brian Stockwell 05:48:05.469
Thank you. Do we have questions? We have questions? Karen Finzel 05:48:10.659
Someone like to move the motion? Happy to move it. Brian Stockwell 05:48:13.783
Moved by Councillor Finzel, second Councillor Wilson, Councillor Finzel. Karen Finzel 05:48:18.187
Yes, thank you, thanks Ben. That was a really thorough report. Yeah, it was really an interesting especially of how we manage our ecosystems and biosecurity and things like feral pigs and all that interesting stuff. So that is really relevant. And often we don't think about that when we you know, we're often like we think about our coastal and areas but I really think you know as we head towards those rural areas and also some suburban areas where we have to look at and manage these the pests and the weeds and the feral animals. I think it's a really good report I think you've done well to deliver such a informative report in such a short time well I think it's been a short time so I think I do support it I think we do need to definitely have that in place to be able to you know inform our staff and our broader community of the guidelines that direct our decisions and the use of you know different things that we undertake in the community to address these issues which aren't always pleasant but they're a necessary part finding that balance for people living in this environment so a big thank you to you and all the team actually that have to take these honest day-to responsibilities in your roles because they're not always easy but I think these policies in line and those frameworks on how to direct that regulate that and implement that is really important so on yeah hopefully by if this gets recommended today that this continues to help inform your work and make those difficult decisions at times. In those spaces so thank you. Ben Derrick 05:50:06.167
Thanks Councillor. I'll pass that on to our team who are unheralded and often unseen in the work they do and that might be at one o'clock in the morning when most of the students are in bed. They might be out on the job. Yeah, yeah. I just have a couple of questions Ben. First one's in relation to so currently Council does use glyphosate in its security and lead management programs. There are several councils that are banned or are phasing out glyphosate due to worker health concerns and legal liability following councils' lead to the chemical. My question is has cancer assessed its legal experience? Legal exposure in relation to glyphosate's use, and have we looked at alternatives? There's a lot to that question. Brian Stockwell 05:50:59.633
If you could just hold. Is there anything in the biosecurity plan that talks control about control measures in new south use wales? Of glyphosate? I don't know that off the top of my head. I believe it's a matter that's more specific than what the biosecurity plan thank you very much. Cabas, obviously, it's one control option for weeds, and I don't believe it's a relevant question to the item in front of us. Amelia Lorentson 05:51:35.756
Through the Chair, I have another question. Ben, in terms of fire ants, what's the current fire ant situation in relation to Noosa Shire. Ben Derrick 05:51:45.165
We don't have known infestations in Noosa Shire. There is a rapid response team from the State government which is tasked at investigating any reported cases. We've certainly had a few queries that have been put through by Noosa Council staff and members of the community as well where the rapid response team has come up and investigated. We don't have any in the Council, in the Shire at the moment. There are infestations close by. Eumundi conservation reserve is the closest one that we've had, which is. I think it's been deemed under control, although I'll take that as an uncertainty. Terms in of. Our protocols going forward, we support the State government in the information that we share with our community members and being able to facilitate an awareness campaign as well. A particular hotspot is our landfill, making sure that we've got the right control mechanisms and that does form part of our monthly assessment, is our biosecurity officers will go through our landfill and look at all the hotspots through there for investigations. Amelia Lorentson 05:52:53.772
And my last question, the report talks about a $30,000 funding gap, so, biosecurity risk without intervention are rated high to extreme. So, why are we deferring these actions to a future budget rather than funding them now? Ben Derrick 05:53:17.112
So, it was at the, I think it was the fire ants are, they residual hives, that came up as individual fires. Yeah, and it's a residual high risk because of the controls that we don't have on it that no one can have on it. And that's just the movement of soil, the uncertain vectors that are involved in, you know, it might be a community member, it might be taking a log from somewhere to else that might have fire ants on it, or it might be on someone's shoes or deposited in their cars or something like that, so it's a really difficult thing to be able to manage the spread of that, which is why we've still got that as a residual high risk. The additional funding that for sort of the program is above and beyond what we're we've probably got at the moment to be able to address some of the emerging issues and compliance items that we've got. So if it hasn't gone through in the budget, it'll go through in the subsequent budgets as a budget request. Brian Stockwell 05:54:13.737
Thank you. Tom Wegener 05:54:20.424
I love the various apps that you mentioned, the read scan. The iNaturalist the naturalist app. The feral scan app, the weed spotter, all these things are out there that can help us understand what to look for. And then I also really appreciate the various landholder support groups like the urban wildlife garden land voluntary compensation, conservation agreements, Noosa District Landcare, and so on. So we really have a lot of things going on in that field to, help the residents and the citizen science do their thing to complimenting them. And again, I really appreciate reaching out to the plan, reach out and depends on our citizens would to report back to their land, help guide the whole process. So I think it's a wonderful plan, and I look forward to the comments. Amelia Lorentson 05:55:19.269
My last question, and correct me if I'm wrong, but when I looked at the plan, there was a list of stakeholders consulted in preparing the giant. I noted that the ice here is earthbound. Biosphere Reserve Foundation wasn't on that list. So, my question is, should it be? I just think the alignment in terms of what the biosphere foundation represents in terms of advancing the values of the UNESCO reserve. Status. And the plan, I see a real alignment. Just asking, were they considered and should they be? Ben Derrick 05:56:00.885
I don't think they were considered for this time. We can certainly put it forward for the public consultation, make sure they're aware of it so they can have a feedback into the draft plan if it does go through. The government agencies and groups that we consulted with are either land managers or they've got an area of responsibility where they can. Some of the program. So rather than an advocacy and awareness building process which NBFA, oh sorry, Noosa Biosphere Reserve Foundation is, the ones that we've targeted are stakeholders with a genuine skin in the game rather than an awareness raising. Which is why we've chosen that. Brian Stockwell 05:56:44.331
Yes, supplementary question there. ULIS Seqwater and SEQ catchments I think SEQ cashers might be a few years out of date. Ben Derrick 05:56:56.824
Yes. Would that be now? Healthy Land and Water? That's correct. I was hoping that went through, but thank you very much, Chair. Brian Stockwell 05:57:06.075
My pleasure. We'll make amendments for Council. And I will talk to it. You mentioned CSIRO identifying biosecurity risk as the most significant one to biodiversity in Australia. We've just dealt with the concept of destination management. There's nothing the Council does more important than actually maintaining our natural areas. But also part of DMP is getting the local food system and the biosecurity plan is one of those ones that spreads across both the environmental and the economic production of our landscape. The risks will continue to grow. As our native vegetation, which is adapted to past climates, has to compete with far more weedy rudder or species, be they animals or plants, I do acknowledge the concern amongst the community and the ongoing debate around the use of herbicides to control weed invasion, and there is always that balancing act to look at what at would be without herbicides. I this I know that Noosa district and landcare were consulted. What most people don't know is that group was started to address the biosecurity problem when a whole lot of people started to move into the rural landscape and we had a significant noxious weed called grantil bush that was being aerated. By helicopter with a thing that is a mix of 245T airmine. And 24D anmine, which most people will know as agent orange. So that was the genesis of when we had a public meeting in Pomona in '89 or so, to start addressing how we could address the management of our landscape in a less toxic and more environmentally friendly way. So it is a big issue, and it is one that really is, if we're going to protect the Noosa brand, we have to protect the naturalness of our bushland and the productivity of our farmland, so it's an important one that we do consult on and make sure that what we've drafted is in line with community expectations. Amelia Lorentson 05:59:23.717
Council lineson Councillor Lorentson. I've been attending, I'm not going through ALGA this year, but I've been attending most of the conferences I think over the last six years, both at local and national level, and fire ants. That's just a real. Dud he must have. Hear much of it here in Queensland, but when you go to these conferences, you actually understand the enormity of the problem. I think biosecurity is one of the most important responsibilities this Council actually carries. It doesn't get that much of attention. Like I said, when I go to the forums, that's when it's really amplified. And as Councillor Stockwell mentioned, you know, when I do Bushcare, volunteering with groups, and when you're there pulling out invasive weeds, and you're just going, man, this is never going to stop. You actually understand you've got to manage it. Once invasive species take hold, cats cause creepers or fire ants. Know, enter a park, that's it. So we've got to do everything to prevent that from actually happening. So I'm really, you know, this plan exists to prevent that, and I really support this plan coming to community engagement. And again, pass on your thanks to your team, a really critical, important role that you guys play in ensuring that we're protected. Thanks. You. Brian Stockwell 06:01:07.755
Anyone else I think Karen Finzel 06:01:11.127
It's all been said looking forward to the feedback from the community so that we get their say in it but I think it's really important that we move forward the biosecurity plan especially to like future generations by then we get this knowledge and then we like keep building on that I think that's really important to inform future generations while leaving a really good knowledge area base of like our and area and what like makes it tick in terms of the we need to protect so thank you the environment and what we need to protect so thank you Brian Stockwell 06:01:46.213
I've put the vote those in favour that's unanimous we move on to the next item which is one uh. It is the uh. Is one the environment and climate change grants. And I'll just get uh. Larry Sengstock 06:02:05.743
Do you know who this man is? Ben Derrick 06:02:07.913
Uh, it's. Say it. Show I you am carrying the camera Brian Stockwell 06:02:10.081
Yes thank you um I am going to declare and that is in accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009 I inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in the matter in terms of environment and climate change response grants, environmental project grants and climate change response grant on this agenda. So I am the current president of the Noosa Lions Football Club who to has submitted the grant application. For climate change response grant. Although I of interest. A declarable conflict I do not believe a reasonable person could have a perception of bias because the application submitted was unsuccessful and could I add and is not discussed in the report. Therefore would I will choose to remain in the meeting room however I respect the decision of the meeting or whether I can remain and participate in the decision. So why are you declining? Why? I don't and people think because if I people say wait a minute he voted on it but he submitted an application I just think there is a perception of risk so if I if we were successful it would be prescribed but I just think it is a clever one to let people know I applied and we did the under lines applied, the lines applied we didn't get the grant. But I think I can make the decision in the community interest. Amelia Lorentson 06:03:46.636
Can I ask a question through the CEO of the new check post? This is not it. It's there. Did you request a new check post? Peace. No. Can I ask a question through the CEO? Is that standard protocol under our Standing Orders? A prescribed conflict and I understand Councillor stockwell's argument that the football club weren't successful and therefore you're going to be arguing to stay in the meeting but that's just, I've never seen that happen before so I'm just seeking advice, is that. Standard protocol? Larry Sengstock 06:04:39.373
That's a good Jay. There's two questions there you've never seen before. Is it standard protocol? It's difficult for me as well. It's not something I've seen either before, Councillor. That it is prescribed, if you were, but because it wasn't successful and it's not being discussed here, I think for the purpose of absolute and it's your decision, Councillor, but I think, you know, my advice would probably be to get it out of the room still? Nicola Wilson 06:05:12.383
It's prescribed if you're a president. Brian Stockwell 06:05:14.780
It's an unusual one, isn't it? Didn't. It is an unusual one. But because it's not in the report, I just wanted to know. Yeah I'm happy to leave if the CEO's advice is that I should leave. See how I'll do that? I've already made decor. That declaration. So yeah, based on the CEO's advice I will choose to leave the meeting. Thank you. Amelia Lorentson 06:05:50.584
Council with me, as soon as the position of Chair, only because they know that you don't like me. We all have to practice, Tom. I'm going to get rid of this in practice. He doesn't wanna practice. Unidentified Speaker 06:06:02.423
Okay, no. Thank you very much. Would you like to? Do it? Yeah. Larry Sengstock 06:06:13.532
All in favour? Yes. This is Simon. He knows. You know, it's over to you, Councillor. Tom Wegener 06:06:20.626
OK. Okay, Ben, would you please us the report on the climate change response grants? Ben Derrick 06:06:26.266
Thank you, Chair. We've got two funding streams that I'll talk to, and first of all, I'll put in an apology for my colleague, Sian, who's our climate change response coordinator, who has just left for a family commitment. So, I'll say very early that on the climate change response grants, I might not be able to answer all of your questions, but ones that I don't, I'll take on notice, and we can potentially put through to a so, we've got two funding streams that are presented in this agenda item. The first one is the environment project grants. Are funded through the Environment Levy and supports the implementation of the noosa's Environment Strategy, as well as council's other key environment strategies and plans. The environment grants program is designed to enable collaboration with the community in initiatives that work towards the outcomes and targets identified in the strategy. All initiatives funded under these project grants must have tangible and measurable outcomes. The total budget that we've got for the environmental project grants for the financial year 2016. / '27 is $35,000. We received nine applications for the current funding round requesting a total of $162,282. The climate change response grants are included under the environment grant policy or assisting the climate change response plan, the Coastal Hazards Adaptation Plan, and the Regional Climate Action Roadmap. The current FY26/27 budget for climate change response grants is $50,000. Unlike the environment project grant, the climate change response grants are funded through general rates. Nine applications were received for the current round of funding, for a funding request totalling $145,753. It is noted that the calibre of grants received in this round across both streams was very high and it's a credit the to our community organisations to be able to put in such well thought and strategic grant applications which would policy, which would all improve the long-term future of Noosa. In accordance with the environmental grant guidelines each application from both streams was assessed by a panel of three officers against the published criteria. The panel assessments then moderated by Director Rawlings with the recommendations presented to the committee in this report. I'll you ask to please you to note please note a correction in attachment 2 relating to the climate change response grants. The correction is for the alignment summary column in NICA's get climate ready with Noosa plants and should include the following text. The was scored highly by the evaluation panel. The project addresses increasing risks of climate change impacts on biodiversity and urban green infrastructure as well as helps improve household resilience due to the addition of climate resilience gardens which provide heat, and health flood and reduction benefits. The project is thus important to help the Noosa community with the climate adaptation and resilience. The project is proposed by a credible group with a demonstrated track record of delivering credible evidence-based information and workshops to the community. The project includes community workshops that demonstrate the broader reach. Recommended conditioning of water funding to improve monitoring and evaluation and to demonstrate stronger partnership with consideration for Kabi Kabi Land and Sea Rangers. So that was the additional dot points in substitution of the dot points that are in there which was cutting and in paisenheira. That is my summary, stumbling summary. Thank you, open for questions Nicola Wilson 06:10:32.240
And this may be to the CEO Through the Chair. Why are we voting on two different types of grants in one recommendation when for the community one we've separated them all out? Ben Derrick 06:10:53.550
They're both under the same policy, and it's so the policy that guides how we assess those grant applications and Kerri is shaking her head over there. Kerri Contini 06:11:03.651
I can answer this question. So Through the Chair, the reason that the community project grants are divided up into different reports, they are under one policy. However, we've however, we frequently have multiple Councillors that have to declare a conflict of interest and in the past when we had them under one report we ended up with nearly all Councillors having to leave the room and we did not have a quorum to be able to vote on the report. So we now separate them. Karen Finzel 06:11:38.370
I'm hoping Kerri Contini 06:11:41.150
That probability and statistics is in our favour and we have enough Councillors for each report to have a quorum. It's an administrative function. It's just to move the pathway for community grants because so many councils are involved in so many community organisations. Nicola Wilson 06:11:58.363
So on the same theory, Councillor Stockwell doesn't get to vote on the climate change grants because he has a conflict on the environmental ones. If he wanted to support one type and not the other, he would have to vote for both at the same time. Amelia Lorentson 06:12:27.064
So maybe there's a request through the CEO that in future whether the reporting can be done separately given that so far there's only one identified conflict in terms of the environment grants? Larry Sengstock 06:12:41.051
Yeah, I've noticed that so I'm happy to do that. I'm happy to defer this to separate them out for thursdays and meeting. How are we going to do that? Karen Finzel 06:12:54.245
Just two reports. Tom Wegener 06:13:02.107
It's time okay, so I understand we're going to move to defer this to make a deferral motion. Do we need to bring this to the Ordinary Meeting? Unidentified Speaker 06:13:12.128
To further of course yeah to the airport, I mean, um, so you should sit down, okay. Tom Wegener 06:13:21.151
I suspect we, no more questions, we just do the deferral- For a motion now? Okay. Okay, who would, somebody like to move? Unidentified Speaker 06:13:32.541
I'm gonna have to make a move. Yeah, okay. Jessica Phillips 06:13:44.242
So it's just a certain secret. I have a question to the CEO that will only be for this particular report, but ongoing for future ones, how would it be best? Larry Sengstock 06:14:02.213
Approached we'll do the future ones but we'll separate them out. We just haven't had this problem before of course, so I don't know what you mean. Jessica Phillips 06:14:32.561
That General Committee agenda item 7.1 will be referred to the Ordinary Meeting or two further reports separating the environment project grants and climate change response grants Karen Finzel 06:15:01.361
So I just have a question then yeah does that just previously we said that the policy guides the assessment so if we doing this can we ensure that the assessment process that preceded this is not is that still like effective or is does that affect that in what or anyway? Way or anyway what way so I know. Ben Derrick 06:15:25.092
Don't do think it affects it at all yeah all right so do Karen Finzel 06:15:29.112
We need to make policy changes further down further the track or no Kerri Contini 06:15:36.538
It's just simply a reporting convenience to enable Councillors to be able to stay in the room for some reports and then Karen Finzel 06:15:45.850
Only exit when it's a batch of grants that are specifically relating to their conflict. Tom Wegener 06:15:53.953
Thank you okay, should we vote on this? All in favour, unanimous? Thank you, we can bring Unidentified Speaker 06:16:06.918
Brian back Karen Finzel 06:16:09.907
Into the room. Thanks Brian, good job. Amelia Lorentson 06:16:10.785
It is because he is so comfortable not sharing that you forget how much he's got to get thrown adjournment. You've got to leave I appreciate it. Brian Stockwell 06:16:41.980
Where's Nick? Okay, we're up to the next item, which is planning application to sign by delegated authority in April of this year. And we have, I forgot the assessment manager, Patrick here to give us a brief overview. Thank you, good afternoon councils. I know it's been a long day and you've been waiting for this item. Here I am, with the delegated report of the decisions that were made for the month of April. As you know, this is a monthly report that's provided for noting, detailing the decisions made on the delegation. Thirty applications decided in the month of April. No refusals. Patrick Murphy 06:17:21.862
Again, a broad spread of application. Unidentified Speaker 06:17:23.521
At heavy events on minor changes. Brian Stockwell 06:17:29.805
Do we have any questions of Patrick? Does someone want to move the recommendation? I'll move the recommendation. Moved by Councillor Wegener. Seconded by Councillor Phillips. Would you like to talk to the motion? Would anyone else like to talk to the motion? I've put the motion. All those in favour? Thank you. That's unanimous. Maybe she'll be more like it. Thanks Patrick. Next item is inconfidential session. It's related to not the public release, proposed land rationalisation, land the under way, lot 2 on RP889596 and Noosa Drive lot on RP889596. RP 884396. Can I have a resolution that we go into committee to address this item. Can I move it? I'll have in a second. Meeting leave me thank you. Will be closed if the public is pursuant to that section of the act. For the purpose of discussing a commercial matter proposed to be made by Council and in particular the potential commercial negotiations in relation to item 8.1 proposed land rationalisation land mining away lot 2 on RP 88496 and Noosa Drive lot on RP 884396. I don't think we need any discussion. All those in favour? Brian Stockwell 06:31:58.400
Okay, we're back. I'm open to the public and transmitting. I would like to move to Council note the report from the acting property manager to General Committee Meeting dated 9th of June 2026 and a. Authorise the chief executive office to provide landowners landowner's consent if required to enable lodgement of any future development application involving Council owned land affected by the proposed land rationalisation process. B. Note that the provision of landowner's consent and actions authorised under this resolution do not constitute approval of any development second dot, do not bind or fetter Council in its role as assessment manager. Do not commit Council to completing the land exchange do not authorise any works or transfer of Council land prior to completion of all required approvals, agreements and settlement conditions. Note that the proposed land rights formalisation process is intended to facilitate land tenure outcomes that support implementation of the Noosa Junction framework and character plan, supports opportunities for future housing outcomes consistent with council's Housing Strategy and borders. Planning objectives will result in no net loss of existing public parking, is intended to improve future access arrangements associated with planned public road connection, and supports increased public realm and green space outcomes within the precinct. Agreed to facilitate a land tenure rationalisation process involving Council owned land located at lot 2 on RP889596 Noosa Heads including a 363m2 portion of the existing driveway and adjoining land located at 99 Noosa Drive Noosa Heads through a market value land exchange whereby 363 metre squared portion of the existing driveway within lot 2 on RP889596 which is transferred to the adjoining landowner for amalgamation into the adjoining land and part of the adjoining land is transferred to Council. Pursuant to section 236 of the Local Government Regulation 2012 resolved that the proposed social part of lot 2 on RP889596 proceed other than by tender or auction in reliance on the exception under section 236 of the regulation of on the basis that the consideration compromised the land exchange for land, the disposal is in the public interest and the transaction is otherwise consistent with sound contracting principles. F, authorising the Chief Executive Officer to undertake all necessary actions to implement the land rationalisation process including negotiating and entering into agreements, preparing and lodging survey plans, finalising infrastructure agreements, securing easements, access arrangements and road dedication, facilitating type facilitating title and tenure arrangements, and completing the transfer of land interests. G, note that all costs associated with the land rationalisation process including legal, valuation, surveying, lodgements, stamp duty, costs will be funded by proponent note that any future development application affecting the subject land will be assessed independently under the Planning Act 2016 by the relevant assessment manager and remain separate from the land rationalisation process. I'll be the of Councillor Lorentson, it is a matter of some confluence of course of the commercial nature, I just noticed that it will be funded by the proponent and that opponent we relax potty. Relates to the party other than Council. Does anyone else wish to discuss the matter? No? I put the motion those in favour. That's unanimous. The motion is carried and that brings us to a close. Related Noosa Council Meetings
← Browse all Noosa Shire Council meeting transcripts
