Ordinary Meeting, 18 June 2026
Date: Thursday, 18 June 2026 at 10:00AM
Location: Noosa Shire Council Chambers , 9 Pelican Street , Tewantin , QLD 4565 , Australia
Organiser: Noosa Shire Council
Duration: 04:13:58
Synopsis: Active Street halted; grant reallocation sought, Tourism Noosa deed approved, Fees and charges adopted, Grants endorsed with guideline review, Biosecurity engagement, Financials stable.
Meeting Attendees
Councillors
Frank Wilkie Karen Finzel Jessica Phillips Amelia Lorentson Brian Stockwell Tom Wegener Nicola Wilson Executive Officers
Chief Executive Officer Larry Sengstock Acting Director Corporate Services Margaret Gatt Director Development & Regulation Richard MacGillivray Director Strategy And Environment Kim Rawlings Director Infrastructure Services Shaun Walsh Director Community Services Kerri Contini AI-Generated Meeting Insight
Key Decisions & Discussions Petition to install lighting on pathway Yellowood Close–Tewantin Sporting Fields received and referred to CEO (5.1; 01:10–02:50). Report requested on process, framework, timeframe and cost to move to divisional boundaries; carried unanimously (10.1; 12:36–19:27). Audit & Risk Committee recommendations adopted en bloc, incl. cyber risk update, QAO briefings, internal audit closouts, financial exception framework, STA legal posture (11.1.1–11.1.22; 21:40–23:58). Peregian Beach Active Street Stage 1: staff motion to delegate contract award lost (For: Stockwell, Wegener); Council instead resolved project not proceed in current form and seek grant reallocation to practical works (footpaths, stormwater, parking, street planting); report back ASAP (11.2.1; 23:58–01:48:36). Community Grants Program approvals: Projects, Facility Development, Equipment, Events, and Three‑Year Signature Community Event Grants endorsed (11.2.2–11.2.7; 01:48–01:56). Legacy Plot Reservation Management Policy adopted to manage unused cemetery reservations 25+ years old (11.2.8). Sport4All outcomes noted; consider ongoing access & inclusion function and framework subject to future funding (11.2.9). Noosa Botanic Gardens Masterplan approved to guide future funding/programming (11.2.11). Tourism Noosa Deed 2026–2029 approved: $2m p.a. (CPI cap 3.5% from Y2), Balanced Scorecard KPIs, performance-based second instalment adjust up to $350k; CEO authorised to execute/administer (11.2.12). Draft Noosa Biosecurity Plan 2026–2031 endorsed for community engagement; report back after submissions (11.2.13). Land rationalisation (Lanyana Way/Noosa Dr) approved to proceed via land exchange under LGR s236(1)(c)(v); no fetter of DA role; all costs by proponent (11.2.16). Environment Project Grants (Round 21) approved: Teewah Turtle Trackers $17,301.16; Noosa & District Landcare $10,870.84; Wildlife Noosa $6,828 (12.1; 01:56–02:01). Climate Change Response Grants (Round 6) approved: NBRF Youth Climate Summit $14,820; Zero Emissions Noosa (ZEN) Swap the Drive $12,899.06; NICA Urban Wildlife Gardens $11,150; ZEN Solar on Low‑Income Homes $10,000; plus directive to review grant guidelines with public consultation before next round (12.2; 02:04–03:10). 2026–27 Fees & Charges adopted under LGA ss 97, 98, 262(3)(c); CEO authorised minor edits (12.3; 03:45–03:51). Financial Performance to 31 May 2026 noted; stable, no material risks identified; capital re‑profiling driving cash position (12.4; 03:54–04:13). Contentious / Transparency Matters Peregian debate saw ruling on procedural motion overturned; meeting adjourned for legal advice; advice confirmed original committee recommendation could be moved at Ordinary; staff motion then lost (11.2.1; 24:16–01:06:24, 01:00–01:02). Community concerns cited: consultation adequacy, safety, parking loss, data transparency; majority opted to halt current design and pursue practical works/grant reallocation (11.2.1; 01:08–01:18:37). Climate grants: attempt to strike ZEN items withdrawn; amendment carried to publicly review guidelines before next round to strengthen trust and value-for-money assurance (12.2; 02:16–02:27, 02:34–02:55). Public Q&A: climate KPI transparency and DMP total cost answered on record; commitment to live reporting platform for climate actions (8.1–8.2; 03:46–06:59, 08:48–10:09). Dog infringements issue: Council confirmed renewals/reminders generated for all; 576 multi‑year non‑registrations fined; significant recent updates/registrations noted (8.2; 10:18–12:00). Legal / Risk Peregian grants timing risk: Active Transport Fund completion timelines; CEO noted awaiting formal responses; potential rate-funded works if grants cannot be repurposed (11.2.1; 01:24:21–01:26:00). Procedural law: Standing Orders 31.1 invoked; dissent carried; adjournment to obtain governance/legal advice; CEO confirmed committee recommendations are not Council resolutions and can be moved anew (11.2.1; 27:21–29:36, 59:36–01:01:55). Land rationalisation relies on LGR 2012 s236(1)(c)(v) exception; explicit no fetter of DA role; all costs by proponent; sound contracting principles affirmed (11.2.16). Audit & Risk: QAO fraud recommendations progress; Public Interest Disclosure Policy/Procedures amended; ICT cyber risk update; financial exceptions policy adopted; STA legal position to monitor with no further investigation warranted (11.1.3, 11.1.10, 11.1.12, 11.1.21, 11.1.9). Financial: Fees & Charges mostly ≤10% increases; animal reg. increases minimal; pensioner microchipped dogs remain no‑fee; typographical correction to legislative reference noted before publishing (12.3; 03:49–03:54). Emerging disaster funding risk flagged in debate (Commonwealth 50/50 proposal); officers to model scenarios in LTFP and brief Council (12.4; 04:01:52–04:02:54). Conflicts of Interest Frank Wilkie : Prescribed COI on Peregian Active Street (donor family member adjoining street); left room; later declarable COI (volunteer at Noosa Arts Theatre) determined he could participate under s150ES (11.2.1, 11.2.4; 23:58–24:08, 01:50–01:53). Brian Stockwell : Prescribed COI—President, Noosa Lions FC—left for Facility Development Grants and Climate Grants (11.2.4, 12.2; 01:49–01:50, 02:01:46–02:03:59). Nicola Wilson : Prescribed COI—Senior VP, Noosa Arts Theatre—left for Facility Development Grants (11.2.4; 01:49:51–01:50:22). Environmental & Climate Program Highlights Environment Grants target turtle monitoring, Pinbarren protection, and river-line hazard reduction with measurable outcomes (12.1; 01:56–02:01). Climate Grants span youth summit, modal shift via e‑bike loans, climate‑resilient native plant guidance, and solar for low‑income homes; staff to condition delivery and report outcomes (12.2; 02:04–02:13:20). Commitment to publish climate KPIs and progress via an interactive public platform; corporate and operational plan reporting cycles reiterated (8.1; 05:32–06:59). Biosecurity Plan to undergo public engagement before finalisation (11.2.13). Peregian Beach Active Street – Safety, Funding, and Community Signals Brian Stockwell: Cited multi‑criteria assessment showing Lorikeet Drive highest on safety/feasibility and alignment with long-term coastal pathway strategy; urged leadership despite local opposition (11.2.1; 01:05:55–01:06:24, 01:38:57–01:44:35). Jessica Phillips: Opposed “rubber‑stamping”; prioritised lived impacts and consultation quality over staff recommendation (11.2.1; 01:08:59–01:10:13). Amelia Lorentson: Argued overwhelming local opposition and safety concerns; moved alternative to halt current design and seek grant redeployment to basic infrastructure (11.2.1; 01:18:37–01:22:36). Officers confirmed formal grant body responses pending; reallocation uncertain; internal budgets don't currently cover substituted civil works (11.2.1; 01:23:55–01:26:00). Short-Term Accommodation (STA) A&R Committee noted STA matters previously addressed via legal advice/independent review; no further investigation warranted; continue monitoring legal developments (11.1.9). Community Transparency & Governance Signals Destination Management Plan development cost estimated ~$600k over five years; fraction of Council/Directorate budgets; itemised cost components outlined (8.2 Q1; 08:48–10:09). Financial Environment Monitoring, Exceptions & Escalation Policy adopted with standing exception reporting to A&R, enhancing early risk visibility (11.1.12–11.1.13). Fees & Charges early adoption improves certainty for users; small dog-reg increase, pensioner microchipped dogs fee‑free retained (12.3; 03:53:57–03:54:44). Climate Grants guidelines to undergo public consultation before next round, directly addressing KPI/value-for-money concerns raised in Q&A and debate (8.1; 12.2; 05:32–06:59, 02:34–02:55).
Official Meeting Minutes
ORDINARY MEETING | 18 JUNE 2026 Ordinary Meeting Minutes Thursday, 18 June 2026 10:00am Council Chambers, 9 Pelican Street, Tewantin Crs Frank Wilkie (Chair), Karen Finzel, Amelia Lorentson, Jessica Phillips, Brian Stockwell, Tom Wegener, Nicola Wilson “Noosa Shire – different by nature” Page 1 of 21 ORDINARY MEETING | 18 JUNE 2026 MINUTES ORDER OF BUSINESS 1 DECLARATION OF OPENING The meeting was declared open at 10.00am 2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY Noosa Council respectfully acknowledges the Traditional Custodians of the lands and waters of the Noosa area, the Kabi Kabi people, and pays respect to their Elders, past, present and emerging. 3 ATTENDANCE & APOLOGIES COUNCILLORS Cr Frank Wilkie (Chair) Cr Karen Finzel Cr Jessica Phillips Cr Amelia Lorentson Cr Brian Stockwell Cr Tom Wegener Cr Nicola Wilson EXECUTIVE Chief Executive Officer Larry Sengstock Acting Director Corporate Services Margaret Gatt Director Development & Regulation Richard MacGillivray Director Strategy and Environment Kim Rawlings Director Infrastructure Services Shaun Walsh Director Community Services Kerri Contini APOLOGIES Nil. 4 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES 4.1 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES ORDINARY MEETING 21 MAY 2026 Council Resolution Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That the Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting held on 21 May 2026 be received and confirmed. Carried. For: Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None Page 2 of 21 ORDINARY MEETING | 18 JUNE 2026 5 PETITIONS 5.1 PETITION: INSTALLATION OF STREET LIGHT/S ON PATHWAY FROM YELLOWOOD CLOSE, TEWANTIN TO TEWANTIN SPORTING FIELDS Attachment 1 to the Minutes dated 18 June 2026 - PETITION - Street lights Yellowood St Tewantin - redacted Council Resolution Moved: Cr Frank Wilkie Seconded: Cr Amelia Lorentson That the petition with 41 signatories submitted by Susan Dewar, requesting that Council requesting the installation of streetlights on the pathway from Yellowood Close to Tewantin Sporting Fields be received and referred to the Chief Executive Officer to determine appropriate action. Carried. For: Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None 6. PRESENTATIONS Nil. 7. DEPUTATIONS Nil. 8. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME 8.1 PUBLIC QUESTION TIME APPLICANT: HAYLEY HASS Question 1 What measurable outcomes, targets and key performance indicators does Noosa Council use to assess the effectiveness of its Climate Emergency declaration and the expenditure incurred in delivering associated climate change, climate resilience, sustainability and emissions reduction activities, including Councils Carbon Reduction Project Officer? Response provided by Director Strategy & Environment, Kim Rawlings Thank you for your question. Since declaring a climate emergency in 2019, Noosa Council has endorsed a Climate Change Response Plan and a Coastal Hazards Adaptation Plan, as well as supported the Regional Climate Action Roadmap developed in partnership with Sunshine Coast Council. Each of these plans contain a range of strategic priorities, targets, adaptation outcomes, and actions that Council uses to measure progress in responding to growing climate change risks. In addition, Council’s Corporate Plan 2023-2028 includes key objectives, projects and performance measures related to climate change response. This includes both measuring emissions reduction and efforts to build resilience. Progress in delivering Council’s Corporate Plan is reported on annually. Page 3 of 21 ORDINARY MEETING | 18 JUNE 2026 Projects and objectives which relate to climate response are then reflected down to Council’s annual Operational Plan which is reported on quarterly. Reports on Councils carbon footprint and monitoring of initiatives to reduce emissions are reported publicly to Council. In addition Council provided an update on progress delivering its Climate Change Response Plan at the General Committee on 16 December 2024. This included measuring progress on governance priorities and targets, as well as estimates on expenditure and external grant funds received since endorsement of the Plan. Council is working on developing a live, interactive and public online reporting platform, which intends to track progress on individual actions in the Climate Change Response Plan to inform the community of progress and strengthen transparency and accountability. 8.2 PUBLIC QUESTION TIME APPLICANT: NICK COOKE QUESTION 1 What has been the total cost of the Destination Management Plan from initial concept planning to final adoption including but not limited to internal staff costs, consultant fees, research, community engagement, workshops, surveys, advertising, communications, graphic design and any other direct or indirect associated costs incurred to date? Response provided by Director Strategy & Environment, Kim Rawlings The research and data gathering that informed the development of the DMP began 5 years ago, the issues the DMP seeks to address have been ongoing for many years and Council has sought to understand and address these issue throughout this period in different ways and therefore allocated resources to these issues also across this period. The estimated cost associated with the development and delivery of Noosa’s Destination Management Plan to date, is estimated to be around $600,000 over a fiveyear period or approximately $120,000 per year when averaged across the five-year period. This accounts for less than 0.07% % Noosa Council’s cumulative budget and likewise, less than 0.7 % of the Directorate’s budget responsible for the development of the DMP over the same period. This figure estimates the total cost of the project including (but not limited to): Portion of Internal staff salaries Consultant and professional service fees Research and analysis Community engagement activities over 3 comprehensive engagement processes. Workshops and stakeholder consultations Surveys and data collection Advertising and communications Graphic design and publication costs Associated project delivery and operational expenses to date (including development of the DMP Portal) QUESTION 2 Can Council confirm whether annual dog registration renewal notices for all affected dog owners were successfully generated by Council's internal systems for the registration periods that resulted in the recent infringement notices being issued? Response provided by Director Development & Regulation, Richard MacGillivray Thank you for the question Mr Cooke. Page 4 of 21 ORDINARY MEETING | 18 JUNE 2026 Yes, Council can confirm that dog registration renewal notices and subsequent reminder notices were successfully generated for all registered dogs. It is important to note that Council has over 10,000 registered dogs. 576 infringement notices were issued in April, all of which related to dogs not being registered across multiple years. Prior to infringements being issued Council also issued public media articles requested dog owners to ensure their dog’s registration and details were current. It is relevant to note that in the past two months alone over 1,000 dog record updates have been received and more than 220 new dogs have been registered that had not previously been registered. 9 MAYORAL MINUTES Nil 10 NOTIFIED MOTIONS 10.1 DIVISIONAL BOUNDARY REVIEW Council Resolution Moved: Cr Karen Finzel Seconded: Cr Amelia Lorentson DIVISIONAL BOUNDARY REVIEW That Council request a report to a future Council meeting that: A. Provides a clear understanding of the process required if Noosa Council were to elect to become a Shire with divisional boundaries; B. Identifies the regulatory decision-making framework that would need to be undertaken and completed; C. Outlines the expected time frame required to achieve the desired outcome; and D. Provides an indication of cost and resources required to deliver the overall process. Carried. For: Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None 11. CONSIDERATION OF COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS 11.1. AUDIT & RISK COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS DATED 29 MAY 2026 11.1.1 QUEENSLAND AUDIT OFFICE - 2026 AUDIT COMMITTEE BRIEFING PAPER That Council note the 2026 Audit Committee Briefing Paper by the Queensland Audit Office to the Audit and Risk Committee meeting 29 May 2026. Page 5 of 21 ORDINARY MEETING | 18 JUNE 2026 11.1.2 CROWE - FINAL REPORT - INTERNAL AUDIT OF 2025 QAO INTERIM REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS That Council note the report by the Internal Audit Service Provider to the Audit and Risk Committee meeting dated 29 May 2026 regarding the Internal Audit 2025 QAO Interim Report Recommendations Audit. 11.1.3 INTERNAL AUDIT REPORT - QUEENSLAND AUDIT OFFICE FRAUD RECOMMENDATIONS (Response to Item 8) That Council note the report by the Financial Services Manager to the Audit and Risk Committee meeting dated 29 May 2026 reporting on Internal Audit’s review of Queensland Audit Office’s recommendations following the fraud event. 11.1.4 INTERNAL AUDIT UPDATE That Council note the report by the Executive Officer to the Audit and Risk Committee meeting dated 29 May 2026 regarding the Internal Audit Update. 11.1.5 SUNDRY CREDITORS PROCESS IMPROVEMENTS - RISK REGISTER ITEM 22 That Council note the report by the Financial Services Manager to the Audit and Risk Committee meeting dated 29 May 2026 regarding Risk Register Item 22 NonCreditor (Sundry) Payments. 11.1.6 CLOSING OF PAYROLL RELATED ACTIONS That Council: A. Note the report by the People & Culture Manager to the Audit & Risk Committee dated 29 May 2026 regarding action items from the 2023-2024 Internal Payroll Audit; B. Approve the closure of actions 44, 45, 46, 48 and 49 relating to payroll matters and their removal from the risk register; and C. Note the current low risk status of these items and strengthened control environment. 11.1.7 VALUATION OF BUILDING LEASES TO EXTERNAL ENTITIES That Council Note the report by the Financial Services Manager to the Audit and Risk Committee meeting dated 29 May 2026 regarding Action Item 13: Update on the valuation of building leases to external entities. 11.1.8 CAPABILITY FRAMEWORK & WORKFORCE PLANNING That Council: A. Note the report by the People & Culture Manager to the Audit & Risk Committee meeting dated 29 May 2026 regarding Noosa Council's Capability Framework and Workforce Planning model; B. Note development and delivery of a strategic workforce capability plan aligned to corporate plan objectives is identified as a key People & Culture action to Page 6 of 21 ORDINARY MEETING | 18 JUNE 2026 address strategic risk 10 on the organisational strategic risk register - human resources not managed effectively 11.1.9 SHORT TERM ACCOMMODATION – RESPONSE That Council; A. Note the report by Director Development and Regulation to the Audit and Risk Committee meeting dated 29 May 2026 regarding Short Term Accommodation; B. Note that the matters raised have been previously addressed through detailed legal advice and independent review; C. Note that the material does not warrant the need for further investigation or external referral; and D. Continue to monitor legal developments relevant to short-term accommodation as part of its oversight role. 11.1.10 ICT CYBER RISK REPORT That Council note the report by the ICT Manager to the Audit and Risk Committee Meeting dated 29 May 2026 regarding an update on ICT Cyber Risk. 11.1.11 SHELL FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND END OF FINANCIAL YEAR UPDATE That Council note the report by the Financial Services Manager to the Audit & Risk Committee Meeting dated 29 May 2026 regarding Council’s progress preparing for the 2025/26 financial statements. 11.1.12 FINANCIAL ENVIRONMENT MONITORING, EXCEPTIONS AND ESCALATION POLICY That Council: A. Note the report by the Financial Services Manager to the Audit and Risk Committee meeting dated 29 May 2026 regarding the QAO recommendation response and the implementation of a new policy framework to address financial risks across Council’s financial environment; B. Approve that that the Audit and Risk Committee have a standing agenda item reporting on identified exceptions under this framework. 11.1.13 FINANCIAL ENVIRONMENT EXCEPTION REPORTING PE 30 APRIL 2026 That Council note the report by the Financial Services Manager to the Audit and Risk Committee meeting dated 29 May 2026 regarding exceptions in Council’s financial environment to 30 April 2026. 11.1.14 QUEENSLAND AUDIT OFFICE'S LOCAL GOVERNMENT FINANCIAL AUDIT REPORT 2026-26 That Council note the report by the Financial Services Manager to the Audit and Risk Committee meeting dated 29 May 2026 regarding the Queensland Audit Office’s report and the pending self-assessment project commencing in late April 2026. Page 7 of 21 ORDINARY MEETING | 18 JUNE 2026 11.1.15 TECHNOLOGYONE HEALTH CHECK That Council note the report by the Financial Services Manager to the Audit and Risk Committee meeting dated 29 May 2026 regarding the TechnologyOne Health Check. 11.1.16 FRINGE BENEFITS TAX (FBT) PROJECT That Council note the report by the Financial Services Manager to the Audit and Risk Committee meeting dated 29 May 2026 regarding Council’s FBT compliance and governance framework. 11.1.17 SUPERANNUATION ON CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS That Council note the report by the Financial Services Manager to the Audit and Risk Committee meeting dated 29 May 2026 regarding Council’s requirement to pay superannuation on payments to deemed employees. 11.1.18 FINANCIAL SERVICES WORKFORCE PLAN - UPDATE That Council note the report by the Financial Services Manager to the Audit and Risk Committee meeting dated 29 May 2026 providing an update on the Finance Team Workforce Plan. 11.1.19 RISK MATURITY PROGRESS UPDATE That Council note the report by the Governance Manager to the Audit & Risk Committee Meeting dated 29 May 2026 regarding Council’s risk maturity progress under the Queensland Audit Office’s Risk Maturity Model. 11.1.20 INSURANCE MANAGEMENT UPDATE That Council note the report by the Governance Manager to the Audit & Risk Committee Meeting dated 29 May 2026 providing an update on insurance management matters. 11.1.21 Confidential - FRAUD, CORRUPTION & PID UPDATE That Council A. Note the report by the Governance Manager to the Audit & Risk Committee Meeting dated 29 May 2026 regarding an update on fraud, corruption and PID matters and: B. Adopt minor amendments to the Public Interest Disclosure Policy as per Attachment 4. C. Adopt minor amendments to the Public Interest Disclosure Procedures as per Attachment 5. Page 8 of 21 ORDINARY MEETING | 18 JUNE 2026 11.1.22 AUDIT & RISK COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS ENBLOC Council Resolution Moved: Cr Nicola Wilson Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That the Recommendations of the Audit & Risk Committee meeting dated 29 May 2026 be received and adopted except where dealt with by separate resolution. Carried. For: Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None 11.2. GENERAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS DATED 9 JUNE 2026 11.2.1 PEREGIAN BEACH ACTIVE STREET - STAGE 1 PROGRESS UPDATE AND NEXT STEPS (Deferred from the Ordinary Meeting dated 19 March 2026 - Item 12.2) Cr Frank Wilkie "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 11.2.1 - PEREGIAN BEACH ACTIVE STREET - STAGE 1 PROGRESS UPDATE AND NEXT STEPS on this agenda as my mother, who donated $5000 to my election campaign, lives in a street adjoining Lorikeet Drive which is the subject of the Active Street project. As a result of my conflict of interest, I will now leave the meeting room while the matter is considered and voted on.". Cr Wilkie left the meeting. Cr Stockwell assumed the chair. 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; Page 9 of 21 ORDINARY MEETING | 18 JUNE 2026 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. Cr Lorentson attempted to move a Procedural Motion to adjourn the meeting. The Chair ruled that a Procedural Motion was out of order as the matter had not entered into debate. Procedural Motion Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That the Chairperson's ruling be dissented from. Carried. For: Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener Procedural Motion Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips The meeting adjourned at 10.33am to obtain legal advice. Carried. For: Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: Cr Brian Stockwell The meeting resumed at 10.59am. 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; Page 10 of 21 ORDINARY MEETING | 18 JUNE 2026 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. Lost. For: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Against: Nicola Wilson Council Resolution 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 Jessica Phillips, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener Cr Wilkie returned to the meeting and resumed the Chair. 11.2.2 2026-2027 COMMUNITY GRANTS PROGRAM - COMMUNITY PROJECT AND SIGNATURE COMMUNITY EVENT GRANTS - SUMMARY 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. Page 11 of 21 ORDINARY MEETING | 18 JUNE 2026 11.2.3 2026-2027 COMMUNITY PROJECT GRANTS PROGRAM – PROJECTS 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. 11.2.4 2026-2027 COMMUNITY PROJECT GRANTS PROGRAM - FACILITY DEVELOPMENT Cr Nicola Wilson "In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009 - I Cr Nicola Wilson, inform the meeting that I have a prescribed conflict of interest in relation to Item 11.2.4 - 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 Wilson left the meeting. Cr Brian Stockwell "In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009 - I Cr Brian Stockwell, inform the meeting that I have a prescribed conflict of interest in relation to Item 11.2.4 - 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 Stockwell left the meeting. Cr Frank Wilkie "In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009, I Cr Frank Wilkie, inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter Item 11.2.4 - 2026-2027 COMMUNITY GRANTS PROGRAM - COMMUNITY PROJECT GRANTS (FACILITY DEVELOPMENT) on this agenda in relation to the application from Noosa Arts Theatre. While I am no longer in a decision-making position on the Noosa Arts committee, I continue to volunteer my time in productions at the Theatre. Although I am making a declarable conflict of interest, I do not believe a reasonable person could have a perception of bias because as Noosa Arts Theatre is a Not-forProfit group and I am participating in an unpaid capacity and am not involved in any decision-making capacity. Therefore, I will 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." Page 12 of 21 ORDINARY MEETING | 18 JUNE 2026 Council Resolution Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Karen Finzel That Cr Jessica Phillips be appointed as Acting Chairperson of the meeting for this item for the purpose of considering the conflict of interest declaration by Cr Wilkie Carried. For: Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Tom Wegener Against: None Have declared a conflict of interest, Cr Wilkie did not vote in the above motion. Cr Phillips assumes the Chair Council Resolution Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Karen Finzel That Council note the declarable conflict of interest by Cr Wilkie and determine that in accordance with s150ES of the Local Government Act 2009, and having considered the Councillor's conflict of interest as described, it is decided that Cr Wilkie may participate and vote on this matter relating to the 2026-2027 COMMUNITY PROJECT GRANTS PROGRAM - FACILITY DEVELOPMENT. Carried. For: Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Tom Wegener Against: None Have declared a conflict of interest, Cr Wilkie did not vote in the above motion. Council Resolution 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 2026-27 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 Frank Wilkie, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Amelia Lorentson Against: None Cr Wilkie assumes the Chair Cr Stockwell returns to the room. Cr Wilson returns to the room Page 13 of 21 ORDINARY MEETING | 18 JUNE 2026 11.2.5 2026-2027 COMMUNITY PROJECT GRANTS PROGRAM - EQUIPMENT 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. 11.2.6 2026-2027 COMMUNITY PROJECT GRANTS PROGRAM - EVENTS 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 - 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. 11.2.7 2026-2027 COMMUNITY GRANTS PROGRAM - THREE-YEAR SIGNATURE COMMUNITY EVENT GRANTS 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. 11.2.8 LEGACY PLOT RESERVATION MANAGEMENT POLICY That Council 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. 11.2.9 "SPORT4ALL" ACCESS AND INCLUSION PROGRAM - OUTCOMES AND LEARNINGS 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 Page 14 of 21 ORDINARY MEETING | 18 JUNE 2026 C. Subject to future funding availability, develop a whole-of-Council Access and Inclusion Framework to embed inclusive principles and guide priorities. 11.2.10 2026-2027 FEES AND CHARGES That General Committee Agenda Item 7.10 2026-2027 Fees and Charges be referred to the Ordinary Meeting for a further report. 11.2.11 NOOSA BOTANIC GARDENS MASTERPLAN 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. 11.2.12 FURTHER REPORT - TOURISM NOOSA FUNDING AND PERFORMANCE DEED 2026–2029 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 Page 15 of 21 ORDINARY MEETING | 18 JUNE 2026 ii. Administer the Deed in accordance with its terms. 11.2.13 NOOSA BIOSECURITY PLAN 2026-2031 That Council: A. Note the report by the Environmental Services Manager to the Ordinary Meeting dated 18 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 engagement on the Draft Noosa Biosecurity Plan 2026–2031 in accordance with the Biosecurity Plan 2026 - Communications and 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. 11.2.14 ENVIRONMENT & CLIMATE CHANGE RESPONSE GRANTS - ENVIRONMENT PROJECT GRANTS (ROUND 21), CLIMATE CHANGE RESPONSE GRANTS (ROUND 6) 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. 11.2.15 PLANNING APPLICATIONS DECIDED BY DELEGATED AUTHORITY – APRIL 2026 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. 11.2.16 CONFIDENTIAL - NOT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE - PROPOSED LAND RATIONALISATION - LANYANA WAY LOT 2 ON RP889596 AND NOOSA DRIVE LOT ON RP884396 That Council note the report from the Acting Property Manager to General Committee meeting dated 9 June 2026; and 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. Page 16 of 21 ORDINARY MEETING | 18 JUNE 2026 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 remains separate from the Land Rationalisation Process. 11.2.17 GENERAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS ENBLOC Council Resolution Moved: Cr Nicola Wilson Seconded: Cr Karen Finzel That the Recommendations of the General Committee meeting dated 9 June 2026 be received and adopted except where dealt with by separate resolution. Page 17 of 21 ORDINARY MEETING | 18 JUNE 2026 Carried. For: Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None 12 ORDINARY MEETING REPORTS 12.1 FURTHER REPORT - ENVIRONMENT PROJECT GRANTS (ROUND 21) (referred from General Committee dated 9 June 2026 Item 7.14) Council Resolution Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Frank Wilkie That Council: A. Note the report by the Environmental Services Manager to the General Committee Meeting dated 9 June 2026 and the Further Report to the Ordinary Meeting dated 18 June 2026 regarding applications received for the Environment Project Grants (Round 21); and B. Approve the allocation of funding to the following organisations for Environmental Project Grants for 2026/27 financial year: i. $17,301.16 to Teewah Turtle Trackers Inc. for the Teewah Turtle Trackers Monitoring and Conservation Initiative; ii. $10,870.84 to Noosa and District Landcare for the Protecting Pinbarren Project; iii. $6,828.00 to Wildlife Noosa Ltd. for the Noosa River Hazards to Wildlife (Lines and Lures) Reduction Program, Carried. For: Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None 12.2 FURTHER REPORT - CLIMATE CHANGE RESPONSE GRANTS (ROUND 6) (referred from General Committee dated 9 June 2026 Item 7.14) Cr Brian Stockwell "In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009, I, Cr Brian Stockwell, inform the meeting that I have a prescribed conflict of interest in this matter Item 12.2. - FURTHER REPORT - CLIMATE CHANGE RESPONSE GRANTS (ROUND 6) (referred from General Committee dated 9 June 2026 Item 7.14) on this agenda as I am the current President of the Noosa Lions Football Club who I am aware submitted a grant application for a Climate Change Response Grant. I will now leave the meeting. Cr Stockwell left the meeting. Page 18 of 21 ORDINARY MEETING | 18 JUNE 2026 Motion Moved: Cr Tom Wegener Seconded: Cr Frank Wilkie That Council: A. Note the report by the Environmental Services Manager to the General Committee Meeting dated 9 June 2026 and the Further Report by the Sustainability and Climate Change Coordinator to the Ordinary Meeting dated 18 June 2026 regarding applications received for the Climate Change Response Grants (Round 6); and B. Approve the allocation of funding, totalling $48,869.06, to the following organisations for the Climate Change Response Grants for FY2026/27: i. $14,820.00 to The Trustee for the Noosa Biosphere Reserve Trust for the Future Tide - 2027 Noosa Youth Climate Summit; ii. $12,899.06 to Zero Emissions Noosa Inc. for the Swap the Drive: Supporting Modal Shift From Cars To Bikes program; iii. $11,150.00 to the Noosa Integrated Catchment Association Inc. for the Get Climate-ready with Noosa Native Plants project; and iv. $10,000 to Zero Emissions Noosa Inc. for the Solar on Low Income Homes project. Amendment No. 1 Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That C be added to read: C Remove Zero Emissions Noosa from the list of approved recipients under the Climate Change Response Grants. Cr Lorentson withdrew the amendment Amendment No. 2 Moved: Cr Jessica Phillips Seconded: Cr Amelia Lorentson That C be added to read: C. Undertake a review of the Climate Change Response Grants Guidelines involving public consultation on any proposed changes prior to the next round of grant funding being opened. Carried. For: Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Tom Wegener Page 19 of 21 ORDINARY MEETING | 18 JUNE 2026 Council Resolution Moved: Cr Tom Wegener Seconded: Cr Frank Wilkie That Council: A. Note the report by the Environmental Services Manager to the General Committee Meeting dated 9 June 2026 and the Further Report by the Sustainability and Climate Change Coordinator to the Ordinary Meeting dated 18 June 2026 regarding applications received for the Climate Change Response Grants (Round 6); and B. Approve the allocation of funding, totalling $48,869.06, to the following organisations for the Climate Change Response Grants for FY2026/27: i. $14,820.00 to The Trustee for the Noosa Biosphere Reserve Trust for the Future Tide - 2027 Noosa Youth Climate Summit; ii. $12,899.06 to Zero Emissions Noosa Inc. for the Swap the Drive: Supporting Modal Shift From Cars To Bikes program; iii. $11,150.00 to the Noosa Integrated Catchment Association Inc. for the Get Climate-ready with Noosa Native Plants project; and iv. $10,000 to Zero Emissions Noosa Inc. for the Solar on Low Income Homes project. C. Undertake a review of the Climate Change Response Grants Guidelines involving public consultation on any proposed changes prior to the next round of grant funding being opened. Carried. For: Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Tom Wegener Against: Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Nicola Wilson Cr Stockwell returned to the meeting. 12.3 FURTHER REPORT - 2026-2027 FEES AND CHARGES (referred from General Committee dated 9 June 2026 Item 7.10) Council Resolution Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Karen Finzel That Council: A. Note the report by the Financial Services Manager to the General Meeting dated 9 June 2026 and the Further Report to the Ordinary Meeting dated 18 June; and B. Pursuant to Sections 97, 98 and 262(3)(c) of the Local Government Act 2009, adopt the updated 2026-27 financial year cost-recovery fees and commercial charges provided as Attachment 1 to the report. C. Authorise the Chief Executive Officer to make any minor changes or administrative amendments as required prior to publishing the final document. Carried. For: Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None Page 20 of 21 ORDINARY MEETING | 18 JUNE 2026 12.4 FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE REPORT MAY 2026 Council Resolution Moved: Cr Karen Finzel Seconded: Cr Amelia Lorentson That Council note the report by the Financial Services Manager to the Ordinary Meeting dated 18 June 2026 regarding Council's financial performance to 31 May 2026. Carried. For: Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: None 13 CONFIDENTIAL SESSION Nil. 14 NEXT MEETING The next Ordinary Meeting will be held at Council Chambers, 9 Pelican St, Tewantin on 16 July 2026 at 10.00am. 15 MEETING CLOSURE The meeting closed at 2.14pm. Page 21 of 21
Meeting Transcript
Frank Wilkie 00:00.000
Ordinary Meeting of Thursday 18th June 2026. Declare the meeting open at 10am. We acknowledge that we are meeting on the traditional lands and waters of the Kabi Kabi People and I pay my respects to the elders past, present and emerging. And also acknowledge their recognition of each and every one of us as joint custodians and respecting and caring for this beautiful place that we all love and respecting and caring for each other. Councils are in attendance. Item 4 is.1 the confirmation is of the Minutes. May I have a move and a second for the Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting held on the 21st of May, 2026. Moved Councillor Lorentson. Move Lorentson. By Councillor Phillips. All in favour? I might be looking at it wrong, but it appears that there's a March minutes that are attached. Did double do you think I will check that? Good. Okay, let's have a look at that. May, okay. Okay, some reason to keep up on that March. Have you got, you're saying on the Resolve System? Mm-hmm. It's- Mind sets, mate. May? Okay. Yeah. That's weird. Okay. Good. Thank you. No worries. Okay. Good. That you've checked. You're checking, Councillor Wegener. We have one petition. I move that the petition with 41 signatories submitted by Susan Dewar requesting the installation of street lights on the pathway from Yellowood close to Tewantin sports field be officer Tewantin received and referred to the chief executive to determine the appropriate action. Seconded I have a seconder, please. By Councillor Lorentson. Seconder, Councillor Lorentson. I look, the submitter submits that the pathway is one of three access points created by Council into the Tewantin sporting fields. The serve as soccer, netball, pickleball, tennis, rugby league, touch football, baseball and the pony club. This pathway is also utilised for other events such as the red hot summer concerts, rodeos, vintage car club days, the walk, run, bike, race, the circus and many other events during the years. They submit parking from the overflow is always utilised in Yellowood close and blackbuck court through this access point. They submit that this is a high safety risk to all community members, the lack of lighting that is. Families, women on their own accessing these sporting fields that are there for community use are unsafe without lighting. Congregate, damage the park area and smash and playgrounds. Bottles play these areas because of no lighting. And these are among in our streets we have multiple disabilities in the community crossing a four metre long bridge people wheelchairs visual impairment where lack of is dangerous. Of lighting is dangerous. All in favour? That's unanimous. Thank you Mr. CEO. There are no presentations. We have no deputations. We have two submissions to public question time. The first question is from Ms. Hayley Hass. Ms. Haas, would you like to come to the lectern to read your question, which will be answered by Kim Rawlings, Director Strategy and Environment, and Richard MacGillivray, Director Development & Regulation. Thank you Chair. Hayley Hass 03:07.475
Since declaring a climate emergency Noosa Council has invested considerable resources into climate-related activities, including dedicated staffing, strategic plans, policies, programs and projects. This includes the employment of a carbon reduction project officer position, with an annual salary exceeding a hundred thousand dollars. $100,000 in addition to expenditure on associated climate initiatives across the organisation. Unidentified Speaker 03:37.559
Of funding provided to tourism Noosa through the use of key performance indicators and measurable outcomes. Frank Wilkie 03:47.065
Sorry, Ms Hassan, that's not the question we. Hayley Hass 03:49.854
No, it's the background information, which I've been allowed to read at previous meetings. Frank Wilkie 03:54.833
You have a different. The question itself, is that in relation to the total expenditure incurred by Noosa Council about the declaration of climate emergency? Hayley Hass 04:04.332
No, it's the what measure measurable will act? Outcomes question. Frank Wilkie 04:07.413
Okay, question two. Apologies. Hayley Hass 04:10.751
Council is currently considering how to measure the effectiveness and return on investment of funding provided to Tourism Noosa through the use of key performance indicators and measurable outcomes. Similar principles of accountability and transparency would. Of and would relevant to expenditure. Relevant to climate related expenditure. Given the outgoing commitment of redpath funds to climate programs and initiatives, it is reasonable for the community to understand how Council measures success, evaluates effectiveness and determines whether these investments are achieving their intended objectives. This question seeks clarification of the key indicators. Performance indicators, targets and measurable outcomes used by Council for that purpose. Question is: what measurable outcomes, targets and key performance indicators does Noosa Council use to assess the effectiveness of its climate. Emergency declaration and the expenditure incurred in delivering associated climate change, climate resilience, sustainability and emissions reduction activities, including council's carbon reduction project officer? Frank Wilkie 05:11.035
Thank you, Ms haas. Director Rawlings? Come over here so we can hear you, please. Kim Rawlings 05:33.041
Thanks for your question, Hayley. Since declaring a climate emergency in 2019, Noosa Council has endorsed a climate change response plan and a coastal hazards adaptation plan, as well as supported the regional climate action Roadmap developed in partnership with the Sunshine Coast Council. Each of these plans contain a range of priorities, targets, adaptation outcomes and actions that Council uses to measure progress in responding to growing climate risks. In addition, council's Corporate Plan 2023-2028 includes key objectives, projects and performance measures related to climate change response. This includes both measuring emissions reduction and efforts to build resilience. Progress in delivering council's Corporate Plan is reported on annually. Projects and objectives which relate to climate response are then reflected down to council's annual operational plan which is also reported on quarterly. Reports on council's carbon footprint and monitoring of initiatives to reduce emissions are also reported publicly to Council. In addition, Council provided an update on the progress of delivering its climate change response plan at the General Committee on the 16th of December 2024 this included measuring progress on governance priorities and targets as well as estimates on expenditure and external grants received since endorsement of the plan. Council is working on developing a live interactive and public online reporting platform which intends to track progress in individual actions of the climate change response plan to inform the community of progress and strengthen transparency and accountability. Frank Wilkie 07:00.059
Thank you Ms. Haas. Next question is from Mr. Nick Cooke. Mr. Cook, would you like to come to the lectern and read your questions, which will be answered by Kim Rawlings, Director Strategy and Environment, and Richard MacGillivray, Director Development & Regulation. Nick Cooke 07:17.185
Thank you. Make sure I've got the right one. Destination Management Plan, strategic, significant strategic document intended to guide tourism and visit a management industry over the coming development of the plan commenced with community engagement in 2023 and involved extensive consultation, engagement, workshops, surveys, communication activities, advertising, staff resources and external expertise over a period of more than two years. While councils reported on the aspects of the engagement and the process and the outcomes of the plan, it does not appear to have been publicly available consolidated figure outlining the total cost incurred by Council in developing the plan from inception through to adoption, understanding cost of the strategic planning initiatives is important for transparency, accountability and informed public discussion, particularly at a time when Council is proposing rate increases and communities are seeking assurance that resources are being allocated effectively. This question seeks to establish the total investment made by Council in preparing the Destination Management Plan and provide clarity on where those funds have been expended. The so the question is, what has been the total cost of the Destination Management Plan from initial concept planning to final adoption, including but not limited to internal staff costs, consultant fees, research? Community engagement, workshops, surveys, advertising, communications, graphic designs and the like, and the other direct or indirect associated costs? Kim Rawlings 08:49.192
Thanks, Nick. Thank the research and the research and data gathering that informed the development of the DMP began five years ago. The issues the DMP seeks to address have been going for many years and Councillors sought to understand these and address these throughout this period in different ways and therefore allocating resources to these issues across this period. The estimated cost associated with the development and delivery of noosa's Destination Management Plan today is estimated to be around $600,000 over a five-year period. Or approximately $120,000 per year when averaged across the-year period. This accounts for less than.07% of Noosa Council's cumulative budget and likewise less than.0% of the relevant directorate's budget responsible for the development of the DMP over the same period. This figure estimates the total cost of the project including but not limited to a portion of internal staff salaries, consultant and professional service fees. It's research and analysis, community engagement activities over three comprehensive engagement processes, workshops and stakeholder consultations, surveys and data collection, advertising and communications, graphic design and publication costs, associated project delivery and operational expenses to date including the development of the DMP portal. Frank Wilkie 10:08.144
Thank you. Your second question Mr cook? Of the Nick Cooke 10:19.081
Second question is about dog registrations. Recently reports indicate the booster Council issued over 500 infringement notices to dog owners for unpaid registration resulting in substantial community concerns and a large number of appeals. Council has publicly stated that renewal notices were sent via postal mail, however many residents have publicly claimed they did not receive a renewal notice prior to receiving an infringement notice. Council has also reported approximately 200 appeals have been lodged in relation to these infringements and there's rumblings of class actions. Given the number of residents raising concerns and significant financial penalties involved it's important the community have confidence that the registration process operated as intended. The question seeks clarifications to whether renewal notices were successfully generated. First and foremost in internal systems and sent to dog owners for the registration periods that ultimately resulted in infringement notices being issued. So the question is simply can Council confirm whether the annual dog registration renewal notices for all affected dog owners. Were successfully generated by council's internal systems for the registration periods that resulted in the recent infringement notices Frank Wilkie 11:30.768
Thank you Nick. Director of regulation and development, Mr Moore. Deliberately answer your question. Richard MacGillivray 11:36.522
Thank you for your question, Mr cook. Yes, Council can confirm that dog registration renewal notices and subsequent reminder notices. Were successfully generated for all registered dogs. It is important to note that. Council has over 10,000 registered dogs. 576 infringement notices were issued in April this year. All of which related to dogs not being registered across multiple years. Private infringements being issued, Council also issued public media articles through various mediums. Requested dog owners to ensure that their registration and details were. Current. It is relevant to note in the past two months alone over a thousand dog. Record updates have been received new dogs have been registered that are not previously been registered across the Shire. Frank Wilkie 12:25.945
Thank you, there are no Mayoral minutes. We have one. Notified motion which is included in the agenda which is 10.1 divisional boundary review. Councillor Finzel would you like to move your motion? Karen Finzel 12:38.455
Oh, yeah, happy to move the motion. Frank Wilkie 12:40.132
Do we have a seconder for the motion, please? I'll be happy to second. Thank you. Councillor Finzel, you have the floor. Karen Finzel 12:45.492
Yes, thank you. First of all, thank you to the Councillors and the CEO for their consideration of this motion. I think it's timely that when. We, you know, in a situation in time and place where there's a lot of change, we are leaders and it's prudent, in my opinion, to actually rigorously look at the systems that are serving us. Are they currently fit for purpose or is it time to, like, pull them out, illuminate them and. Have a review to see are they serving us effectively now and into the future? This is a matter about accessibility, transparency and accountability. I thank the CEO for his time to put forward his support for this motion to have a look at the boundary review to provide clear understanding of the process, identify the regulatory decision making and outline the expected time frame. That will provide also to Council an indication of cost and resources required to deliver the overall process. I think it's really important that when we sit in this role of leadership that we are informed by our past, our present and our future. I think in terms of looking at gaps and risks into the future. Think we need to be ready. There is a lot of change going on noting that the LGAQ boundaries to the south and the north of us are divisional and I think as we head towards growth in the region we need to be on the ready. Of course this doesn't mean that the current process is not working as mentioned in the motion but I think it's prudent that we have a look at the best options available to us moving forward. Thank you. Councillor Finzel. Council Finzel. Frank Wilkie 14:31.020
We also wish to speak to the motion Councillor Lorentson Amelia Lorentson 14:33.654
I'll speak to it. I want to speak in support of the motion in front of us. The motion doesn't actually ask us to change anything. It doesn't introduce boards, doesn't cost millions and doesn't touch as a scale. Clean. Standing as an independent Council. All it asks for is a report, one that tells us the process. If Noosa were to move to divisional boundaries, what are the steps involved, how long will it take and what would so we're not deciding on any outcome, we're just asking staff to bring back the facts so that we can have an informed discussion later. I want to thank Councillor Finzel for bringing the report to us today and I want recognise to just reference a couple of you of the notes that she put in the report. And first of all, it's on the background. Since the so since the DML government in 2014, Noosa has run as an undivided Council. At that time in 2014, that made sense. The Shire was actually smaller. And the thinking was that the whole Shire representation would avoid fragmentation. And at the time, there was it also very strong community support for it support for it. But that was over a decade ago and newstart has grown since then. And the issues that councils deal with today are more complex, and community expectations of their Councillors have changed too. Again none and of that means that undevoted model is broken. As Councillor Finzel just mentioned, and in her own comments, it's still defensible. And it's still it may be delivering effective representation but I think it's just proven through governance that we take the opportunity to just review the process and make a decision is it still fit for purpose. I want to also mention right now we actually have six Councillors, one that lives in kina, one that lives in Cooroy, one in Boreen Point, myself and the Mayor, Easton beaches, Councillor Phillips and Councillor Wilson in Tewantin. So around this table, the system that we already have, we've actually got really representation. But I think the question that Councillor Finzel puts in the motion is that not guaranteed next term. That depends on how people were I've got someone who raised hand. I also want to raise, this isn't a new conversation. It was raised last term and I remember the discussion really clearly with the Mayor and I think it was Councillor Joe jerusevic that raised it. Recently resident also regulate our. Residents circulated a really good argument in an article on this very issue and what that tells me is that it's still something that people in this community are still thinking about and want addressed formally, not just left to informal debate. I know there are genuine fair arguments on both sides. An undivided model keeps Councillors thinking Shire-wide instead of defending patch. Wards can create rivalry between areas instead of cooperation. And for a Council our size, and that's really important, some will actually ask whether a review is worth the time and resources. And more importantly, whether the State actually considers us big enough to warrant a review. Our faith. Doing. And they're all valid points, and I think exciting. What that's exactly why this motion is the right way to handle this. It doesn't prejudge the answer, it just asks for facts, process, timeframe, and cost. That we will ever. So that whenever this Council, or a future one, decides to look at this properly, it's an evidence-based decision. An evidence based decision rather than a guess. So again, I commend and thank Councillor Finzel and I am happy to support the motion. Frank Wilkie 18:47.165
Anybody else wish to speak to the motion? Jessica Phillips 18:49.507
I will really quickly. Councillor Phillips. Thank you very much Councillor Finzel for bringing it to the table. And I think you did really well with the process because again, it doesn't have any answer. It's just asking Council to invest in what that model might look like if it is or isn't right for our Council. I was around for the time where we were. I'm now part of a Council that isn't. I think it's a really good conversation to see if we're continually sort of testing things are fit for purpose, whether it's current, whether it's meeting the needs of our Shire, but more importantly, whatever we can do to rebuild trust with our community, I'll support. Frank Wilkie 19:27.766
Councillor Finzel, are you still closed? Councillor Stockwell? Brian Stockwell 19:30.562
Yeah. There's one person, I think Councillor Wilkie also, who's experienced both systems. I have a particular view. This one's not asking for our views, it's asking to do a process and I think it is sensible after 10 years and because there are still community discussions on it too. I most often get asked the question why haven't we got divisions when I'm in the hinterland and I'm normally stopped in the street in the hinterland when I'm asked those questions and I'm going so what's different? You know, in 1988 we had 13 Councillors. In five divisions, multiple Councillors per division and a population of significantly less. That Council actually decided to take four Councillors out but still keep the divisions one less from memory. I always think I've spent a lot of my time well the majority of the time since I've been here 81 living in the Tinbeerwah area if I get on my electric bike it's about 22 to 24 kilometres in any direction to get to the edge of the Shire so that whole thing about what is reasonable for someone to represent if you can ride there in an hour and a half it's probably not too big an area to represent and I think some of the shortcomings have been identified certainly parish pump politics and the horse trading around budget time I'll give you your toilet block you give me my bitumen row type thing and that whole consensus of a Shire but I do agree it's probably time to bring it out in the open let the community see both sides of the story let the costs I noted that Councillor Lorentson out pointed out we've got three Councillors who live in hinterland areas and three who live this side of the of that plus we were to if we were to adopt divisions it would be based on a one vote one value so it's most likely that the hinterland would have locked in a smaller number of representatives. Frank Wilkie 21:38.662
Any other Councillors wish to speak to the motion? Wish to close Councillor Finzel? You wish Finzel uh no thank you okay I'll the to put to the vote those in favour? That's unanimous. Brings us to consideration of committee recommendations. 11.1 Audit and Risk Committee recommendations. 11.1. Queensland Audit Office audit committee briefing paper. 11.1.2 pro final report internal audit 2025 QAO interim report recommendations. 11.1.3 internal audit report Queensland Audit Office forward recommendations. 11.1.4 internal audit update. 11.1.5 sundry creditors in process improvements risk register. 11.1.6 closing of payroll related actions. 11.1.7 valuation of leases building leases to external entities. 11.1.8 capability framework and workforce planning. 11.1.9 short-term response. 11.1.10 ICT Cyber Risk Report. 11.1.11 Shell Financial Statements and end of the year financial year update. 11.1.12 financial environment monitoring exceptions and escalation policy. 11.1.13 financial environment exception reporting. PE 30 of April 2026.11.1.14 Queensland audit officers local government report. 11.1.15 technology health check. 11.1.16 fringe benefits tax project. 11.1.17 superannuation on contract payments. 11.1.18 financial services workforce plan update. 11.1.19 risk maturity progress update. 11.1.20 insurance management update. 11.1.21 fraud, corruption and PID update. 11.1.22 Audit and Risk Committee recommendations en bloc. Mover and seconder for the Audit and Risk Committee recommendations to be adopted please. I move. Councillor Wilson. Seconded, Councillor Phillips. All in favour? That's carried. We go to the General Committee recommendations. Peregian Beach active street. Look, I need to declare a prescribed conflict of interest which has been documented and I will leave the meeting room. Brian Stockwell 23:58.942
So Councillors, I'm going to move the staff recommendation presented to the General Committee. Larry Sengstock 24:04.910
Yeah, no, it's automatic. As the Deputy Mayor. Brian Stockwell 24:07.811
Definitely I'll second it. And I'll wait for that to get up. Vicky 24:16.751
This is the original staff Amelia Lorentson 24:29.441
A question to the CEO. This is a procedural question, not a question in relation to the report in front of us. A question to the CEO. Given that the motion was defeated at General Committee, and then an alternate motion could it be for our Standing Orders that is this standard protocol or not? Larry Sengstock 25:05.763
I need to take a moment to actually talk to you. This is not something I expected today, so. Brian Stockwell 25:13.389
Rules. Orders, I'll speak to it. Order, so I'll speak to it. Amelia Lorentson 25:17.416
Can I ask through the CEO, Chair, what section in the Standing Orders gives you authority to re-litigate a motion that was defeated? Brian Stockwell 25:32.133
Motion that I the motion of a General Committee is a recommendation to this meeting. That's all it is. So, any motion can be moved at the Ordinary Meeting. Amelia Lorentson 25:43.395
Can I possibly request an adjournment of this meeting and seek advice from governance, just not to challenge the Chair, just to ensure that proper process is actually being followed and also to ensure that we don't compromise the integrity of our decision-making in trusting this Council. Thank you for that. Thank you. Brian Stockwell 26:07.812
We can, I've after I've spoken to the motion. It's a procedural motion. There is nothing in the standing order said you're going to need to remove the procedural motion before the speaker of a motion has talked. Amelia Lorentson 26:19.850
Can I move to deceit against the Chair, please? I put a second. Research my reasons are we had something very similar that came before us. We sought legal advice and I think it was in reference to about section 11.4 of our Standing Orders, correct me if I'm wrong. Legal advice actually said that our interpretation of the Standing Orders at the time which was to move a procedural motion after a motion was defeated was in fact incorrect. So again, not to compromise the integrity of our decision. Integrity of-making and trust in and in trust community that we're actually following our Standing Orders, I dissent from the chair's ruling and request an adjournment so we can get advice from our governance and legal team. Brian Stockwell 27:20.718
I'll get just get the courier. The correct. I'm just looking for the procedure of motions. Unidentified Speaker 28:05.580
Through the Chair Brian Stockwell 28:06.432
I have. I so I've got the call, thank you Councillor. We've got a dissent motion. No, a dissent motion, she's moved, I'm responding. That's how a dissent motion works. 31.1 of the Standing Orders states a Councillor at a meeting of Council may during the debate of a matter at the meeting move a procedural motion. A debate does not start until the mover of the motion has spoken to the motion after it's seconded. That is why the dissent in the chairman's room should be voted against because anyone voting for it would be voting against the provisions of the Standing Orders. Unidentified Speaker 28:43.341
Just a question. Nicola Wilson 28:46.199
We're asking whether maintained. Motion should be moved in the first place, so it would be unfair to speak to a motion that potentially shouldn't be moved. Brian Stockwell 28:55.233
I accept that, that's your opinion. It's certainly not consistent with the Standing Orders. I've given the response. You can vote whatever way you feel. Those in favour of the motion in dissent of the chairman's ruling. The motion carried. Amelia Lorentson 29:17.670
I move that we adjourn and close the meeting to seek advice from governance and house legal Brian Stockwell 29:37.103
Anyone wish to speak to the motion? I think procedural motions, i'll just put the motion then, those in favour. Loading to adjust. Close it. Okay. Those in favour, as I think it's contrary to Standing Orders, I'll vote against. So those in favour was Councillor Wegener, Wilson, Finzel, Lorentson and Phillips against is Councillor Stockwell. We'll adjourn the meeting. Frank Wilkie 58:28.991
Good to go, Brian. Brian Stockwell 58:30.393
Yeah, we're good. So Councillors, in accordance with 31.8b, while we can specify time the in would continue. Adjournment continue. In the motion would it was until such a time as governance advice could be received. I believe the CEO is in a position to provide that advice. Mr. CEO? No, there's no motion to resume. If you could provide the advice in regard to the-- so we are open to the public. The meeting is open. The adjournment has been finished. As I said, under 31 131 motions 8B, adjournment motion should specify the time. It did allude to the fact that it would be at such a time that there was governance lifestyle undertaking. We do have advice and therefore believe it is appropriate to restart the meeting. Larry Sengstock 59:34.474
Yes, so, following discussion, the position is that the best method forward was to, we are able to a new motion to the table because the, from the General Committee Meeting to the board meeting is not a resolution, it's a recommendation. So a new motion is able to be brought. The fact that it is the original motion being brought is allowable, however it's not necessarily the best practice, government's practice. Again, interpretation of the Standing Orders, it won't be dealing with here, it's not clear, but that's our interpretation, but it is allowable, however it's not necessarily a mispractice, perspective but it is allowable to bring the original motion back as a new motion, because of the fact that it's coming from the general ordinance, so the ordinance is where the resolution happens, the general is where the recommendation happens. Amelia Lorentson 01:00:44.734
Seeking clarity at the meeting, the staff recommendation was deleted and an alternate motion was held. My question is that the alternate motion then becomes the decision or resolution whatever the term might use. A recommendation that was defeated and replaced with an alternate amendment motion is now resurfaced without applying section 34 of the repealed and received amendment motion. Councillor, can you sit down, please? Brian Stockwell 01:01:33.434
Councillor, asked for to advise got advice. That asking the same question in a different way, is not respectful of the chamber. Amelia Lorentson 01:01:47.500
Section 34 repealing or rescinding resolutions and why that section doesn't apply to this situation? Brian Stockwell 01:01:56.091
I'll answer the question because I am the chairman. As the CEO clearly stated in his advice, the recommendation from the committee is not a resolution of Council. Okay, so we have in front of us a motion. Is up on 9/11 the panel and I'll speak to it. So Councillors, I think it was very important to once again give Councillors the opportunity to respect the expert advice we've received, to respect the strategic direction that this Council has had for many years. 2020. Respect in 2022 we had a cycling and walking strategy that really set the current strategic direction. In 2020 we had the coastal pathway corridor study which identified this as a high priority corridor. We've had two liveability studies where we've asked a large number of people in our community what their priorities were and priorities at the highest level of the world. We're walking, jogging and bike paths. Access and safety of walking, cycling and public transport. Now I appreciate that what is proposed is something different. And what we're dealing with is a small local area that is challenged by the change that is proposed. As Councillors is to listen to what their concerns are, to listen to how the experts in the field respond to those concerns, and to make a judgement that's in the best interest of the whole Shire. We had a notice of motion about this, whether division may or not be good. But regardless if you're representing division around Paris or the whole of the Shire, it's always been the fact that your decisions have to be in the broad community interest. Being popular as a Councillor is quite easy. Making the hard decisions that sometimes mean that the perceptions of the community and the concerns of the community in one area may be listened to but maybe perhaps don't carry the weight of the whole Shire. And in this case, there is clear strategic steps that have been taken that's suggests that what's in front of us is not only a outcome that is a high priority that's been there for six years, but it's also one where ratepayers' funds won't need to be used to address the current deficiencies in pavement, in stormwater, in pedestrian and cycling safety. Supporting this means you do support access along that street, not just for young, but for the old, and it is support access along that street, not just for young, part of a process that will help build the current momentum towards a more frequent use of active transport by our residents. By our visitors and by our neighbours. It is one that yes, you may need to show leadership may need to show leadership in this instance and understand that some people will be unhappy with the decision. But it is a decision that is supported by strategy, it's supported by overwhelming community feedback about what the priorities are, and it's supported by grant funds that means it that means it is cost effective and won't put burdens on future ratepayers. That's why I think it's important to start this debate again from where it ended. In terms of a secure process. Six-year to get here. Councillor Wilson. Nicola Wilson 01:06:24.186
I'm just going to say that I want to my offence at being told that being popular is easy. Brian Stockwell 01:06:34.509
Councillor you may sit down please. You talk to the motion or you move a point of order. Amelia Lorentson 01:06:43.618
Can I move a point of order on behalf of all of our Councillors? Thank you. And what's your point of order? Through the Chair is a completed board of a person. You haven't been haven't got a point of order? Sorry. So I came for reference to Local Government Act section 150D which says that we must talk with respect to one another and we have minimum standards around this table. Brian Stockwell 01:07:14.839
Thank you Councillor. As I said Wilson, if you want to move a point of order about offence and what I specifically said that offended I'm happy to receive it otherwise if you're talking to the motion please talk to the motion. Nicola Wilson 01:07:33.214
I will talk to the motion and say that an extensive community consultation process has occurred and valid concerns were raised by the community. We're being asked by Councillor Stockwell to ignore those and to show leadership in a way that I don't understand, given that we want I don't think she took mic. To listen to the community. Jessica Phillips 01:07:58.588
You took okay, I'm going to also just say that I also take offence to being told that the job is about being popular. It's because Brian Stockwell 01:08:24.639
Take I'm going to speak to the next gentleman. Councillor, I'm standing on the Chair so you need to sit down. Councillor, you've misrepresented me. And so it's like an apology. I did not say that the jobs or called any Council being popular. I said if to be sometimes if you to just want be popular, that sometimes you can't just be popular because you don't achieve anything. I didn't specify any Council and I didn't refer to anyone. I said in the process. So inferring that what I said is incorrect. Jessica Phillips 01:09:00.523
I'll speak to the against the motion and I'm going to say that I don't just respect recommendations. I respect the needs of this community. That's why we are here and that's the job that we were elected to do. Our responsibility is not just to rub a stamp. It is to listen to our residents, to the people who live here and the consequences of our decisions every day. Recommendations are incredibly important but they are one part of the broader picture. If every single time we came into this chamber we simply voted in line with recommendations then I would ask what is the point of our role as a Councillor? Why would the community even elect us if it is not to apply judgment or bring lived experience and represent their voice? Good governance requires more than process. Our job is to find balance, excellence to balance expert advice with community sentiment, to balance policy with practicality and to balance what is recommended with what is right. But more importantly, I'm going to respect this community and I will continue to make decisions with them at the centre thank of every vote that I cast. Brian Stockwell 01:10:11.894
Thank you. Councillor Lorentson? Amelia Lorentson 01:10:17.630
I'll move this. Okay. Tom Wegener 01:10:23.380
Regardless of what was happening today, I was going to give this speech. I'm very. I was in Paris a few years ago, and there's a very nice streetscape there, shared street pathways, bikes, zooming path, people, and the whole city moves so much nicer. Than London did, where I was a few weeks before, and other places, so I really, understood the streetscape, and I thought this is wonderful, I'd love Noosa to do this, so and then since then that we've had consultation after consultation with the community, and our number one and goal is traffic congestion. And management, and that has been asked of us over and again as our number one priority. We've had lots of consultations, and of course we have our adopted Walking and Cycling Strategy 2021. And the and goal of strategy is to make right riding and biking and walking so convenient and safe that it is preferred mode of transportation for the shire's residents and visitors. And that's what I saw in france and other places in my travels. The Peregian active streets stage one two and three are steps towards this goal towards answering the request of the larger community to please do something about congestion and traffic and here stage one has been funded by the southern South East Queensland liveability fund to the amount of eight hundred and eighty thousand dollars and on the website of the South East Queensland liveability fund it states the project comprises of 800 metres of wayfinding signage and 800 metres of cycle street to enhance the accessibility and connectivity for pedestrians and cyclists the project will provide a seamless extension of the Sunshine Coast pathway and I would love to see a seamless pathway along the entire Sunshine Coast that would just be fantastic the Federal active transport fund is also supported and that is supporting with one million five hundred and seventy thousand dollars and on the website it says the program has been created as a part of the Australian government's commitment under the national road safety strategy to improve road safety outcomes for people walking wheeling aim of and riding the program is to encourage and increase active transport through the upgrade of existing and construction of new bicycle and walking pathways across Australia so we have an alliance our local government the State government and the Federal government and I feel that to reject the active street is out of step with the vision of Australia we have an identity in being leaders and saying you know we're not afraid to try something that's going to be really good with long-term vision musa's specialty is long-term vision now of course I have listened to you the residents concerns definitely putting boats in and out of driveways the parking issues speed and I've listened very carefully and I don't believe they outweigh the benefits the rest of that Noosa will enjoy as a response as a result of one two or three of the stages because I live in Cooroy and I would love to ride my bike up there I would love to see all kids of Noosa all the young people saying yeah let's hop on our bike and safely go down Lorikeet Drive and into Peregian down to Coolum and have that safety aspect they don't have that now keep drive is in my opinion and I'm down there a lot is not safe. I think a safe streetscape is something that should be a given especially in our Noosa community where we are working so hard for an active street. This last week, I was actually at a party and a man was he was talking to me and he was so angry at the Gold Coast government local government and he said you know Tom I grew up in a beach house. I'm so sorry it's supposed to be on silent. It was okay, so I was talking to the guy at a party and he was like oh yeah you know local government blah blah blah and what happened he said well we had this house on the beach it was just right on the beach and we'd go out in the morning and we just felt all by ourselves and then the Council put a path in front of the beach in between his house and the beach and I said was that a public property yeah and I said dude that's public property your private property ends here and the public property starts there Brian Stockwell 01:15:18.763
So yeah I tend to agree you your story is perhaps going a bit too far away if you could draw the conclusion that you got from that conversation Tom Wegener 01:15:27.772
The conclusion is the active streetway is about public property use used best for the majority of the residents and the majority of the residents would love to have this active street riding pathway up and down the Coast it would be a wonderful thing to have for ourselves and the next generation and that's what it is the vast majority of the people would enjoy this and a few people are affected just like the folks that had each a beach house Brian Stockwell 01:15:57.116
Thank you Councillor Finzel or Lorentson, would you like to make a motion? Amelia Lorentson 01:16:14.015
What I do want to say, firstly, on red bull, they are two of the greatest champions, so it's not worse. Brian Stockwell 01:16:19.655
So point of order. This is the third time I've ruled against that as being part of the debate. I'm going to rule that you are conducted because you have not listened to the inappropriate meeting conduct and please desist and talk to the motion or, as I said. Amelia Lorentson 01:16:43.935
Thank you. Can I seek advice from the city? I'm back to the point where our times are not fully in interest and that's why I said again, can I seek advice from the city, please? Larry Sengstock 01:16:58.992
Can I ask a question? Can you say what was not properly addressed? Did the Chair. I understand that the Chair addressed each of those points in a way that was okay. Amelia Lorentson 01:17:10.194
He did not address them in an order through the seat. Hopefully that answers your question. Brian Stockwell 01:17:19.855
Give a solution, sorry, okay, so, I didn't accept your point of order as being one that is raised in that you suggested there was a motivation behind what I said that wasn't accurate. I've and that you argued that what was it your point of order was saying that councils should be able to raise matters other than what's under debate and not through a point of order I thought I made it clear that I didn't accept it but I will do that now is that a point of order is in accordance with the Standing Orders the Council Councillor was open at the time I said something or to raise a specific issue as I said what I said is it easy what appears to be what's taking offence is when I said it is easy to be a popular be as a Councillor sometimes you have to make hard decisions towards that effect I didn't make any accusation of any individual Councillor I wasn't offensive or made offensive remarks directed at any individual and therefore I did respond to both these Councillors giving that advice you then sought to do it but I will withdraw the finding of inappropriate meeting contact because you might be right I might not have clearly articulated my response in gord. Amelia Lorentson 01:18:35.575
To your point of order. Thank you, Francis, Dr. and my, like I said, I've always spoken about that. A lot about my position on the curriculum in Jacob street. What I'm going to say just briefly around this table is that I think we're giving in the fundamentals. Of what's in this community. And what's been in dispute about this Peregian Beach active street study is whether the specific design an active street project whether this specific design on these residential streets has been properly assessed has properly assessed, has been properly consulted on and has been properly justified. I'd like to reference again reading the report a couple of weeks ago now. Council received correspondence and to, and some of us could be used. Summarised the views of over ninety-four people that were surveyed locally around the area. Sixty-two of those residents were from south Virginia, more than thirty from Virginia springs. Of those from recollection only two supported the project. Thank you very much. Overwhelming signal that something has gone wrong in how this has been developed and presented. Again, we're I'm going to just quickly repeat the you might be able to follow of prominent matches of issues from cycling and city organisations. And again, those organisations have a legitimate voice. But again, they don't live in the streets. The 94 people surveyed lived in the streets. Those 94 people plus the whole precinct, the other ones that are going to be affected by the daily reality of potentially reduced. Smoking can strike me probably. Constrained roadways or a path design that raises genuine safety concerns to the children. And also conflict between users. I had an email sent to me recently by a resident. In south michigan who referenced our risk appetite segment, which clearly says we have zero tolerance for. Anything that puts safety in front of our residents. There ever since. The end we've got a design plan that potentially puts at risk the safety of children that can serve. Women in management and pedestrian. So, in summary, to me the recent proceeding with the recommendation in front of us, it's not just a design risk, it's also a public trust risk. This community has watched a consultation process that started with less than 24 hours notice for the first information session. There have been 10 meetings. We attended during work hours and raised concerns that the NLPM did not report it or escalate it. We have asked for survey data and not received it. Proceeding now on this report sends a message to our no the lesson here is not cycling infrastructure is wrong. It's that a consultation that is done poorly costs more than a consultation done properly in community trust in time and ultimately in outcomes. So we have an opportunity to get excited by supporting the alternative motion and not by supporting the recommendation which in my opinion actually, which disregards the voices of the community that we are needed to live for. Karen Finzel 01:22:37.872
Through the Chair, question to the CEO. I didn't item number B of the last meeting was to direct the CEO to engage with South East Queensland liveability fund and active transport fund to determine whether available grant funding can in fact be reallocated to deliver practical infrastructure improvements and encourage you to reach out for alternatives including but not limited to pedestrian footpath connections, stormwater, infrastructure, stormwater park and stream planning. Consistent with the priorities. Expressed by community through the end of the crisis, Through the Chair and Mr CEO can you please advise us if any or what information you have received back with regard to that matter. Much. Larry Sengstock 01:23:33.404
Thank you could correct me if I'm wrong Director but my understanding is that we haven't had any response at this point in time and as we said at the General Committee that we can't control that. We can ask questions but in terms of their response we are in their data we're the SMS category. Currently we haven't got a response. Shaun Walsh 01:23:55.892
I would probably further support that as well. We have made informal communication with the funding communications area and General Committee recommendations. But we're also aware that we need to wait for the resolution of Council to formally act. You know, so which is the resolution that will occur at this meeting. So we have the approach. Faithfully made initial approaches to them. They were affirmed in terms by of us making the formal report. Thank request, we have to wait for the resolution. Brian Stockwell 01:24:23.367
Very much. While you're there, Director, in some of the information that was provided prior to the committee, there was a suggestion that the existing, what we did on the existing arrangements that the active transport fund would need to see construction completed by October 26. Is that the case as it seems now? Shaun Walsh 01:24:44.364
The information presented in the addendums to the report showed that there was an extensive extension to that time period which did allow us to achieve the works. Thank you. Karen Finzel 01:24:58.455
Thank you very much. Another question please to the Chair, to Mr CEO. Is there opportunity at all to proceed with funding to address the communities community's expectations. That just the basic infrastructure be upgraded and replaced? Is there opportunity that we could proceed forward with that and then address other issues around the gaps that I see around the demands of education to the broader community about our higher order to meet our strategies in our Corporate Plan with regards to a whole Shire active street idea to support it. Wiggum walked to the table in terms of the higher goals of nationally around you know dealing with congestion and activating for health and wellbeing these streets. Larry Sengstock 01:25:59.631
So I think it falls on to what the Director just said Shaun, is that we have he said, to wait them." To wait for the funding bodies to come out to us in terms of whether we can utilise that money for something other than what we've prescribed at this point in time. Yes the new recommendation or that was made in the General Committee looked to see if we could use it to do guttering and upgrade of the road and footpaths. We don't have an answer on that at this point in time. If we aren't able to utilise the funding for that then that would come out of, that would be a project that would then come back into us as an organisation. To fund out of our own budgets. But that's not been included in our current budget for 26, 27 years. So that would have to be something that would be looked at as a future. You could use it on our list. As we all know there's a long list of projects that we'd like to undertake. You could use it on our list but it's not been scheduled because it's been focused through this funding. Amelia Lorentson 01:27:10.998
And of course, we just question to the CEO. If this recommendation forms, is there an automatic or an alternate motion that is supported and generally these are held in a tariff too or is there another alternate motion that you need? Larry Sengstock 01:27:29.245
My understanding is that if this one's not held then the recommendation from the General Committee needs to be put to the district for decision, for final resolution as it would normally be. Brian Stockwell 01:27:43.665
Any or other any other alternative motions. Someone wants to make. You. Councillor Finzel. Any more questions or talk to the motion? Karen Finzel 01:28:01.346
Well, the question, I guess, to staff or CEO, I guess it's probably going to have to be on notice, but off the top of everyone's head, in terms of that strategy. Street and prioritisation when where is that sitting on the current register in thank you. Terms of. Shaun Walsh 01:28:28.109
Probably to give it a bit of context we have streets with our kerb and channelling and footpaths across the whole of the Shire. So at the moment our new footpath budget across the whole of the Shire over the previous years is only about $1.4 million. So while I'm coming. It's not extensive to address all of the requests for new footpaths and also kerb and channelling across the Shire. And Noosa Council decades has been very advantageous actually taking advantage of grant funding to actually meet rural clients. So getting back to that core question is that we can tap into funding but it would be quite a significant amount increase to actually achieve it in this location and it would need to be balanced against other priorities. Yeah so there are other, in isolation, there are other footpaths in the Shire that are actually high priority in this location. The advantage of this one is it met funding criteria of external agencies. Jessica Phillips 01:29:38.599
Just a quick question. Please, it won't put you if you don't have it, thank you. Probably to the CEO. Has there been a body of work done previously when we talk about grants pushing a. I've will get to a question, I'm just going to work out how to. When a grant funds a project that takes it from 90 something on the list to now prioritisation, but in the Capital Works Executive I see that when we do capex there's operational no. costings included. How does this. How does this change the prioritisation for community? So one thing that I'm noticing is something will bump up on the prioritisation because of a grant and then we have to fund it through OPEX which continues to expand our operational. Budget. Brian Stockwell 01:30:45.100
And then we don't have. Canter, please focus on active street. Jessica Phillips 01:30:47.912
I know. But it probably will be a question to the Acting Director Corporate Services, I think, in the end. My question. Falls to the CEO. Does it make sense while I'm talking? Larry Sengstock 01:31:01.920
Yeah. So, as Sean said, we have a long list of projects that we've scoped out to winderbury, some more than others. And. Is. They're there to take advantage of funding, either that, be it through our own budgets or through grant funding, or both. Had-- so, when a grant comes along, an opportunity comes along, we then look at that list and which ones meet that criteria and then if it's possible to bring it up the list because it meets a certain criteria, then we bring it to Council. And that's what's happened with this. We brought it to Council and we all decided that was a project that met the criteria and was something that we could fund and move forward with because it actively met the of the funding. Body was looking for. In terms of IBEX, currently we've got IBEX on that street, on all of our streets. We're continually upgrading, maintaining, we're doing work on them all, fixing things. Or phones. This would, what this does is actually brings in a new piece, which then technically pushes IBEX budget out further, which we care for. We do that through our asset management plan, so when it's required to be upgraded or maintained or have new work done to it, that then fits into our asset management plan in the future. So what it actually does is by renewing it, producing new, then it actually pushes our OPEX budget out, which is technically a good thing, because we've now got a new piece that shouldn't need work on it for a number of years, and we can build that future work into our future budget. So that's the principle and the model that we run with, and how we do it. And that's how this one got a higher rating in the priority, because we met some of the criteria, we brought it back, we had this opportunity, this is one we thought was a reasonable opportunity for us to take, and then we just agreed by Council to go forward with that project. Thank you. Come on. Amelia Lorentson 01:33:08.210
Just a question, so we now have a report which formally tables some significant safety terms in of being if an active street project goes ahead, there's the potential you've got pedestrians coming in the middle of the road with fast-moving cars, coming from both sides. The report focuses on-- a lot on reputation. And financial risk, not so much on safety risk. My question to the CEO, now that it's been tabled, and given that our risk antics statement is very clear that there's zero tolerance for what is safety, regardless of what happens in terms of the funding, will these unsafe risks, and I'm talking, you know, in south Virginia, that are now being identified and tabled as high safety concerns, will they be.pushed up in terms of priority given the safety concerns which are now being tabled? Larry Sengstock 01:34:18.673
I can't give you a direct answer to that, Councillor, because we have any community, any Shire, not just Noosa, but there's areas that have got similar risks or issues and we deal with them as best we can and that's what we do. Certainly this has been identified. This would now potentially go back into the mix and when we do assess all of our projects and future part of it, but it's not, I can't say that it's more, it's a higher safety risk than some of our other streets and again you talk to residents and they all claim different things and we have to measure them against each other and I can't say where it would fall against other priorities within Noosa, within the Shire. Amelia Lorentson 01:35:11.578
Just in terms of discharging our obligations and of councils around the table, I'd just like to table that, I think that parts of self-regulation high risk, safety concerns, and you might not be able to manage them. Thank you. Brian Stockwell 01:35:30.340
So, Councillor Finzel, I believe you're the only one that hasn't talked to the motion, would you like to do so? Karen Finzel 01:35:36.854
I'm not really sure. This is really challenging, I think. You know, again, I think sometimes we're at a point in history. Our aspirations and our systems are not yet aligned. I think, for me, the big issue here is when you look at the gap in. Education awareness across the whole of the Shire around those safety and active transport benefits, that challenge. Is a big gap in this Unidentified Speaker 01:36:17.405
Decision-making model. I we'll leave. Think all the issues have been raised. I mean, I think in terms of being a Councillor and leadership, our role is to ensure, and it's in our Corporate Plan, which is what I bring to every meeting, and reliable. Karen Finzel 01:36:39.902
You know, our objectives, 5.6, under excellence, states increased opportunities for the meaningful collaboration and community engagement, which is highly representative of our community, especially our youth. So I think we've got a bit of work to do in terms of Council around we actually, when we look at the future, when we talk about the follower Shire, when we look at high strategic thinking and decision making, I think we've still got a lot of work think we have to do. I think this highlights that for us today, how can we actually head towards excellence because clearly there are some gaps and we need to work towards excellence and engender trust in our community. So I think there's a few issues. As this stands today, I've still got a few matters especially the one raised that until there's a resolution on this apparently we can't hear back from the liveability funding. Is that correct Mr senior? Can you please clarify that? Larry Sengstock 01:37:54.720
No, as Shaun said we've informally done that but to informally do it we need a resolution. We're waiting on it, so we've done it informally, it. But it's part of the process. Unidentified Speaker 01:38:06.281
Okay, thank you for the clarification. Amelia Lorentson 01:38:11.455
So in terms of the informal communications made, staked in terms of funding. Has Council got any indication that part of the funding could be reallocated to genuine infrastructure projects, not exclusively just um, south Virginia, you know, but across communities, that we're not going to lose the funding? Larry Sengstock 01:38:38.014
Again, no, have a we haven't had any, we haven't asked, we haven't got any response put it that way. All we've done is said this is a position that we're currently in. Terms of the recommendations coming to where we're in, this is a position just highlighting to them and, you know, Yeah, basically getting them ready. Brian Stockwell 01:38:57.998
Okay. I'll close the debate. So there has been good discussion around safety. So, we refer back to the original report. It tells us that for Peregian beach south, segment six of the corridor, four route options were looked at. Multi-criteria analysis looked at safety, comfort, directness and coherence, connectivity, strategic alignment, and feasibility. Lorikeet Drive scored the highest or equal to the highest across all criteria and ranked the highest in both unweighted and weighted scoring. Key differentiators in scoring between route A, David Low Way, and route B, Laura keat shearwater, were connectivity, strategic, alignment, and feasibility. Okay. Several design treatments were also explored, including cycle street, active street, advisory bicycle lanes, and shared pathways. These treatment types were scored against the following criteria: safety, connectivity, feasibility, and impact. The active street concept supported by TMR performed best for safety and feasibility. So if we went with the recommendation from the committee are locking ourselves into a sub suburb-optimal use of funds whether it's state or councils because the analysis has already beaten that the design put before us is supported performed based for safety and feasibility then we looked at the other questions around prioritisation and this is where it without a detailed understanding of the different ways this particular path has been prioritised it report can be murky so we talks about the cycling and walking strategy of this specific link being quite low but if you link it through to the shops it goes up in ranking quite significantly and that was something when we did the cycling and walking strategy was really heavily debated about what how we showed the priorities but because as the Director told us in answer to one of the questions only have budgets for small sections it would determine that it's best to keep it at that small section from memory when we did the first prioritisation the highest priority link was between the Noosaville state school and St Teresa's and the district sports complex that whole link I think came up with one. Thing I or two okay but if you look at the individual segments that need to be done in there in the Walking and Cycling Strategy they'll be much lower. So we go back to say well how is best it this priority Councillor Wegener and as Wegener argued convincingly, it might be. The priority is based on the fact that it's part of the long-term coastal pathway corridor that has looked at connecting caloundra Tewantin shops okay and we've been progressively doing that both along the beaches both coming from Hastings along the river and currently working on others so it's not a matter of reprioritizing it's about choosing what's of the high priority areas are best to be achieved with limited impact on the rate payer and in this case the bucket of funding identified that this section for cycle street was for the two buckets funding was most beneficial so I'm not going to discount the fact that yes, there was a lot of concerns raised by people in the immediate locality and we talked this loss of car parking yes but if we're going to do anything for safety we'll probably lose car parking because at the moment and when it's busy you go to a one lane road with two lanes of parking that are uncontrolled. I then because there is competing objectives now people want to keep it the way it's been ever since south Peregian came across the Noosa Shire many years ago that sort of feel pretty laid back pretty coastal or whether you want to start preparing for the future and for me if I owned a house on that street and I looked at the stormwater systems and I looked at the would be over the moon to have a Council wanting to do what is proposed here I'd be over the moon because I do like riding to the shops or walking to the shops I'd be over the moon because I know it would increase my property value significantly property value significantly I'd be over the moon because I know it's starting to create an atmosphere where residential streets are for the residents not cars for zooming up to go get and go kids get catch a surf okay it's for the residents and people we want to visit in a low speed high amenity area and the design I am confident if it went ahead would be one that in two years time that the local residents will be thankful for I put the motion faith those in favour that's Councillor Wegener and Councillor Stockwell. Those against? Councillor Wilson, Finzel, Lorentson and Phillips. The motion is lost. Frank Wilkie 01:44:35.318
Councillor Lorentson. Amelia Lorentson 01:44:36.319
I would like to move the alternate motion that was supported at the General Committee. Brian Stockwell 01:44:42.306
And do we have a seconder for that motion? Councillor Phillips. You have the floor Councillor Lorentson. Amelia Lorentson 01:44:48.195
I think everything's been said I just present this as the right way forward. Brian Stockwell 01:44:59.209
Anyone else wish to talk to the motion? I you Councillor Finzel. Can I ask a question? You may. Karen Finzel 01:45:05.666
Could we somehow be add an be able to add an extra bit into this that talks about like looking at broad community engagement through education around this matter? Relevant to is that relevant to this today? To be able to include that, support the development of education awareness around active streets in the whole of the community? To work. Where can we include the aspect around engagement, given it's been a big part of this Unidentified Speaker 01:45:37.848
Influence decision? You would be able to name it, if you were able to name it for me. Shaun Walsh 01:45:40.352
Yeah, can I just pay back to that? Unidentified Speaker 01:45:43.195
I'll just that's my question, is it relevant? No, sorry. Brian Stockwell 01:45:47.476
I'm sorry. I'm looking at the motion. The report is and there's only one action which is about the CEA to engage with South East Queensland to fund an active transport return with available grant funding and direct the CEA to report back on those issues. An amendment to do broader education would not be an amendment to the motion, it would be a different motion. So I understand your desire to have it looked at it wouldn't be an amendment of that motion. Amelia Lorentson 01:46:21.179
Thank you Mr Chair. Through the CEO could Councillor operationally. Finzel's request be addressed Shaun Walsh 01:46:38.661
Report and the sustainable transport meeting, which is all about encouraging active transport. There's actually a report coming to the July meeting about how we spend those funds which would include scope for education programs for active transport. So we'll offer further discussion with that at the next round of meetings. Brian Stockwell 01:46:56.516
Thank you. Happy to address you. Yes, thank you. Okay, would anyone else wish to talk? Councillor Lorentson would you wish to close? All those in favour? That's Councillor Wilson, Finzel, Lawrence and Phillips. And those against would remain at Wegener and Stockwell. And we can invite Councillor Wilkie back to Chair the meeting. The motion is passed. Thank you. Larry Sengstock 01:48:29.121
We'll continue on with the regular ranks. Thank you, Frank Wilkie 01:48:38.367
Councillor Stockwell, for chairing. We're now at item 11.2. Which is the 26-27 community grant program, community project and signature community event grant summary, 11.2.3.20, 26.2026-27 community project grants program projects, 11.2.4 26-27 community project grants program facility development, and we have a few.Councillor Wilson? I'm already up. Oh, sorry. I've got a conflict of interest, please declare. Brian Stockwell 01:49:18.062
And it's cords a rope in accordance with the relevant section of the act. I wish to declare a prescribed conflict of interest. Sorry, I didn't mean to cross this. Yeah, I got to I'm up for that. For item 11.24, for the community grants program, community project to be developed on this agenda, as I am the current president of Noosa Lions Football Club, who I recommend it for funding. As a result of my conflict, recommended I will now leave the meeting. Leave while the matter is considered and voted on. Frank Wilkie 01:49:44.098
Thank you, Councillor Stockwell. Councillor Wilson. Nicola Wilson 01:49:51.800
In accordance with Chapter 5B of the Local Government Act 2009, I, Councillor Nicola Wilson, inform the meeting that I have a prescribed conflict of interest in relation to item 11.2.4, 2026.7, community grants program, grants program, community project grants, facility development, as Noosa Arts Theatre has 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 interest, I'll now leave the meeting room while the matter is considered to end. Frank Wilkie 01:50:23.129
Thank you, Councillor Wilson. I also have a conflict of interest to declare. In accordance with Chapter 5B of castlefield I, Councillor Frank Wilkie, inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in the matter, community grants program, community project grants facility development, on this agenda in relation to the application for Noosa Arts Theatre. While I am no longer in a decision-making position on the Noosa Arts Theatre committee, I continue to volunteer my I time in productions at the theatre. Although I am making a declarable conflict of interest, I do not believe a reasonable person could have a perception of bias, because Noosa Arts Theatre is a not-for-profit group and I am participating in. An unpaid capacity and am not involved in any decision-making capacity. Therefore, I will choose to remain in the meeting room, but I will respect the decision of the meeting on whether I can remain and participate in the decision. Amelia Lorentson 01:51:33.290
I'm happy to move that Councillor Mayor Wilkie remains in the group and participates in the decision before us. I believe that his, if I could have a correct wording, probably easier than improvising, but I do believe he can remain impartial in making the decision. He's no longer sitting on the executive and his association the Noosa arts with the Noosa Arts Theatre, though involved is as a member, which, but I'll use the standing, standard wording, Vicki. Unidentified Speaker 01:52:10.989
Oh, there we go, okay. Okay, so, can- Council. We have the Director? Can Chair? Frank Wilkie 01:52:15.150
Yes. Oh, just, it's a small point of procedure. Thank you, Councillor Lorentson, but we do need to appoint a Chair before these motions can be accepted. Amelia Lorentson 01:52:26.210
Oh, sorry. Yeah. I'm happy to recommend Councillor Jess Phillips sits as Chair. Karen Finzel 01:52:33.150
Happy to second. Amelia Lorentson 01:52:34.230
Thank you. Unidentified Speaker 01:52:35.754
So, do I vote on that? No. Yeah. So, Jessica Phillips 01:52:43.321
Thank you, Councillor Lorentson. And we wanted to move that Mayor Wilkie stays in the room. Unidentified Speaker 01:52:51.668
Sorry, I should have stood on that. Well, there you go. Look at that. Amelia Lorentson 01:53:21.407
How could you leave? I'm happy to move that Council note for declarable conflict of interest by Councillor Wilkie and determine that in accordance with section 150 here, so the Local Government Act 2009, and having considered the council's conflict of interest as described, it is decided that Councillor Wilkie may participate and vote on this matter relating to the 2026/2027 community projects grant program facility development. Jessica Phillips 01:53:46.240
Do we have a seconder? Happy to second the vote. Thank you Councillor Finzel, all those in favour? And that's carried. Mayor Wilkie, you can stay and take your position as Chair, I believe. Frank Wilkie 01:53:58.943
Thank you, Councillor Phillips. Very well done. Now, can we have a mover and a seconder for the committee recommendations, please? Karen Finzel 01:54:08.104
Happy to move. Frank Wilkie 01:54:09.026
Councillor Finzel, seconded by Councillor Wegener. All in favour? That is carried unanimously. And can we have Councillors Wilson and Stockwell back in the meeting room, please? Thank you. 11.2.5, 20, 26, 27, Community project grants program equipment. 11.2.6, community progress grant program events. 11.2.7, community grants program three year signature community event grants. 11.2.8, legacy plot reservation management policy. 11.2.9, support for all access and inclusion program. 11.2.10, was referred to the Ordinary Meeting for a further report and we will deal with item 12.3 on the agenda. Which was Fees and Charges. 11.2.11, Noosa Botanic Gardens master plan. 11.2.12, further report, Tourism Noosa funding and performance deed. 11 master plan. 11.2.13, Noosa biosecurity plan. 11.2.14 was referred to today's Ordinary Meeting for two further reports, which we will deal with at item 12.1 and 12.2 on this agenda, which is environment and climate an and change and environment project grants, round 21, climate change response grants, round 6, 11.2.15, planning applications decided by delegated authority, April 2026, and 11.2.16, planning applications decided by public release, proposed land rationalisation, Lanyana Way lot 2 on RP. Authority, and Noosa Drive lot on RP884396.11.1.7 is the General Committee recommendations on thank you, Ben. Could you give us a summary of the report, please? Ben Derrick 01:56:53.603
Thank you, Mayor and good morning, Councillors. The environment project is funded by the and supports the implementation of the Noosa Environment Strategy, as well as council's other key environment strategies and plans. The environment project program, the environment project grant program. Is designed to enable collaboration with the community in initiatives that work towards outcome and targets identified in the Noosa Environment Strategy. All initiatives funded by the environment grants program must have tangible and measurable outcomes and the total budget for financial year 26-27 is $35,000. This year we received nine applications for a request total totalling $162,282. Accordance in with the environment grant's grants guidance, guidelines, each application was assessed by a panel of three officers against a set of criteria that are detailed in our policy. Applications were open from the 9th of February from 2026 until the 23rd of March 2026 and promotion of the grant guidelines include social media advertising, specific emails to not-for-profit community groups that have been involved in the grant program previously, direct conversations with NRM groups. And details published on our website. The grant required the applicant to engage with a relevant Council officer prior to submitting the application which gave us with clarity and sight on the development of grant applications as they were being developed. This round, following discussions from Council meetings last year, this round introduced more robust governance enhancements to improve defensibility, objectivity and transparency evaluation process to ensure of process. The integrity of the program, the assessment methodology was executed in four phases, the first being probity and conflict of interest screening, the second one being an expert technical review by an internal member of our staff, the third one was a cross-disciplinary panel evaluation undertaken by the same panel members for all grant applications in this program, and the fourth one was independent scoring and executive moderation by our Director. The recommendations for the environment project grants for this year is to fully fund two applications totalling $24,129 and partially fund one application totalling $10,800. Information on the grant applications is attached to the report. Frank Wilkie 01:59:33.095
Thank you. Any questions for Ben? Some care to move the recommendation? Brian Stockwell 01:59:39.015
Happy to move. Frank Wilkie 01:59:39.778
Councillor Stockwell, can we have a seconder please? I'm happy to second. Councillor Stockwell, do you wish to talk to the motion? Brian Stockwell 01:59:55.961
It's really good. Sometimes we don't get many applications for these small grants and this time we're well and truly, you know, nearly five times the amount of funds available, four or five times, that's been issued. We do have the larger grants that come up less frequently. But what we've got here is three really good local projects and while we would love to have more money it's also important that we maintain the Environment Levy so that the long-term modelling does allow us to do big projects and also allows us to keep a kitty to a acquire land for our environment reserve network so the Teewah turtle trackers funding it's a great local initiative of a species that are of significance and. It's in an area where we get a lot of exposure from both our residents who. Like to go fishing and surfing up that way and also from a lot of visitors the. Wildlife news are obviously that plays a great role the this at in the river and this case looking reducing the potential threats to birds like the pelican no doubt and yes the. Pinbarren project there's lots to be done in pinbarren and. Providing any funds to address the issues there is a good initiative. Frank Wilkie 02:01:11.774
Thank you Councillor Stockwell. I think it has to stop well. Everybody does anybody else wish to speak? Councillor Stockwell are you happy with everything you said? I'll put it as a vote. Fact, a vote, that's unanimous you Pam thank you, Ben. All right. We now move to 12.2, which is a further report of climate change response grants. Referred from the General Committee dated 9th of June. Councillor Stockwell, I believe you have a I to declare. Brian Stockwell 02:01:47.373
I'll start. Under the normal section of the act, I have a prescribed conflict of interest. In regard to, Matt, item 12.3, environment and climate change response grants, environment project grant, round 21, climate change response grants, round 6. Ooh, is that the right oh, descriptor? Or does that to heaven? Refer to how it was referred to in the general? Yeah, so it'll be just, sorry, it'll be in regard to item 12.2 of the Ordinary Meeting agenda yeah and as I am the current president of Noosa Lions Football Club who I'm aware submitted a grant application for a climate response grant. Change response grant although I take out that is this the title of the one? Out the I declare a conflict of interest take out everything that follows that. I just want to say I declare. Right then second last line. Oh okay. Although I take out although. Okay. Hang on. If I get actually take out that whole sentence and say I will now leave the meeting room while the matter is considered as I have done. Unidentified Speaker 02:03:14.763
Okay yeah. Isn't it prescribed? Didn't we say it was prescribed? Brian Stockwell 02:03:21.232
Yeah that's what I said at the top too didn't I? Oh yeah I tried to do it as declared and changed if you remember. Unidentified Speaker 02:03:26.346
Right okay. So a long night, even late. You want to leave? Brian Stockwell 02:03:32.777
Yeah and if you change on the first line change the declarable to describe. Unidentified Speaker 02:03:37.353
Sorry this was just going I'm over all there. It's okay. Brian Stockwell 02:04:00.180
Yeah, you're taking it in the hand, though. Frank Wilkie 02:04:05.150
Thank you Councillor Stockwell. Thank you. Okay, we have Cheyenne barman here for this report. Welcome Cheyenne. Amelia Lorentson 02:04:24.743
Through Cheyenne 02:04:30.466
Chair, thank you for the opportunity. Noosa Council's climate change response grants aim to advance the implementation of the climate change response plan, the coastal hazards adaptation plan, and the regional climate action Roadmap, as well as the objectives priorities in the Corporate Plan related to climate change response. Subject to budget outcomes, the current total financial year 26-27 budget for the response grants is $50,000. The climate change response grants are funded by general rates and this is the sixth round of annual grant funding to date. Nine applications were received for the current round for funding requests totalling $145,753.06 and a total combined project value of $269,000 two hundred and sixty nine thousand fifty four dollars and six cents. These figures illustrate the strong desire for community support for as well as the willingness to co-invest in measures that reduce emissions which cause climate change and adapt to growing climate change impacts by building resilience. It is noted that the calibre of in of grants received this round was strong and represented actions across emissions reduction and climate change adaptation. The projects all reflected well against the themes of the climate change response plan. Applications were open from 9th of February 2026 until 23rd of March 2026. Applications were then evaluated internally through a more robust governance process this year to improve the sensibility, objectivity, and transparency of the evaluation process as mentioned by of manager of environment services. Ben Derrick. Four projects have been recommended for funding based on a thorough assessment against the evaluation criteria, community benefit, and Council priorities. The funding requests across the four projects totals forty eight thousand eight hundred and sixty nine dollars and six cents. Staff have also identified a number of minor conditions that would be required for each successful applicant to implement during project delivery. Which would be included in the in notice. Of successful grant outcome. Further information regarding the applications and individual funding recommended are provided in attachment one. Council staff plan to reach out individually to the successful applicants. Let them know should they be approved by Council as well as the five unsuccessful applicants in this program and work with them on their projects to improve the identified gaps in their applications and see how they can be supported through existing programs and opportunities to meet the need that has been articulated. Overall, most applications worked highly against the relevant grant criteria, and we are incredibly grateful for the time invested by all applicants and community groups to apply for the climate change response grant. Thank you. Any questions for Cheyenne? Jessica Phillips 02:07:16.676
I do have a question, please. Cheyenne, thank you. Just in relation to climate change response grants being funded by general rates, can you talk me through how that sort of came about? I would have thought and I think the community would maybe think that it came from Environment Levy. So could you just talk me through how it comes out of general rates? Cheyenne 02:07:37.113
Yes thanks for the question Councillor I wasn't here when that decision was made that predated my time but it comes out of the operational budget in relation to our sustainability bucket which is an operation budget that is separate to the Environment Levy the environment grants come through the Environment Levy and it was a decision of Council at the time as I understand to allow that. Come out of operational budget. Frank Wilkie 02:08:08.078
Thank you. Okay, question, Councillor Lorentson. Amelia Lorentson 02:08:12.338
Probably just a follow-up and just I'm going to reference a public question that we heard earlier. Today. Terms of measurable outcomes, targets and key performance indicators. So I think I raised this question at general meetings in terms of outcomes, I think I raised this looking at all our grants, not specifically this one, but whether we can report the outcomes that we've found in terms of the grants that we support. I understand that information already exists within Council, but it's not publicly shared, so question or noting, can we expect some public sharing of that information in terms of what outcomes were committed and what outcomes were delivered, particularly when the projects are cumulative over multi thank you for the question. Years? Cheyenne 02:09:08.769
Thank you for the question, Councillor. I agree that is very important. Thank you. And we can definitely do that. We can definitely look back and make sure that outcomes from previous grants and the current ones that have KPIs and outcomes against them can be reported and shared with communities. They understand the impact value that these projects have. Frank Wilkie 02:09:25.888
For the benefit of those who are interested, I'm going to for the benefit of those who may be listening, could you talk us through and give us a summary of each of the projects that were successful? Cheyenne 02:09:34.928
Yes, sure, no problem. So, thank you. For the question there. So the first recommended project for funding is from the Noosa Biosphere Reserve Foundation and the project is called future tide: 2027 Noosa youth climate summit. So NBRF, in partnership with the Noosa Environmental Education Hub, plans to host the free youth-led future tide Noosa youth climate summit at the J theatre on 27th of May. J.D. Dirk 2027. The event plans to empower young people to take practical climate action through keynote presentations led by youth, student-led sessions, hands-on workshops, and a sustainable careers expo. It will also embed First Nations knowledge sharing to highlight cultural stewardship and deepen connections to country. The second project recommended for funding is by Zero Emissions Noosa, inc. Called swap the drive, supporting modal shift from cars to bikes. This project would build on the Noosa e-bike library and go car free Noosa campaign. It is called swap the drive, and the initiative will promote cycling as a healthy, low emissions alternative for a short, alternative-level trips. The program will provide 120 free two-week e-bike loans, that's the target, deliver presentations and demonstrations on safe, legal, and practical cycling, and run a social media campaign encouraging everyday bike use. Activities would intensify around world car free day to boost awareness and participation. The third project recommended for grant funding is by urban wildlife gardens, which is a program by Noosa Integrated Catchment Association, and the project is titled get climate ready with Noosa native plants. This project would update the Noosa native plants website include climate resilience information, helping residents choose native species suited to future conditions and support urban greening. Working with Council and NRM partners, the project would assess around 350 priority species using established climate adaptation tools, updated taxonomy and cultivation information, develop ecosystem-specific garden templates, and deliver workshops and outreach to encourage uptake. The result will give the community clear, accessible guidance thank you. To create biodiversity diverse water-efficient climate-resilient gardens that support local wildlife and neighbourhood pooling. The final project recommended for the for funding is solar on low-income homes by Zero Emissions Noosa Incorporated. This project proposes to install solar on 10 low-income Noosa homes, building on council's 24-25 pilot that delivered systems to 10 households. ZEN Inc.. Will replicate a proven crowdfunding model to raise $25,000 from the community with the grant contribution the remaining $10,000 of a $35,000 total project cost. Donations would be sought from supporters in the wider community and promoted with permission through media to boost participation supported by zero emissions noosa's DGR status. The project provides an affordable community-backed pathway expand solar access for vulnerable households. So as you can see a diverse range across transport, renewable energy, lowering the cost of electricity for some of the most vulnerable in the community as well as climate adaptation with regard to building a resilient community. Gardens and residences brazilians. With resilient biodiversity. Frank Wilkie 02:13:09.971
Thank you, Shire. Any further questions? Someone care to move the recommendation? Councillor Wegener, do you have a seconder? I'll second Wegener. Councillor Wegener, him? Do you wish to speak to it? Tom Wegener 02:13:27.040
I would just say I'm just so proud of these projects. I'm so happy that Noosa Council amplifies the incredibly good work of these community groups that are full of volunteers, volunteering their time to help us all through enhancement of Noosa Shire. I'm especially looking forward to the zen expo this weekend where I'm going to be learning about house batteries because I'm going to get my electricity bill going up and I know that electricity is very cheap during the day and more expensive at night. So, Thank you. For supporting these wonderful community groups. Frank Wilkie 02:14:04.140
Thank you. Any other Councillors wish to speak? Councillor Wilson. Nicola Wilson 02:14:12.241
I'm a bit concerned with some of these recommendations and have asked that we revisit the assessment criteria for future rounds. My is always to is always to act in the public interest. And I'm not sure that ratepayers paying for solar for 10 property owners is in the broader public interest, regardless of income. I do support the work zone does and know how hard the volunteers work. I do think the e-bike library is a good idea. However, I'm not sure it should draw on Council grants to fund its ongoing operations. This is a long-term project and was set up with state government funding to acquire the bikes and other equipment. At that time. Zhen ZEN should have had a plan to fund its ongoing operational expenses and I don't think that should be done by entering a competitive grant process each year. Council already funds ZEN's operating budget and I believe this should be covered as an ongoing BAU expense. If we fund this year does that mean that we're now expected to fund it every year across the life of the project? If this is the expectation it should have been agreed with Council as part of the project plan. It seems poor process to start a capital project and not have an ongoing plan to fund its operations. Well I like the idea of the bike library a lot. There is no evidence that the bike loans have reduced or replaced car usage, that they have led to significant purchases of e-bikes, based on participant feedback it's less than 30% went on to actually buy an e-bike, and a two-week loan has minimal impact on emissions. If the loans had a servicing charge of $50 per week or $100 per fortnight loan, this project could be self-funded. If people are really in the market, to spend thousands of dollars on an e-bike, I think they would welcome the chance to try before you buy at a cost of $100. It does not need to be free. If they can't spend that $100, then they're really not in the market to buy an e-bike. If they can afford an e-bike, I don't see why ratepayers should pay for the loan. Frank Wilkie 02:16:20.202
Thank you, Councillor Wilson. Any Councillors wish to speak to the motion? Amelia Lorentson 02:16:24.108
Oh, sure. Councillor Wilson. Can I move an amendment? Of course. Thank you. I'd just like to move an amendment that the motion be amended to exclude SEMA from the list of approved recipients under the climate change response grant. And it's. Sorry, remove? Zero Emissions Noosa. Ignitions okay, OK, so you. From the list of approved recipients under the climate change response grants. Dr. Happy to second? Unidentified Speaker 02:16:59.311
It's a C, is it? Remain. Remove. Room A. Amelia Lorentson 02:17:07.488
Zero emissions. Noosa. From the list of approved recipients under the climate change response grants. Room 6. Unidentified Speaker 02:17:20.598
Under the. Sorry. From the list of approved recipients under. The climate change response grants. Climate change. Thank you. Noosa. Frank Wilkie 02:18:04.830
Councillor Lorentson. Amelia Lorentson 02:18:08.265
I think we raised some of our concerns during a recent workshop and I think Councillor Wilson has articulated the concerns really well. So I'm not going to go over that. Probably all I want to sort of raise is that. Importance that any money spent is that kind of money. And that in terms of projects, I always look at it and I think we have a really great panel that assesses all the criteria. But I think a couple of the projects, in my opinion, to are okay. Me, I look at biggest impact and are we delivering value for great paid so we had, like I said, raised some concerns rather than repeating what's already been said. My issue is simply the projects needs to represent best value for money when compared to other projects. That have requested funding. Frank Wilkie 02:19:12.958
Anybody else wish to speak to the motion? I will, the amendment. Councillors, these applicants have applied in good faith under a policy and a process that has been widely advertised and clearly understood. They have been recommended for approval by an expert panel because they do meet the objectives of the policies of which they are applied under. Concerns about value for money are valid, but if, as can see in the attachment, the Zero Emissions Noosa projects administered by volunteers, one of them returned is a $12,000 recommendation returning $37,000 worth of value, so a leverage of three times the investment. That's the swap drive, the modal shift. And the solar and low income homes, which provides electricity bill relief to our most vulnerable in our community, an opportunity that would never happen under any other circumstance. Is an investment of $10,000 to ease the burden of 10 low income households in our community for a total project value of $45,000. So I'm saying, Councillors, if you have and objections to that on value for money, we need to see that reflected in the leverage that has been reported to us. But also, change the policy. Don't do it at this point of the process. It's okay to not agree with how ratepayers' funds are being spent. In this case, less than $50,000, which is a relatively small amount, I think it's 0.03% of the total Council budget, very small amount for such an important subject. So, councils, let's respect the process. These applicants have entered to it in good faith and I think it's unfair to cruel their chances at this late part of the process. You're and if you have differences with the practice, as Councillor Wilson said, let's review the criteria. But this is not the place to do that. I take I the take point the about the criteria. We need to review how the money is spent. It's a very good point. But I think this is not the point for them. Castle Councillor Wilson. Nicola Wilson 02:22:15.302
Can I ask a question, please, for the Chair? Unidentified Speaker 02:22:17.827
Just on a statement that Mayor Wilkie has just made about the. Frank Wilkie 02:22:23.940
I just want Nicola Wilson 02:22:24.686
To want to clarify some figures, because I've been looking at this one for some time and asking lots of clarification questions, which have been. Questions, glad to talk to you. The value of $37,000 isn't actually the value generated by the project, it's the cost of the project. So it's about $11,000 that has been spent already with the State funding to purchase the bikes and equipment, then it's $12,000 or nearly $13,000 from Council potentially under this grant, and $13 $30,000 in volunteer time, please. Cheyenne 02:22:59.136
Yeah, thanks for the question, Councillor. So the way that we run the these grants through the guideline that we provide community is that we ask them to outline a budget and in that budget put how much your funding requests you're putting towards Council. And then also put in your co-contribution and can come from both cash contributions as well as in-kind which is common practice with many grants and so for this particular grant swap drive and so off the from zero emissions incorporated, they requested twelve thousand eight hundred ninety nine dollars and then the remainder of that thirty seven thousand total project value was from co-contribution which one was the value one was the of the bikes that they have existing and they were previous provided previously from a previous grant in 2025 I think it was and so and then the remainder is volunteer time so that is reflected as income and as a co-contribution captioning- Thank you. Jessica Phillips 02:24:05.062
Can I ask a question to cancel Lawrence and just around this one are you recommending just for this round or for like if there was a policy review I just need to clarify I just potentially, if you're looking at it just for this round and then if we review the policy then the criteria changes and then they potentially are included again. Does that make sense? Amelia Lorentson 02:24:37.285
Then we workshopped and raised all these issues during the workshop and my issues were at the time around with all the questions the table there were quite a few issues raised so the intent of that is that rather than. Refuse hope. The whole all the applications just the two that I had concern and it's nothing to do with zero emissions so it's just projects that were put forward that those ones be removed and not approved and in terms of criteria and assessment that gets done as well. Jessica Phillips 02:25:22.784
And for the follow-up question because I'd like to support this I just wondered if we do go for a policy would you be willing to look at just for this one that's in front of us to look at it for today and then that way I feel more comfortable if there's a review of the policy or the criteria that we can have that discussion in a workshop? Yes. Thank you. Councillor Wilson. Nicola Wilson 02:25:48.575
Would an alternate method be to split the original motion and vote on A, B, C, D? I would A, because I feel yeah, because I feel like this wording just is maybe not. Unidentified Speaker 02:26:02.911
Well this yeah Amelia Lorentson 02:26:09.940
Absolutely agree with that because, as I said, Sarah mission has done excellent work and contributed a lot and I don't want this misread as we're not backing the organisation, for example, in the expo. We've got a team of. Excellent people, volunteers, who do good work. My issue with them is Frank Wilkie 02:26:33.167
Just. So what's the course of action you propose in Council? I would like to Amelia Lorentson 02:26:37.794
Let this amendment fail and if we can reconsider. Councillors. As Councillor Wilson said, just putting the motion into four pieces so we can vote on each project rather than using the wording that's not correct. So I'm happy for this to today. Vote. Frank Wilkie 02:26:55.029
Okay, so unless anyone else wants to speak to the motion, we'll put it to the vote. Or can I just withdraw the motion? You can withdraw the motion with the consent of the meeting. Amelia Lorentson 02:27:06.906
Yeah, I'm happy, yes. Motion. Frank Wilkie 02:27:09.566
The amendment is withdrawn. Larry Sengstock 02:27:17.300
So, Ben, do I need to move? Sorry, yes, just so you can get the wording right and bring it back and we can. Unidentified Speaker 02:27:25.220
We can get the original motion. Is this for that? Frank Wilkie 02:27:28.500
Yeah, bring up to bring up the original motion. So you'd move in a minute an amendment which would strike out the ones you don't like? No. Unidentified Speaker 02:27:50.235
No? He's put the motion we can vote on each separately. This has been first and second. For the national museum of the united Unidentified Speaker 02:28:06.915
Oh, I see, because it's been seconded. Yes. Okay. Frank Wilkie 02:28:13.995
And we can this motion. Can amend this motion. Each time striking out one at a time, if you want. Unidentified Speaker 02:28:22.154
No, because all Councillors should still get to vote. Frank Wilkie 02:28:26.954
And we can still. You can still vote on whether each project stays in or not if you highlight each as a name. Language, or you highlight the ones you don't want. Councillor Finzel. Karen Finzel 02:28:39.950
Yeah, yeah, I just have a question Through the Chair. I'm. You know, I've sat on committees with robust panels around the process to arrive at, you know, how funding is allocated. It's adjudicated and it's a rigorous process. My concerns are around governance. It feels a bit to me like this is a bit like policy on the hot when we've got a process that has been undertaken in good faith. And then yeah, I'm just not sure I think, do we need to raise an amendment where if we want to have those or an additional where first off we look at policy change further down the track. But yeah, I've but got concerns around the of process that's already been rigorously undertaken. I understand the concerns around, you know, expenditure and making sure that we have good eyes over ratepayers' money and I'm sure we're in agreeance with that. I just have, I don't know, there's a question around the governance around, given it's already gone through. A process that is an endorsed process. It's followed the, you know, the process. From what I've read, it feels like it's followed that. What we're questioning is, I guess, maybe the amount of money. Can I just please have me out the some feedback? Through the CEO around those governance issues that, you know, and policies around how we do this process? Because I feel like that's a. Frank Wilkie 02:30:18.003
Correct. A concern. I can say it. Strategy and environment. Larry Sengstock 02:30:23.447
Director Rawlings? Kim Rawlings 02:30:24.131
Thank you, Councillor Finzel, Councillor Finzel, for acknowledging that because the report outlines the process that the grants go through and there's numerous steps in assessing those against you know guidelines and evaluation criteria and the panel and then moderation so thank you for acknowledging that is correct and that is what brings us to the point of recommendation you but ultimately you are the decision-maker so this is a legitimate part of the process. Jessica Phillips 02:31:04.524
Can I please test an amendment? Frank Wilkie 02:31:07.127
Test an amendment Jessica Phillips 02:31:07.130
Yes that art I haven't sent it to you sorry Council undertake a review of the climate change response grants policy and conduct public consultation on any proposed changes. I'll send it to you Vicky. Frank Wilkie 02:31:24.311
Will this be part 5? Vicky 02:31:25.501
Yes. So that's part 5 or C? Probably C I think. Unidentified Speaker 02:31:47.458
Have should it just come through e-mail then? Vicky 02:32:07.761
Okay. Sorry, I'm editing. Jessica Phillips 02:32:12.741
Sorry I've just added some extra words Vicky. Just to make it a little bit stronger and clearer. It's coming through now. I just sent another one. Okay. Yeah, it's just got more wording in it. Okay. Keeping in mind that the original motion has that Council at the top. Yeah, okay. So just take that bit out then. Yeah. So add on C that, so complete a review of the climate change response grants policy. And undertake public consultation on proposed amendments with the outcomes of this process to inform the criteria and guidelines for the next round of funding. Cheyenne 02:33:17.716
Before the next, for the next round of funding Through the Chair. Yes. Thank you. Just the point of clarification, it probably should say climate change response grants guideline, not policy. Frank Wilkie 02:33:32.219
Okay. Yeah. Thank you. No, that's right. Okay. Amelia Lorentson 02:33:41.058
Sorry, through, the Chair, Councillor Wilson. The wording as agreed, so complete a review of the climate change response grant guidelines, and undertake public with a professor in New South Wales. I think it's just to be just a little bit tweaked, maybe complete a review of the climate change response grants guidelines and any recommendations on changes. I think it should go back to my original one then and I shouldn't have added the wording because I think I had that, that's right. Jessica Phillips 02:34:20.244
Yeah, okay. So it'll be that Council undertakes a review of the climate change response guidelines and conduct public consultation on any proposed changes prior to round of grant funding being opened because that means the consultation happens. And supports the amendments or consultation happens to help the amendments. Help the amendments not the other way around. Amelia Lorentson 02:34:52.533
Consultation and conduct public consultation as part of the review think would Frank Wilkie 02:35:24.528
It be helpful if it said undertake a review of the climate chance change response grant guidelines involving public consultation any proposed changes prior to the next round of grant funding? I was trying to make it shorter. Jessica Phillips 02:35:37.332
Good morning. Unidentified Speaker 02:35:41.385
I'm happy to second. Frank Wilkie 02:35:47.125
Okay, Councillor Phillips you have the floor. Jessica Phillips 02:35:49.827
Okay, I'm just trying to listen to everyone around the table and then I think which I agree with you Councillor Finzel about the process. I think yep, so I think we can probably agree that you the guidelines and going through a process to review the guidelines is probably where we're at. By undertaking the review of the policy or the guidelines before the next round of funding would give us opportunity to assess what's working well and where improvements can be made whether the eligibility assessment criteria and how those how the outcomes are measured but equally important I've wanted to include the public consultation. These grants are funded the of benefit of our community and it's an entire it's entirely appropriate that the community has a say in how they are structured and delivered so consultation will help build trust ensure fairness and bring forward ideas that we may not have otherwise considered the amendment won't delay today's progress it will just strengthen for the next round so we're not having sort of policy decisions on Frank Wilkie 02:37:14.605
At the meeting Council, listen. Nicola Wilson 02:37:19.977
Yeah would this adequately address the assessment criteria, is the assessment criteria part of the guidelines or is that a separate Unidentified Speaker 02:37:30.154
Process, a separate document that we would need to add in here? Cheyenne 02:37:34.764
This would adequately address the assessment of the evaluation. Frank Wilkie 02:37:40.824
I'm going to support Councillor Phillips' proposed approach to this. Is the way to build trust in council's processes. This signals that we're going to undertake a review of the guidelines. That's the way to do it. So that when it comes to opening the next round of grant funding, again, the community can have clear expectations when they go to spend their valuable time and energy in applying, that it will be very clear and assessed fairly under the guidelines, whatever they will be. Where we were heading, I think, would not build trust, because where we were heading, if I've understood correctly, it would have been cutting groups off at the who entered into who entered into the process in good faith, trusting Council would follow through and assess the projects on the guidelines and criteria as widely, publicly advertised. If we want to change it, this is exactly the way to go. So, well done, Council. Phillips, I will be supporting the amendment. Councillor Finzel, Finzel, you had your hand up. Councillor Finzel Karen Finzel 02:38:50.791
Yes, I do. Thank you, Mr Chair. I have a couple of questions Through the Chair to the CEO of the staff. I see the of going. I do have some questions because in the past, we have had to go out repeatedly for community engagement, I understand that meaningful community engagement takes time and money. So my question around this is, firstly, for good governance and to reach the objectives of meaningful community engagement, how will that affect our current calendar, which does cause disruption, as we've seen in the past, when we have to leave a project and go back out. So that's my question. I would like to look at the timeframe, the current calendar time how that will be affected. And can it reach the objectives within the timeframe of the next round of meetings, and the cost to the community. Thank you. Kim Rawlings 02:39:51.825
Is there a short answer to that? Yes, absolutely. So we need to assess the implications of this on the calendar. It's currently not planned, but what we'll say is that we had already agreed to review the guidelines operationally and we provided that to Councillors, so that was already agreed operationally that we would be reviewing the guidelines. That working with the Council on the guidelines in accordance with the Corporate Plan and the climate change response plan. That review didn't anticipate public consultation but as I said we'd operationally already agreed to review and think it's timely. So now the inclusion of public consultation that would need to be assessed in terms of the engagement calendar and when that could be done. On the fly I would think the engagement calendar is pretty, it's not here. I know that we're pretty full for the rest of the year so this would probably lead into next year and we haven't found out. Thought about cost of this yet so there's still some unknowns in it but operationally we were already committed to continuous review of these and that will be happening. Frank Wilkie 02:41:06.710
Thank you. Councillor Finzel you've got your hand Karen Finzel 02:41:08.910
Up. Yeah just following on. Maybe a question to Councillor Phillips. Would you consider like raising this perhaps through another channel where we can have those matters like the costing and the calendar given that may cause disruption and not meet the 12 month time frame. Are you prepared to like yeah move this forward so we could get that information to inform our decision? So we've got some data to support that. Jessica Phillips 02:41:40.338
Unfortunately no I won't them? Because we've we're spending public funds each year and I don't believe that I'm willing to support continuation of public funds spent without public consultation because I can't in good faith without public consultation on this then I don't believe it would be. Karen Finzel 02:42:02.085
Give me trust in the process without engagement first so. Thank you. Just to clarify I'm not against the public consultation. I'm around the process to make sure that we've got the best process with the understanding. Frank Wilkie 02:42:17.598
Question Councillor. You have the right to talk to the amendment or not. If it's a question ask the question. If you'd like to debate the amendment, please do. Karen Finzel 02:42:27.437
Want to debate it. Just asking a question around the public consultation process, are you prepared to raise that through another channel? Jessica Phillips 02:42:44.032
Yes, except what would be, to the CEO, what would be the other process that I would be able to raise, including public consultation in it. Know what other process we can bring up when it's on the floor for debate to have that included. So question to the CEO, how would I bring public consultation into this if it today without it. Larry Sengstock 02:43:15.829
Again, my reading of this is, there's two parts to this. One, we do have a very full public consultation schedule. So it would mean, if this got up, it would mean reprioritizing reprioritising or finding its position in that, schedule of events and that then may delay this. We can't, that'll be your decision because something has to give. We've got a very full. The second question I have is when we say public consultation, that's a very broad term. Now what does that mean? Is that full public consultation? Is it more to stakeholder consultation that are more involved in this? Because that then governs how much work and how much time and effort and cost goes into that, so. I'd ask that question back in terms of what's the expectation of public consultation for something like this. Jessica Phillips 02:44:11.074
Okay, am I allowed to speak to that then? If it would help to clarify then. Previously I put a notified motion around surveys being used. Could it be as simple as a survey for public consultation given that my notified motion asked for unbiased surveys could that be surveys and could that be included if I was to amend it to have public consultation as per a survey would that satisfy Councillor Finzel? Karen Finzel 02:44:48.782
I feel in terms of thereof but of part thereof but of in terms meaningful public consultation when we want to like really if we're spending time and money to engage with the public then in my opinion it does need to be meaningful and will what your suggestion actually go to the depth of the broadness of where you want to go. So I guess it is about like the CEO said what would you like to achieve and which type of public consultation do you intend to use. Frank Wilkie 02:45:27.409
Could I ask a question that may help to clarify? A claims, in undertaking a review of the climate change response grants guidelines, we would have an internal discussion first. Could that then involve a discussion about an appropriate form of consultation, what it would take, what form it could take. Could it be surveys? You have something on for on the your side, given we're talking about guidelines only and a small budget of $50,000. Kim Rawlings 02:45:54.492
Yeah, that absolutely could happen. The operational review, that's what would happen. So we would do an internal operational review that would then be workshopped with Council. About what's the evaluation criteria look like, what are the parameters that want to be considered, and then what's the process that you would like to take this forward. So that could happen. Jessica Phillips 02:46:14.864
Question, yeah it does, but just in relation to the it's only $50,000. Could I have clarity on how long these grant rounds have been? And if it's $50,000 every year I'd love to know a total of how much we've spent on these grants. So we're not just saying one year. Cheyenne 02:46:34.101
This is I believe the sixth round of the climate change community grants and it is $50,000 every year. So it's exciting. Thank you. Amelia Lorentson 02:46:44.418
I would like to raise maybe a suggestion to Councillor Phillips. These so climate change response grants they're decidedly. Frank Wilkie 02:46:56.157
So are you speaking to the amendment or? Amelia Lorentson 02:46:58.554
I'm just trying to throw an idea at Councillor to see if we have questions for Councillor Phillips given that the response grants are annual and also that we have a budget review too later lighter in the wheel, year. Which of the other than I.V. You be able to maybe, because I totally support your intent. Question please. Would you support maybe an additional wording, so undertake a review of the climate change response grant guidelines involving public consultation and any proposed changes subject to funding and if someone can help me. So the intent is that it's subject to funding or acceptance through the budget review number 2. So it gives it some definite and some certainty because I accept the conversation that people are going to do consultation and yeah, I agree. Frank Wilkie 02:48:06.268
Councillors, we're getting to the realm of policy on the run. Can I suggest we vote on this amendment. It gets up or stays if you want to fine tune it gets up, it becomes part of the motion. You can fine tune it further, wordsmith it further if that's what you want to do. Yeah, that's fine. And so far only Councillor Phillips and myself have spoken to the amendment. Anyone else wish to speak for or against the amendment? Councillor Lorentson. Amelia Lorentson 02:48:31.210
Think that we can speak ells and with smithing the amendment. I think we understand the intent and I'm happy with the wording as it stands, Councillor Phillips. I probably sort of backtrack a little bit with my wording and I really do want to make, put this formally on the table, my issues with, not my issue, but some of the concerns that I raised during the workshop prior to this were involving the projects, not with the community groups. I do want to place that on the table. Secondly, in reference to what Councillor Wilson said, I totally support that if the projects are being questioned, then the correct way to do this is through a review of the grants guidelines and in particular the criteria. And I really want to also note, in terms of climate and environmental grants, possibly one of the most detailed processes in terms of assessment and packaging. So the issue is not with the process. I agree. And I really respect the conversation around the table. It's in terms of the criteria and policy. So this is definitely, I think, the way forward. And we understand that this will be done sooner, not later. I think they will change. It's really captured in this discussion today. Thank you, Councillor Lorentson. Frank Wilkie 02:50:19.852
May the Councillor speak to the amendment? Councillor Wegener? Tom Wegener 02:50:25.198
I don't like this process of just doing stuff on the fly. This consultation public thing before the next grant funding being opened easily could end up stopping the next grant funding being opened for next year or the year after that if we don't get around to the public consultation because our staff is busy and it costs a lot of money to do this stuff and it takes them away from other really important we're throwing this upon them on the fly and maybe really stuffing up our grant funding and the trust of our many fantastic organisations that depend on this grant funding that it might not come around because we couldn't get around to public consultation before that being open. So I just, I don't support this at all. Can you cancel the work now? Larry Sengstock 02:51:15.449
Yes, Councillor Wilson? Nicola Wilson 02:51:16.609
I think this wording is broad enough. Public consultation can mean anything from just having a pop-up session or a Councillor coffee chat or Facebook survey or just inviting email submissions to Councillors. I don't think we need to necessarily say it's going to be an expensive huge process and I think we're just inviting public feedback on spending. Public funds, so I'll support it. Frank Wilkie 02:51:44.083
Thank you. Councillor Finzel, you wish to close? Oh sorry, Councillor yeah, this is a challenging time. Finzel. Karen Finzel 02:51:51.100
Yeah, this is a challenging one. I don't like doing things like this on the hop. I think public consultation, those words to me mean going out really with a meaningful objective. Councillor Wilson just talked about feedback from the coffee chat or whatever. I think for me it's about clarification about what the, I see the overall intent. City that how do we break that down? I do believe there's other processes that we could arrive to that place. In terms of governance, I have real concerns around the process to arrive at what's before us today in terms of that expenditure and how that process was undertaken in good faith and through the policies and the guidelines that are pre-existing. I'm also I'm always for terms of governance, in good governance. I understand the intent around engaging the public that's I stand on that all the time. I'm just not comfortable with how this is worded. Frank Wilkie 02:53:17.639
Thank you Councillor Finzel. Councillor Phillips you wish to close? Jessica Phillips 02:53:21.753
I respect Councillor Wegener and Councillor Finzel's points. Six rounds at fifty thousand so we've spent three hundred thousand dollars of public funds just through this process. That's just through grant funds. So every year it might seem like fifty thousand but we sat at this table and disagreed that we would give $50,000. Councillors dollars to assist in Councillor initiatives and we didn't even we've knocked that straight off without even this sort of robust conversation so that is interesting to me. I would think that sometimes with amendments the intent is that we can take it away during the guidelines review and the operational side of it in workshops we can properly talk about where we land comfortably with public consultation and what that means. I agree will make a with you Councillor Finzel making it on the fly is not my intent however sometimes we're at a crossroads where this is the only opportunity to bring it to debate and to actually have an outcome that says we're doing this. So that's was. Probably why it wasn't whilst the words were written quickly it's not something that I haven't thought is something that we should consider anyway so I to decide. But I will leave it to everyone Frank Wilkie 02:54:57.303
Thank you Councillor Phillips. Put the amendment. Those in favour? Councillor Wilson, Lawrence and Phillips and Wilkie. Those against? That's Wegener and Finzel. The amendment is carried becomes part of the motion to which Councillor only Councillor Wegener has spoken and sorry. Councillor Wilson. Yes, I found myself, found my part on my page. Yeah, Councillor Wegener and Councillor Wilson have spoken. This is, so can we, is it possible to have a look at the are you speaking? Whole motion of how you speak here? Vicky 02:55:38.156
Yeah, sorry. With the same services? Including services, yeah. Same, good save, yeah. Good save, Unidentified Speaker 02:55:54.369
We can't see I am A and B. Yeah, I'll bring it up. I've got my view. For some reason, the A and the B. And the C is the HD dollars over there. I'll have to fix it up. Here you go. Excuse me, Mr Chair, we're just waiting. Yes, Councillor Finzel. We didn't have a one-stop lounge break. Can we stop for a two-hour break if we're not going to Frank Wilkie 02:56:20.012
Do it? Absolutely, we'll deal with this. You want that now? Or can we deal with this motion? I think we're meant to. You're welcome to. We'll hold the vote for that's really good. Yeah. Vicky 02:57:02.224
Is not written on there though, so it's just a name, okay. Yeah, I'm going to actually, since I've got the time, I'm just going to type it in. Is the mic in here? All there. And now it's got double, it's actually double. That's all that's done. Unidentified Speaker 02:58:32.574
Thank you. Frank Wilkie 02:59:07.761
Okay, Councillors, there's the full motion before you, to which Councillor Wegener and Wilson have spoken. Anybody else wish to speak to the motion? I will, thank you. Councillor Phillips? Jessica Phillips 02:59:17.332
Okay, firstly, I appreciate the diversity at this table. I think that it shows democracy. At its best and I also think that it's important so we land in the middle somewhere every time the dial is too far either way. I don't think we get great outcomes so I appreciate the conversation firstly. I think it was perfect timing although I didn't, we plan it. Hayley's question time at the commencement of this. I firstly want to acknowledge that you know as a long-term resident I never came and did a question time and I've probably sat back and had issues but never spoke up so coming and spending the time today to actually sit in chamber I think it's really commendable. It's easy to probably sit online and make a comment but you've come out and put it on notice so thank you for that. I also want points to make a point of why I was grateful that we were able to separate the two grants from Monday because it gave us the opportunity to look at this one with a little bit of a different lens and I want to be really clear from the offset that supporting and protecting noosa's unique environment is one of our greatest assets and I will always support Council in investing in projects that genuinely improve environmental build legacy for outcomes build resilience and leave lasting legacy for our future generations interestingly I had a company come around to look at solar panels and battery on my house I have a four-bedroom house two children a mortgage and you know my income because you will have the same income you don't need to know my husband's but let me tell you where we represent many people in this Shire that are feeling the cost of living hurting so the quote for my solar and battery on my home was onwards of $30,000 and I don't have the financial I don't have that money sitting in the bank to invest in that so over the past two years I am probably becoming increasingly uncomfortable change response with the way the climate grants are being funded from general rates without meaningful consultation we are spending our ratepayers' money and I think that every time we should be questioning is this probably not so much about is this project worthwhile because I argue through crisis I think you could probably argue through the criteria that it is but is it the best way to invest limited public money it's time that we start thinking about the way we're spending as Councillors we have a responsibility to every ratepayer to ensure every dollar collected delivers the greatest possible benefit to our community that responsibility is even greater following the significant rate increases in mortgages and cost of living I'm increasingly concerned that we've probably reached a point now we need to ask ourselves whether each investment delivers measurable outcomes does it represent value for money and does it provide the greatest benefit for our environment and our community see Councillors be provided with more meaningful information during the assessment process greater transparency about how projects are prioritised a comparison of value for money and long-term measures just then we out whilst we sit worked out that whilst we sit and look at 50,000 on paper in six rounds it's 300,000 so that adds up really quickly and I don't want the future Councillors to who are warming the Chair for four years to look at it at two million dollars especially since we had a fair bit of robust conversation around spending two million dollars on Tourism Noosa so how quickly will that escalate to future councils sitting here going why did we spend two million dollars without questioning public funds so it's not about reducing our commitment to the environment today for me it's about ensuring that every environmental dollar we collect from our community is invested wisely transparently and that the projects are going to deliver the greatest possible benefit for Noosa both today and into the future and if we talk about good governance that requires us to continually review our policies and our guidelines and our funding frameworks so I'm going to believe today that grants have now reached a point where it is warranted that there is a review. Karen Finzel 03:04:11.141
Councillor Phillips. I just have a question. Frank Wilkie 03:04:12.484
Question Councillor Finzel. Karen Finzel 03:04:15.611
I know we made the decision today but in terms of that expenditure that has that gone has through the process to arrive at this figure today, for example then, if I choose to vote against all of those allocations given what's been debated around the table and that ends up none of them get over the line, what are legal and governance ramifications? And governance ramifications given we've filed a pre-existing process? Are we open to, what's my risk? Questions. Thank you. Kim Rawlings 03:04:47.891
Councillor, it's within your right. You're the decision maker. So, if the funds aren't allocated through the grant process, they go back into operational. And this is the right process for you to decide whether or not you support these or not. So, I don't believe there is any recourse or risk for you. Frank Wilkie 03:05:14.699
Does where does from? Reputational risk come into this for the Noosa Council and the community's trust in the Council if these grants at this point in time are going to be overruled? Kim Rawlings 03:05:25.599
Thank you for picking me up on that because you are right. Was responding to like a liability or legal risk and my response was there yes as you know our strategic risk register identifies reputational risk as a core risk so yes potentially there could be on impact on our reputation from a risk perspective but my response to Councillor Finzel was really if I heard your question correctly about if there was any kind of legal recourse or liability and I don't believe there is. Frank Wilkie 03:06:03.167
Any other Councillors wish to speak to the motion? Councillor Lorentson. Amelia Lorentson 03:06:08.275
Just briefly, I think we need to always remember that and I sit around this table as a. Director, essentially. And Noosa Shire Council, it's an accountable body. So I think the review of climate change scales. Guideline, I'd like that addition because I think it's exactly what an organisation of this size demands, that we regularly review our guidelines and make sure they're fit for purpose. I hear consistently around the community that they want confidence in how their money is spent and I'm not just talking about grants. Every decision that we make in terms of planning terms of plans and strategies and consultancies and contracts that we give to when we outsource contracts. So to me this to is the correct way forward and again it's about continuous improvements and also just honouring the voices of the community that want transparency and also want to be involved in the decision making process. I'm not challenging the organisations or the community organisations, they do. Tireless work for nothing for our community and they fill a gap that Council often can't fill. Grants, and I need to speak about this, our grants back people not only just the projects and that's how exactly how you build strong communities by powering our community with funding and in these instances a lot of these are funded I think one of the grants four times the amount that we're actually funding so I don't want to diminish the importance of community work but this is a governance issue and it's governance oversight and again just a requirement that as an accountable body Noosa Shire Council as a matter of transparency we should you know continually review all our guidelines all our policies to ensure they meet our community expectations in terms of value for money and in terms of that we're spending their money on matters that are important to them. Frank Wilkie 03:08:43.226
Thank you, Councillor Lorentson. Thank you very much. Members wish to speak? Councillor Wegener, you wish to close? Tom Wegener 03:08:55.224
The climate change response plan and these grants are to help noosa's vision to address climate change into the future and years ago under the Tony wellington Council they recognise the climate emergency and this is was a long sweep of go in that direction perhaps that era is over I'm so happy that these grants will be approved today this is wonderful support for these communities as a councillor Lawrence and says that is our community doing the thing that is our resident working hard for a positive future but I'm a little bit pessimistic especially with the have you know having the next round of grants preconditioned on some sort of consultation and guidelines being revisited so I think I'll just enjoy that the celebration today because these are wonderful grants going to wonderful groups. Frank Wilkie 03:10:00.494
Thank you Councillor to the vote those in Councillor Wegener, Lorentson Lorentson, Wilkie those against and the grants are approved on my casting vote okay we come now to we come now to item on 12.3 thank you Cheyenne thank you Director Rawlings I think it's time we have a break so we'll come back in half an hour Frank Wilkie 03:45:07.741
Welcome back everyone. Everybody we resume at 1:46 we're up to item 12.3 which is a further report the Fees and Charges which was referred from the General Committee date on the 9th of June and we have found the financial services manager Zach Morton-Ayr and acting corporate services Director Margaret Gatt here for this report. Zach or Margaret please give us summary of the report please. Margaret Gatt 03:45:37.241
Again apologies that this wasn't made out to be considered fully at the General Committee due to some lightning in the ministry there and also some changes around the policy act at the last minute that we needed to include in this challenge. Thesis I'll hand over but I'll to Zach now to take us through the report. Zach Morton-Adair 03:45:56.333
Thank you for the Chair. So the report in front of you today outlines our 26-27 cost recovery fees and commercial charges as provided as attachment one. This version has as Margaret has referred to, incorporates a number of changes relating to the declaration of new state government right for information charges, cosmetic charges, changes to the layout and function including descriptors relating to environmental health descriptors and also the creation and update of the Fees and Charges related to the waste and symmetry areas. Fees and Charges contribute approximately 90% of councils overall revenue budget. Most of the Fees and Charges 26-27 attachment increased by less than 10%. This aligns with CCUI, CPUI, Council cost index, CPUI consumer price index, or cost recovery measures. A number of random change due to legislative or market constraints, or targeted increases in the CCUI, where cost recovery gaps exist. High increases are generally limited to regulatory and compliance services, commercial use of public assets, and use of paid services. Fees align with underlying legislative requirements, and we are determined to we're support a pay models. The review of fees and services ensures they are cost-reflective with major changes workshopped through budget processes and commercial activities fully costed. Early adoption of the Fees and Charges schedule improves transparency and gives an advance notice to the community. I would like to draw a particular team-- attention to two fees noted in the schedule. On page three of the schedule refers to the stock transport fee and on page four refers to the de-sex of excluding of up to six months old paid after due date. I just wanted to note a typographical error with a legislative reference. It currently references Local Government Act 2009 section 972. That is correct. The subsection D is a typographical error and it should make reference to subsection A instead of the same section. This will be corrected as part of the final report that is published post formal more uh thank adoption of Council. Thank you. Frank Wilkie 03:48:16.426
Any questions Councillors? I do have some questions please. Thank you. Jessica Phillips 03:48:19.851
Just in relation to the cost recovery fee structure, I'm just interested to know when was the last time an organisational review how that works as far as cost recovery? Like does each department do it? Is it um and both of you bring experience from external? It common to is it common see a review that's maybe more regular or? Hopefully that answers my question. Margaret Gatt 03:48:50.358
Through the Chair I'm happy to take that um question Councillor Phillips. Um it is part of a more yearly process so each area that administers um they're those facing charges so for example in regulatory services or in community services a detailed review of those cases conducted. In terms of then a complete comprehensive detailed cost recovery exercise can happen maybe once a term or at a time that seemed appropriate but it is normal practice for each of those departments to administer those things to conduct a review of those things. And then if I sign it, some of the increases, decreases will satisfy. Jessica Phillips 03:49:44.312
Are you able to tell me when the last time the organisation did a full review? Margaret Gatt 03:49:49.156
I'll have to have take that one. That's okay. I thought so. Kessel, what was that? Amelia Lorentson 03:49:56.467
In terms of, and I've got page four in front of me, variances. So the report shows material and services. Are running $1.044 million over budget for the year to date. Is that correct and can you just explain what's driving some of the key areas? Margaret Gatt 03:50:17.288
Through the Chair of Council, we're in the Fees and Charges report, not in the monthly finance report. Asking you a question, please. Where I think your relates to. If you could please, apologies. Councillor Stockwell? Brian Stockwell 03:50:28.165
Yeah, I'm going to move the recommendation, but I think after what the manager has told us, we need to see. Have you got a see? There it is. Yes. I thought I was going to move. Frank Wilkie 03:50:40.040
Okay, move councilor Councillor Stockwell. Do we have a seconder? Brian Stockwell 03:50:44.332
I'll be the second. Finzel, Councillor Stockwell. This is just standard practice in terms of adopting these as early as possible so those people who are reliant on setting their own Fees and Charges have it before the actual results come in as far as the budget. Frank Wilkie 03:51:02.708
Thank you Councillor Stockwell. Other questions or comments? Jessica Phillips 03:51:07.439
Just a quick question and it's probably another one on notice but what I'd love to see is it might be hard but if I was a small business wanting to start up in the Noosa Shire like this pages yeah how would I how quickly work out what costs Council would be like through these Fees and Charges what sort of from what I'd be looking at I don't know it's just something that I'm interested in finding out if there's a way to do that Margaret Gatt 03:51:38.106
Through the Chair, Council. Through the Chair, Councillor Phillips, I can take that question on notice and have a discussion with my colleagues on the NT to consider how potentially we could assist members of the community who are looking to commence a business and see how they could access that information. Thank you. Frank Wilkie 03:52:02.018
Larson. Councillor Lorentson Amelia Lorentson 03:52:03.444
Okay, sorry, back to the bits and charges. In terms of analysis, I'm just sort of interested, when I run through the Fees and Charges report, I sort of pull out just certain ones and the question I'm asking which proposed fee increases will have the greatest impact on low-residence pensioners and those on fixed income, so understanding that there is a cost-of-living crisis. And have we ever done an analysis in terms of impact on those most vulnerable? Margaret Gatt 03:52:39.761
Through the Chair. Through the Chair, Councillor Lorentson, if I could ask for a little bit more of a clarification on that question. So that question is quite broad. All the Fees and Charges, if we could focus on potentially say some fees in regulatory services or fees in the community services, the relevant Director might be able to answer that question. To a certain point, but no, as of today, we haven't done an analysis with that specific lens. Amelia Lorentson 03:53:17.335
So I will be specific in that case. In terms of volume cap registration fees, these are fees paid by ordinary residents. Actually older. So my question is, what's the proposed increase and has any consideration been given to holding registration fees steady this year given the broader cost of living context? Margaret Gatt 03:53:47.574
Richard, can I ask my colleague Richard, would you like to come to the time and of the answer to that question. Is that okay? Larry Sengstock 03:53:55.768
Certainly. Richard MacGillivray 03:53:56.267
Thank you Councillor, it's a privilege to hear. The changes to the Fees and Charges this year for particularly for animal registration have been minimal so we will continue our no fee requirement for the pensioners for microchipped dogs so there's no fee at all for pensioners and we'll maintain that for this year's Fees and Charges. For other animal owners there is a $4.50 increase for registration this year which is in line with essentially CPI so other than that we've maintained those fees sort of in line with CPI across the board particularly for animal registration. Frank Wilkie 03:54:44.565
Anybody else wish to speak to the motion? Councillor Stockwell do you wish to close? Thank you. I'll put it to the vote. All those in favour? That's unanimous. Thank you Acting Director Gatt and Zach. The next item is the Financial Performance Report again we have financial services managers Zach and acting corporate services Director Margaret Gatt. Would you like to give us an overview please? Zach Morton-Adair 03:55:13.006
Thank you to the Chair. I'll take a report as written. The matter report provides the living amounts representing 92% of the financial year's actual data. Consistent with previous commentary provided in the financial reports, there are no identified financial risks expected to negatively impact council's financial position as of the 30th of June, 2026. The May 2026 report provides a favourable net result variance to the budget of $13.5 million. This comprises of $4 million operating variance and $9.1 million from capital funding sources, but the favourable position reflects timing of capital works and grants receipts rather than underlying performance changes. Operating revenue is tracking at $152.2 million or 99.2% of the overall budget with operating expenditure at $157 million or 89% of the budget. Performance remains stable with the budget expectations. The Mayoral report sees a continuation in consistent with the performance trends in the monthly report. In doing so, we would like to draw specific attention to elements of the report. So on top of the page, on the table at the in the top of page two, an there's analysis conducted of variances to both our revenue and expenses. The 4. Million dollar operating variance to budget, 3.2 million relates to the general operating surplus with 1.2 million dollars relating to our business activities. From waste, the positive variance in expenses primarily relates to lower interest charges related to the loans associated with landfill, lower waste living charges due to a lower tonnage volume, and a lower profit share expense related to the sale of recyclable renewables. Holiday parks exhibits both increases to the revenue and expenditure. Brian Stockwell 03:57:06.388
This is a of high occupancy rent. Zach Morton-Adair 03:57:07.303
Is a result of higher occupancy rates across all three of the holiday parks, and consequently the impact of commissions related to higher revenue. To provide detailed commentary as to the materials and services variance, in our April 2026 report, materials were tracking at minute a $1.5 million variance over budget. The May 2026 report sees a return of that only a million dollars variance budget compared to its base. Tables are provided in the report as to capital, revenue and expenditure. There's no changes based on historic trends to the numbers reported in the report. Cash management and investment. Performance. Council's total cash holdings as of May 2026 were $142.5 million with $7 million upheld in trust. The higher cash balances can be explained primarily driven by the re-profiling of council's capital works program. Council's investments continue against industry benchmarks. To reduce rate arrears, are $8.5 million as of May 2026 or represent 7.2% of the revenue base. This has improved from 7.8% in April with a reduction in rates of $731,000 paid relating to arrears. These amounts are consistent with historic trends and the established semi-annual pattern following July and January rates periods. In the previous financial report, we have had sections as questions taken on notice so we will provide a verbal update to the one that was taken as part of the April, sorry May General Committee Meeting. Again questions may not be debated but hopefully you catch the intended intent of the question. Councillor Lorentson a Councillor Lawrence then raised the question in regards to what was driving the reliance on current consultants and what areas do they support. In the May 2026 report there's a variance to the budget of $420,000 related to consultancy expenditure. This is primarily driven by $193,000 relating to an ICT maturity assessment and establishment of a project management office and $97,000 related to a health check of councils payroll and time sheet systems. $81,000 relates to waste management support and consultancy services and $32,000 related to industrial relations support carried out throughout the year. So in closing, Council remains in a strong and stable financial position as we reach the end of the financial year. Other favourable or resolved results are a reflection of timing and basal performance, and they're not structural in nature. As noted, there are no material risks that currently present which will impact our overall financial position at the end of the year. Thank you, and we'll be happy to take questions. Thank you, Sir. Questions? Council members. Amelia Lorentson 04:00:10.580
I think you answered my question in referencing a similar question I just asked in the last month's report. I have got a couple other questions, so I'm going to start with in terms of emerging note that the report. Terms of emerging issues and risk, I just note that the issues and we have discussed this in workshops, but the report doesn't actually identify what I call an emerging but significant risk. The commonwealth government's announced its intention to move potentially to a 50 / cost sharing disaster recovery. And it's a substantial change. At the moment, my understanding is that the commonwealth contributes 65% and Queensland contributes 35%. And when I looked at the numbers on the report and put it into our Noosa context, we have received nearly $18.8 million in disaster recovery grants this year alone against a recovery program budget of $29.3 million, a shift to 50 /. Would be significant and the difference is going to have to be absorbed by some of the limits stated by local governments. So can we quantify or do some scenario setting to actually identify what that potentially may mean to a Council our size? Again, in my opinion it's a significant emerging risk that I think we probably need to unpack and understand in a bit of detail. Or be brought through the audit and risking it. Margaret Gatt 04:01:52.356
Thank you, Councillor. Ormston for the question Through the Chair. As this is a recent and change I think it's changed. Haven't had yet the capacity to understand full implications, immediate short-term and long term. It is a piece of work I need to do with SAC and our colleagues on ET that back to you either through a Council to bring briefing. Or a workshop in addition to that, we are still working on a long term financial plan strategy, which identifies, which will identify a lot of SAC, not a analysis, it have a it will have scenario analysis, emerging threats and risks around our financial sustainability. So that particular strategy document is about 60% complete, but it's yet to be targeted with the executive leadership team. Training they've been given with the Council. Councillor Finzel. Jessica Phillips 04:02:54.761
Question, thank you. Just in relation to operating operational budget, what impact does accelerating lower priority projects place on operational budget and this proactively managed? And a follow up question to that is how is this taken into account in whole of life costings? Margaret Gatt 04:03:17.362
Through the Chair, Councillor Phillips. So as you would be aware, we have a works Project Control Group. Works executive. Also have a Capital Works Executive. We have a project, I won't get to answer your question, I'm just providing context, through the PID process and the evaluation through the relevant teams before it comes to the Capital Works Executive. Couple is consideration of the impact on the capital works program, available cash or using grant funding as a way to fund a particular emergent capital works initiative, project. Need necessary. When you're speaking about whole of life costing, it is considered at a probably what I would say a high level. In terms of then having it documented in kids, we do that. Potentially not consistently as we could. But a rule of thumb is a consideration that for every million dollars in capital, you can assume 100 to 200,000 in perpetuity for OPEX. As a result, but that's theoretical in terms of maintenance for that. But again, it would depend on the type of asset that we're talking about. Jessica Phillips 04:04:43.094
Okay, then a follow up question because obviously we don't all sit in capital works exec. Too much work ask work to ask if it was included in the financial report each month? I'm happy for you to take it on notice, but I'm just thinking could that be included? Through the Chair. Sorry, can you clarify what would you like included in the finance report? Um, like when if we've got expenditure sitting there I'd love to know how it could be more clear maybe when we cut when it comes to this maybe that it's included in the financial sections or like um I just feel like I don't get enough from this but I because I sit in capital works I get a little bit more information from that but that isn't for every Councillor does that make sense yes Margaret Gatt 04:05:39.316
Thank you thoughts Through the Chair so once a quarter there is the company works update report that comes through from our infrastructure services area and they report on not only costs but on time frames and delivery so that report does come to the General Committee Meeting and to the ordinary but it's not within our finance report meaning it comes as a separate report are you asking for us to consider how we could incorporate some of that reporting from that report into the monthly finance report Jessica Phillips 04:06:18.604
Yes but I think I'm asking for a lot of work so maybe I'll just take it offline and then work out exactly what part I would like to see come to the monthly meeting Zach Morton-Adair 04:06:28.305
Comments about alignment between infrastructure and finances the consolidation of reporting which the first step of that was bringing the crafts into the report there is a second stage that we're looking to understand post 30 June. Initiate if they can be consolidated consistency of language to the public as well because infrastructure and financial people use different jargon so we'd like to align that for consistency for the public to understand it and if you could provide some of the details as to what you would like to see in that they can form part of the ongoing project that we have with infrastructure to align that that's planned for post 30 June adoption. And there were comments made as well through the budget process of all of our assets, management planning and what that looks like. So there's probably a couple of problems that would very clearly lead to address your question. Frank Wilkie 04:07:18.400
Ms. Wilson? Nicola Wilson 04:07:20.821
Just a question on capital expenditure so at the end of May we've got capital expenditure excluding exploiting commitments of 33.3 million or 41.2% of the annual budget. Given that we're now halfway through June what do we anticipate the year in position to Unidentified Speaker 04:07:37.017
Be in terms of accrued commitments? Zach Morton-Adair 04:07:41.519
So Through the Chair I'm happy to take that. So this is probably if I can just provide some context as to the way that finance reports this information versus the way that CW reports it in terms of the idea of actual spend which is skin what is the financial numbers and then finance actual plus commitments. So I believe in the graph, sorry, there is an insert from the Capital Works Executive presentation which provides a graph in there which is on page seven on page seven of so I'm capital executive the report so on the capital expenditure section there's a picture a screenshot of the PowerPoint slide which shows a budget forecast versus actual expenditure and under the notes there's a section of the forecast to the end of the financial year is forty point six million dollars included in that slide it is something we are discussing with infrastructure the idea of future forecast or detailing where that is specifically within the report and that's a part of the process that I've just talked about. Councillor Finzel. Karen Finzel 04:08:42.883
Thank you Through the Chair on page 8 of 12 we're looking at our investment summary at our summary. It continues to inform well. Our benchmark but I'm interested in this going into the future and when our investments what we're investing in and how those returns will be protected given the volatility and you know global and unrest and things like that so just interested in how we're protecting that. Margaret Gatt 04:09:08.698
Through the Chair, thank you for the question Councillor Finzel. All of our investments are with Queensland Treasury Corporation. We look after local government and public sector funds very prudently so we meet the AAA, boren, sands rating but what I can request is you would be maybe familiar that we do have an upcoming briefing with Queensland Treasury Corporation that will be briefing Councillors on our credit review outcome. I can request that they put some information into that presentation to explain how they manage our funds and what risk mitigation measures that they put and potentially how our funds have been affected by the middle east crisis that you're speaking about. Thank you. Frank Wilkie 04:10:00.553
Councillor Lorentson. Amelia Lorentson 04:10:00.553
I'm going back a little bit so I'm referring to the audit and risk meeting recommendations that's listed in our report today and there's, wow, a ton of them. 22 reports and significant reports from internal audit reports, from the QAO, from. John, my gosh. Councillor Councillor, are Morrison, we were talking about the Financial Performance Report. I am, okay, so I'll make this quick. So in terms of. The risks that have been raised recently in the Audit and Risk Committee, can you give us a quick summary of the main risks and whether any of them could affect our finances or service delivery? Margaret Gatt 04:10:49.111
The risk Through the Chair, Councillor Lorentson, you're talking about the entire strategic risk register and how that affects our financial sustainability? Amelia Lorentson 04:10:59.754
I mean, I started in the audience committee meeting and there were quite a few issues that came out of the QAO briefing, the internal audit, the cyber report, etc. So I just want to really understand whether those issues are referenced in our financial report and identified and are there anything of great concern that keeps you awake at night? Frank Wilkie 04:11:28.945
Could you describe the appropriate reporting channels for each the audit and risk and perhaps the Financial Performance Report? Margaret Gatt 04:11:38.957
Through the Chair. Through the Audit and Risk Committee as you as were aware. Councillor Lorentson when you attended as an observer, a review of the strategic risk register is part of the papers and is part of what is spoken to. That strategic risk register is currently undergoing a review and our appetite statement as well is being reviewed and that will be part of an upcoming briefing workshop with Councillors. So in terms of then how that impacts through to our financial sustainability and our monthly finance report, we don't expressly link the strategic risk register to our monthly finance to report. But considering that the first risk on our strategic risk register is financial sustainability, we closely monitor existing controls, future mitigation activities and residual risk ratings. We do that in preparation or just as a customary practice in preparation for the audit risk meeting. So it's not expressly linked in through to this report, but it is addressed and monitored through that strategic risk register. Okay. Someone care to the recommendation? Frank Wilkie 04:13:07.101
Councillor Finzel? Seconded by Councillor Lorentson. Councillor Finzel, do you wish to speak? Karen Finzel 04:13:14.081
I'd just like to thank the staff and for the continuous improvement we see in the report. Thank you very much. Frank Wilkie 04:13:19.781
Thank you. Anyone else wish to speak to the motion to vote? Those in favour? That's unanimous. Thank you very much work, Director. For your work. Much appreciated. Okay, there is no confidential session. The next Ordinary Meeting will be at Council chambers at 9 Pelican Street, Tewantin at 10am on Thursday 16th July 2026. Declare the meeting closed at 2:14pm. Thank you everybody for your attendance and contributions. Thank you Mr CEO. Vicky. Related Noosa Council Meetings
← Browse all Noosa Shire Council meeting transcripts
