Ordinary Meeting - 22 January 2026
Date: Thursday, 22 January 2026 at 10:00AM
Location: Noosa Shire Council Chambers , 9 Pelican Street , Tewantin , QLD 4565 , Australia
Organiser: Noosa Shire Council
Duration: 03:17:04
Synopsis: Shark nets trial advocacy approved, Independent survey reviews mandated, Audit and financials adopted, Disaster plan adopted, Botanic Gardens collections plan urged, Housing transparency queried.
Meeting Attendees
Councillors
Frank Wilkie Karen Finzel Jessica Phillips Amelia Lorentson Brian Stockwell Tom Wegener Nicola Wilson Executive Officers
Acting Chief Executive Officer Richard MacGillivray Director Corporate Services Margaret Gatt Director Infrastructure Services Chris Steel Director Community Services Paul Brinkman Deputations
Willy Ostwald Jill Brownlee Pat Spicer Public Question Time
Rhea Den Braasem John Spencer Brian O'Connor Pat Spicer AI-Generated Meeting Insight
Key Decisions & Discussions Amelia Lorentson: Petition (93 signatories) to redesign the proposed Noosaville Foreshore “Big Pelican” toilet block for smaller footprint referred to CEO (Item 5.1; 01:39–02:11, 02:11–02:25). Willy Ostwald: Deputation urged inclusion of a Living Collections Management Plan in the Noosa Botanic Gardens Masterplan to maintain scientific and curatorial integrity (Item 7.1; 03:05–11:13). Jill Brownlee: Reported 2,000+ volunteer hours and provided plant records to support master planning; requested low-cost, near-term adoption of a collections plan (Item 7.1; 11:13–13:42). Council: Voted to advocate to Qld Govt for a 3‑month trial replacing shark nets with non‑lethal tech (smart drumlines, etc.) during southern migration at Noosa Main Beach; carried unanimously after amendment disputes (Item 10.1; 01:00:29–02:04:41). Jessica Phillips: Motion requiring independent third‑party review of community surveys for significant projects carried; CEO to report back on opportunities and costs (Item 10.2; 02:05:02–02:54:51). Council: Adopted all Audit & Risk Committee recommendations of 12 Dec 2025 and 9 Jan 2026, incl. noting QAO/KPMG papers, WHS report, recruitment audit, ICT actions, and appointing Ian Rushworth as A&R Chair (3‑yr term) (Items 11.1–11.2; 03:13:32–03:15:30). Council: Adopted Noosa Local Disaster Management Plan 2026; repealed 2023 plan and authorised CEO for minor edits (Item 11.3.1; 03:15:30–03:16:30). Council: Deferred Council‑managed trial of rescue tubes/life rings at unpatrolled beaches pending risk evaluation and evidence‑based strategy; endorsed SLSQ leadership (Item 11.3.2; 03:15:30–03:16:30). Chris Steel: Disclosed 15,500 tonnes removed from 62 Lake Macdonald Dr; refused cost/tonne as commercial‑in‑confidence (Items 8.1; 22:34–23:16). Kerri Contini/Paul Brinkman: Flagpole at Pomona War Memorial not supported in open park; further assessment to fit within garden bed; temporary flagpoles encouraged (Item 8.3 Q1; 29:51–31:35). Kim Rawlings (via officers): Pomona Place Plan actions staged with draft short‑term plan showing progress; budget timing to govern delivery (Item 8.3 Q2; 32:29–33:40). Contentious / Transparency Matters Amelia Lorentson: Successfully dissented from Chair’s ruling on her shark‑nets motion; Amendment No.1 ruled out after dissent vote (For: Finzel, Lorentson, Phillips, Wilson; Against: Wilkie, Stockwell, Wegener) (Item 10.1; 01:11:23–01:28:26). Frank Wilkie: Tried a narrower amendment to broaden advocacy beyond letters; lost 3–4 (Lorentson, Phillips, Finzel, Wilson against) (Item 10.1; 01:32:38–01:53:05). John Spencer: Challenged in‑house survey credibility and AV quality; CEO cited IAP2 framework; Corporate Services committed immediate PA use and future upgrades (Item 8.2; 23:52–29:28.919). Pat Spicer: Alleged limited transparency/late engagement on 62/64 Lake Macdonald Dr; sought open forum and clarity on grants’ implications; officers defended role under Housing Strategy and Social Justice Charter (Items 7.2, 8.4; 13:54–22:11, 34:04–42:59). Legal / Risk Margaret Gatt: Fraud loss reduced from $2.3m to $1.7m after recoveries; controls strengthened per QAO 2025 Interim Audit, incl. vendor masterfile controls, policy, cyber‑fraud training, EFTSure rollout, and risk‑based financial accountability program (Items 8.4 Q1; 35:30.100–37:02; 11.1.9 noted). Council/QAO/KPMG: Noted 2025 Closing Report and approved 2024/25 Financial Statements for certification—signalling audit closure posture (Items 11.2.1–11.2.2; 03:13:32–03:15:30). Chris Steel: Properly withheld contractor pricing as commercial‑in‑confidence, consistent with probity/competitive neutrality norms (Item 8.1; 22:49–23:07). Meeting Procedure: Standing Orders s29.1 tested; Chair’s ability to rule on his own amendment challenged; process clarified by Acting CEO, with dissent mechanism applied correctly (Item 10.1; 01:16:28–01:28:26). Governance: Audit & Risk Committee noted PID update per s254D(3) Local Government Regulation 2012 (Qld) (Item 11.1.10). Whales, Shark Nets & Public Safety Amelia Lorentson: Advanced evidence‑based case (Cardno 2019) that replacing nets with drumlines could maintain target‑shark control while cutting bycatch ~97%; focused on southern migration when entanglements peak (Item 10.1; 01:04:20–01:10:22, 01:59:51–02:04:41). Tom Wegener: Opposed removal without stronger evidence; emphasised need for data‑driven mitigation and noted NBRF advocacy/education programs (Item 10.1; 01:54:49.999–01:56:11, 01:51:04.400–01:52:16.531). Council: Ultimately supported letter‑based advocacy while some argued for broader strategies; recorded unanimity for the refined 3‑month trial ask (Item 10.1; 02:04:41). Community Engagement & Surveys Jessica Phillips: Motion mandates independent review (methodology/framing) for significant project surveys; addresses repeated community claims of bias (Item 10.2; 02:05:02–02:54:51; 8.2 Spencer, 7.2 Spicer). Brian Stockwell: Sought “report‑first” approach on costs/implications; warned against policy by notice of motion; amendment lost (Item 10.2; 02:13:06–02:18:43, 02:38:05). Richard MacGillivray: Confirmed mixed funding models; some projects can incorporate external review within grant budgets; others need co‑contribution (Item 10.2; 02:20:25–02:21:23). Housing at Cooroy (64/62 Lake Macdonald Dr) Kim Rawlings (via officers): Justified Council role in enabling social/affordable housing under the Local Government Act, Social Justice Charter (2018) and Housing Strategy (2022); site among several assessed (Item 8.4 Q2; 40:00.560–42:59). Chris Steel: Disclosed approx. 15,500 tonnes removed from 62 Lake Macdonald Dr works (Item 8.1 Q2; 23:08–23:16). Pat Spicer: Sought open forum, clarity on $178k (Housing Support Program) and $4,099,040 (Residential Activation Fund) implications and equitable hinterland consultation (Item 8.4; 34:04–42:59). Environmental & Public Realm Noosa Botanic Gardens: Friends flagged loss of rare species, inconsistent theming, inadequate records, and absence of garden‑focused planning; asked to embed a collections plan in Masterplan implementation (Item 7.1; 03:05–13:42). Pomona War Memorial: Permanent flagpole in open park area not supported on safety/maintenance grounds; possible garden‑bed option to be further assessed; temporary poles and nearby fire station flagpole available (Item 8.3; 29:51–31:35). Noosaville Foreshore: Accessibility‑focused “Changing Places” toilet acknowledged; redesign petition sent to CEO for consideration (Items 5.1; 02:11–02:25, 02:11). Governance, Audit & Financial Stewardship Audit & Risk: Council noted CEO update, internal audits (recruitment), ICT action items, and endorsed 2026 rolling work plan; appointed Ian Rushworth as A&R Chair (3 years) (Item 11.1; 03:13:32–03:15:30). Financial Reporting: Approved 2024/25 Annual Financial Statements for certification; noted draft 2024–25 Annual Report (Item 11.2; 03:13:32–03:15:30). Public Interest Disclosure: Noted confidential PID update per LG Reg 2012 s254D(3) (Item 11.1.10).
Official Meeting Minutes
MINUTES Ordinary Meeting Thursday, 22 January 2026 10:00 AM 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” ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 22 JANUARY 2026 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 Acting Chief Executive Officer Richard MacGillivray Acting Director Corporate Services Margaret Gatt Acting Director Infrastructure Services Chris Steel Acting Director Community Services Paul Brinkman APOLOGIES Nil. 4 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES 4.1 ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 18 DECEMBER 2025 Council Resolution Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Karen Finzel That the Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting held on 18 December 2025 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 ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 22 JANUARY 2026 5 PETITIONS 5.1 PETITION: PROPOSED NEW TOILET STRUCTURE AT NOOSAVILLE FORESHORE The following material was presented to the meeting in relation to this item: Cr Lorentson – refer to Attachment 1 to the Minutes dated 22 January 2026. Council Resolution Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That the petition with 93 signatories submitted by Craig McGovern, requesting that Council redesign the proposed new toilet structure near the Big Pelican to make it smaller, less obtrusive and maximise the existing grassed area 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 7.1 APPLICANT: WILLY OSTWALD, FRIENDS OF NOOSA BOTANIC GARDENS TOPIC: MASTERPLAN FOR NOOSA BOTANIC GARDENS SPEAKERS: WILLY OSTWALD, JILL BROWNLEE 7.2 APPLICANT: PAT SPICER TOPIC: COMMUNITY CONSULTATION SPEAKERS: PAT SPICER 8. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME 8.1 RHEA DEN BRAASEM QUESTION 1 What is the cost, per tonne, of material removed by truck from 62 Lake Macdonald Drive? Response provided by Chris Steel, Acting Director Infrastructure Services Council is unable to provide the cost per tonne of Material Removed from 62 Lake MacDonald Drive as it would be breaching commercial in confidence through release of Carruthers Contracting’s competitive pricing rates, being of sensitive information QUESTION 2 How many tonnes of material have been removed by truck from 62 Lake Macdonald Drive so far? Response provided by Chris Steel, Acting Director Infrastructure Services An estimated total tonnage of 15,500 tonnes from 62 Lake MacDonald Drive. ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 22 JANUARY 2026 8.2 JOHN SPENCER QUESTION 1 Would it not be better for Council to conduct community consultation surveys through an appropriate independent third party. This would almost certainly provide more detailed and accurate information and remove the perception of bias which is inherent in council run surveys. Does the council not think that this would improve community confidence that their views were being adequately represented particularly if the results were published in full and in a timely fashion? Response provided by Acting Chief Executive Officer, Richard MacGillivray Thank you, Mr Spencer, for your question. Council is committed to meaningful engagement that is reflective of the broader community and its practices are underpinned by the International Association of Public Participation (IAP2), globally recognised for its best practice approach to community engagement. Council also has a Community Engagement framework to provide the context on how to plan, design and implement the community engagement process for identified projects, strategies, and decision-making processes. Surveys are one part of the conversation with our community, as we adopt an integrated approach to community engagement which is consistent with best practice. There are a range of options offered, including face-to-face engagement and the opportunity to provide written submissions. Council staff make an operational decision to design, develop and test community engagement surveys in-house and these are developed by highly skilled engagement professionals. The cost to engage an independent third party to provide this service can be significant. For some of the complex or high-profile community engagement projects, such as the Noosaville Foreshore Infrastructure Master Plan, Pomona Place Plan and Housing Strategy, we have partnered with specialised consultants to assist with survey design and the analysis of data. In line with our Community Engagement Framework, we endeavour to “close the loop” with the community by reporting back what we heard and how it influenced Council’s decision-making. We acknowledge there have been some delays in providing reports for some of our recent engagement projects. We continually review and investigate methods to enhance our engagement and encourage members of the community to sign up to be part of our newly formed Community Engagement Feedback panel for future projects QUESTION 2 Would the Council please improve the sound system in the Council Chamber so that the person asking a public question is heard on the video proceedings with as much volume and clarity as the person responding for Council? Response provided by Acting Director Corporate Services, Margaret Gatt Regarding the public question about improving the sound system in the Council Chamber to ensure that public questions are heard as clearly as the responses, I propose an immediate and a longer-term solution. For the immediate solution, we can utilise the portable PA system with two mobile microphones. This system is already used effectively during our remote Council meetings throughout the region. By using the PA system, we can amplify the questions so that the streaming audio picks them up clearly, ensuring that the public question is heard with much more volume and clarity. In the long term, we plan to look at further permanent upgrades for the Council Chambers. ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 22 JANUARY 2026 8.3 BRIAN O'CONNOR QUESTION 1 Pomona remains the only town in Noosa Shire without a flagpole at its war memorial. In its responses outlining progress on the Pomona Place Plan initiatives, the council states that the placement of a flagpole at the Pomona War Memorial is 'under consideration' - an action that has been underway, on and off, since before the memorial was refurbished and rededicated in 2018. The question is this: This matter having been under investigation for the past seven years, what are the 'considerations' around a flagpole at this location and has that consideration resulted in any outcomes, such that the Pomona community can look forward to permission being granted for a flagpole to be located at the memorial rotunda in Joe Bazzo Park? Response provided by Director Community Services Kerri Contini Thank you, Mr. O‘Connor, for your question and your continued interest in the Pomona Place Plan initiatives. Council acknowledges your longstanding interest in the proposal for a permanent flagpole near the Pomona Rotunda War Memorial in Joe Bazzo Park. Over several years, Council officers have carefully evaluated various factors, including the park’s limited space, high community use, safety concerns related to children and pedestrian movement, and maintenance implications such as mowing access and obstruction risks. A permanent flagpole in the open park was not supported. These considerations were outlined in previous correspondence to you. The idea of installing a flagpole was included for consideration in the Pomona Place Plan and will be further assessed by Council to see if it could be accommodated in an existing garden bed. This proposal still needs more research and hasn't yet become a funded project. The evaluation process will continue as resources, staff capacity, and overall organisational priorities permit. In the interim, Council advises that temporary flagpoles can be effectively utilised for commemorative events, offering flexibility without permanently impacting the park's function. Additionally, the permanent flagpole located outside the Pomona Fire Station across the road is also available for use during commemorative occasions. QUESTION 2 If it takes seven years to consider something as relatively simple as the placement of a flagpole in a park, beside a war memorial at Pomona, what prospect is there that Noosa Council will complete all 52 actions in the Pomona Place Plan within a 10-year timeframe; some of those actions being complex, in need of detailed planning and requiring cooperation and considerable funding from other levels of government? Response provided by Director Strategic Planning & Environment Kim Rawlings The Pomona Place Plan has actions with specific timeframes for commencement to ensure implementation of the plan can be staged in a sustainable long term approach. A Draft Short Term Implementation Plan has been prepared showing good progress against many actions in the Place Plan. This will be continually monitored over time with medium and long term projects being considered over the appropriate timeframes as part of the council budget process to ensure adequate funding. ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 22 JANUARY 2026 8.4 PAT SPICER QUESTION 1 While there were restrictions on releasing information to the public regarding the loss or $2.4 million through fraud in December 2024, were all staff in the financial department fully briefed on the contents of the Queensland Audit Office report immediately after the report was received as it explicitly warned about the fraud risk in "super master file" data changes and provided a case study of a recent council loss through such data changes being made to supplier bank account details? Response provided by Acting Director Corporate Services Margaret Gatt Firstly, I’d like to confirm that whilst the initial loss was $2.3M, through recovery by the bank and our insurers, the current figure is $1.7M. This is still a substantial amount and Council does not take this lightly. We are making a range of changes and additions to prevent this happening again. Council was notified by QAO in March 2024 of the fraud event that targeted Gold Coast Council prior to the calculated attack on Noosa Council. Also as documented in our previous reports to the Audit and Risk committee and Council, the recommendations from the 2025 QAO Noosa Shire Council Interim Audit Report have been implemented or substantially progressed. Specifically; Council has met all reporting obligations Council has conducted regular mandatory cyber-fraud training to better equip our staff for such activities Council has strengthened processes for updating, maintaining and securing the vendor credit Masterfile including the development of a Vendor Maintenance Policy Council is in the process of establishing an independent, risk-based financial accountability program to review and audit the accuracy and proper use of financial information Council has substantially progressed the implementation of third-party payment protection software (EFTsure) to validate banking information QUESTION 2 Why is Noosa Council taking on the state responsibility of providing housing by spending millions above grants to remediate and install all infrastructure for housing at 64 Lake Macdonald Drive Cooroy as well as entering into a contract with Coast2Bay to build 26 units when it is a fact that this site does not meet the housing strategy actions of ready access to services, transport and proximity to work? Response provided by Director Strategic Planning & Environment Kim Rawlings The housing crisis currently gripping Australia is one that neither the State or Federal governments are going to be able to solve alone in a short time. Rather than sitting back and expecting the problem to be solved by other levels of government, Noosa Council along with many other Local Governments has chosen to be part of the solution. Despite the belief by some that this is not a Local Government responsibility, Local governments have a responsibility to ensure their communities are places people want to live and families can thrive, with amenities and services critical to people’s livelihoods. Local Governments are specifically required to plan for the needs of its community under the Local Government Act, this could legitimately include land use and development outcomes to support housing. Many Councils across Australia are increasingly exploring how they can support affordable housing in response to local needs including Sunshine Coast and Moreton Bay amongst others. Councils also have a critical role in enabling housing outcomes through planning, servicing and often land. ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 22 JANUARY 2026 Noosa Council's 2018 Social Justice Charter commits Council to implementing policies and providing services that decrease inequality, to doing what it can to ensure Noosa is a diverse community where there are affordable places for people to live. At the 2021 Census there were 2,461 low to medium income Noosa Shire households in housing stress. Since then, the situation has only worsened. To illustrate, the median weekly rent for Cooroy has increased from $500 at the time of the 2021 census to $800 in the September 2025 quarter. That's a 60% increase in 4 years. In endorsing the 2022 Housing Strategy Noosa Council committed to encouraging greater public and private investment in more social and affordable housing in the Shire and partnering with registered Community Housing Providers and others with the aim of providing more social and affordable. This included investigating Council owned land which might be put to the purpose of housing locals. The land at Lake Macdonald Drive was just one site subject to feasibility investigations with others being in the centres at Noosa Junction and at Tewantin. Thes actions are specifically listed in the Housing Strategy and therefore do meet the Housing strategy actions. A Guide for Local Councils in Delivery of Affordable Housing, produced by the ALGA, Housing Australia and Australian Community Housing has recently showcased Noosa Council's efforts, including the Cooroy land-based contribution to social housing delivery 9 MAYORAL MINUTES Nil. 10 NOTIFIED MOTIONS 10.1 THREE-MONTH TRIAL OF ALTERNATE SHARK MITIGATION MEASURES DURING SOUTHERN WHALE MIGRATION The following material was presented to the meeting in relation to this item: Cr Lorentson – refer to Attachment 2 to the Minutes dated 22 January 2026 Cr Wilkie - refer to Attachment 3 to the Minutes dated 22 January 2026 Cr Wilkie - refer to Attachment 4 to the Minutes dated 22 January 2026 Cr Wilkie - refer to Attachment 5 to the Minutes dated 22 January 2026 Cr Wilkie - refer to Attachment 6 to the Minutes dated 22 January 2026 Motion Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That Council write to the State requesting that, during the 2026 whale migration period, the Queensland Government consider a three-month trial replacing traditional shark nets with smart drumlines or other contemporary, non-lethal mitigation technologies that allow for the safe passage of migrating whales, with Noosa Main Beach proposed as the trial location. This trial should apply specifically to the southern migration period when whales, including vulnerable calves, are travelling south and when the majority of entanglements are known to occur. Amendment No.1 Moved: Cr Frank Wilkie Seconded: That the Motion be amended to read: A. Note the attached correspondence to and from the State Government on Noosa Council’s request to trial the removal of shark nets during whale migration season in conjunction with deployment of non-lethal mitigation methods, including smart drumlines and aerial drone ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 22 JANUARY 2026 surveillance, and B. Formulate a range of advocacy strategies, not limited to letter writing, to achieve the objective of a trial for shark net removal during whale migration season. These strategies are to include advocacy for a three-month trial during the southern migration period when whales, including vulnerable calves, are travelling south when the majority of entanglements are known to occur. Cr Lorentson called the amendment out of order according to Section 29.1 of the Standing Orders. The Chairperson ruled that the amendment was in order and not contrary to section 29.1 of the Standing Orders. Procedural Motion Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Nicola Wilson That the Chairperson's ruling be dissented from. For: Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Nicola Wilson, Against: Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener Amendment No. 1 was not considered by the meeting, as the dissent motion was carried, and the amendment was therefore considered out of order. Amendment No 2. Moved: Cr Frank Wilkie Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener That the Motion be amended to read: That Council: A. Note the attached correspondence (provided as Attachments 3 - 6 to the Minutes dated 22 January 2026) to and from the State Government on Noosa Council’s request to trial the removal of shark nets during whale migration season in conjunction with deployment of non-lethal mitigation methods, including smart drumlines and aerial drone surveillance, and B. Councillors discuss a range of advocacy methods, not limited to letter writing, to achieve the objective of a trial for shark net removal during whale migration season. These are to include advocacy for a three-month trial during the southern migration period when whales, including vulnerable calves, are travelling south when the majority of entanglements are known to occur. Lost. For: Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener Against: Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Nicola Wilson Council Resolution Moved: Cr Amelia Lorentson Seconded: Cr Jessica Phillips That Council write to the State requesting that, during the 2026 whale migration period, the Queensland Government consider a three-month trial replacing traditional shark nets with smart drumlines or other contemporary, non-lethal mitigation technologies that allow for the safe passage of migrating whales, with Noosa Main Beach proposed as the trial location. ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 22 JANUARY 2026 This trial should apply specifically to the southern migration period when whales, including vulnerable calves, are travelling south and when the majority of entanglements are known to occur. 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 10.2 INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF COMMUNITY SURVEYS Motion Moved: Cr Jessica Phillips Seconded: Cr Amelia Lorentson That Council: A. Requires community engagement surveys that are developed to support consultation and/or decision-making for significant Council projects, undergo an independent review by a suitably qualified third party prior to release, to ensure methodological integrity, neutrality of framing, and confidence in the reliability of the data used to inform Council decision-making; and B. Requests the CEO to provide a report back to Council for further consideration and/or decision that explores the potential opportunities and costs in line with Council’s Standing Orders. Amendment Moved: Cr Brian Stockwell Seconded: Cr Tom Wegener That the motion be amended to read: That Council A. Requires community engagement surveys that are developed to support consultation and/or decision-making for significant Council projects, undergo an independent review by a suitably qualified third party prior to release, to ensure methodological integrity, neutrality of framing, and confidence in the reliability of the data used to inform Council decision-making; and B. Requests the CEO to provide a report back to Council for further consideration and/or decision that explores the potential opportunities, implications and costs of obtaining independent review of surveys to be used as part of the community engagement on significant Council projects and plans. in line with Council’s Standing Orders. Lost. For: Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Brian Stockwell Against: Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Tom Wegener, Cr Nicola Wilson Council Resolution Moved: Cr Jessica Phillips Seconded: Cr Amelia Lorentson That Council: A. Requires community engagement surveys that are developed to support consultation and/or decision-making for significant Council projects, undergo an independent review ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 22 JANUARY 2026 by a suitably qualified third party prior to release, to ensure methodological integrity, neutrality of framing, and confidence in the reliability of the data used to inform Council decision-making; and B. Requests the CEO to provide a report back to Council for further consideration and/or decision that explores the potential opportunities and costs in line with Council’s Standing Orders. Carried. For: Cr Frank Wilkie, Cr Karen Finzel, Cr Jessica Phillips, Cr Amelia Lorentson, Cr Nicola Wilson Against: Cr Brian Stockwell, Cr Tom Wegener 11. CONSIDERATION OF COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS 11.1 AUDIT & RISK COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS DATED 12 DECEMBER 2025 11.1.1. CEO UPDATE That Council note the CEO Update to the Audit & Risk Committee dated 12 December 2025. 11.1.2. QAO / KPMG - 2025 AUDIT COMMITEE BRIEFING PAPER That Council note the Briefing Paper provided by the Queensland Audit Office (QAO) & KPMG to the Audit & Risk Committee meeting dated 12 December 2025. 11.1.3. WORKPLACE HEALTH AND SAFETY ANNUAL REPORT 2024/25 That Council note the report by the Workplace Health and Safety Co-ordinator to the Audit and Risk Committee Meeting dated 12 December 2025 regarding Workplace Health and Safety Annual Report 2024/25. 11.1.4. CROWE: RECRUITMENT MANAGEMENT AUDIT (FINAL REPORT) That Council note the report by the A/Executive Officer to the Audit & Risk Committee dated 12 December 2025 regarding the (Crowe) Final Report for the Internal Audit of Recruitment Management. 11.1.5. BRIEFING PAPER ON OUTSTANDING (ICT) ACTIONS ITEMS That Council note the report by the Acting ICT Manager to the Audit and Risk Committee meeting dated 12th December 2025 on outstanding Action Items from previous meetings. 11.1.6. UPDATE ON THE REVIEW OF OUTANDING ACTION ITEMS That Council note the report by the A/Executive Officer to the Committee dated 12 December 2025 regarding the update on the review of outstanding action items ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 22 JANUARY 2026 from previous internal audits. 11.1.7. 2026 DRAFT ANNUAL ROLLING WORKS PLAN AND STANDING AGENDA ITEMS The Audit & Risk Committee approved the 2026 proposed annual rolling work plan and standing agenda items listing provided in the agenda. 11.1.8. DISCUSSION TO RECOMMEND NEW CHAIR OF AUDIT AND RISK COMMITTEE That Council note the recommendation of the Audit & Risk Committee to appoint Ian Rushworth as the Chair of the Audit & Risk Committee for a term of three (3) years 11.1.9. CONFIDENTIAL: 2024 FRAUD EVENT ANALYSIS, CORRECTIVE ACTIONS AND STATUS UPDATE That Council note the report by the Acting Director Corporate Services, Margaret Gatt to the Audit and Risk Committee meeting dated 12 December 2025 regarding the 2024 Fraud Event Corrective Actions and Status Update. 11.1.10. CONFIDENTIAL - PUBLIC INTEREST DISCLOSURE UPDATE - S254D(3) LG REG 2012 (QLD) That Council note the report by the Governance Manager to the Audit & Risk Committee meeting dated 12 December 2025 and the update on public interest disclosure matters. 11.1.11. AUDIT & RISK COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS EN BLOC Council Resolution Moved: Cr Tom Wegener Seconded: Cr Nicola Wilson That the Recommendations of the Audit and Risk Committee meeting dated 12 December 2025 be received and adopted. 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 AUDIT & RISK COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS DATED 9 JANUARY 2026 11.2.1. QAO / KPMG 2025 CLOSING REPORT That Council note Attachment 1 titled 2025 Closing Report by QAO / KPMG to the Audit & Risk Committee dated 9 January 2026. ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 22 JANUARY 2026 11.2.2. 2024-2025 ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENTS That Council A. Note the report by the Acting Financial Services Manager to the Audit and Risk Committee dated 9 January 2025; and B. Approve the 2024/25 Annual Financial Statements for certification by the Mayor and Chief Executive Officer. 11.2.3. NOOSA SHIRE COUNCIL ANNUAL REPORT 2024 - 2025 That Council A. Note the report by the Governance Manager to the Audit & Risk Committee meeting dated 12 January 2026 regarding corporate reporting; and B. Note Council’s draft Annual Report for 2024 - 2025 financial year. 11.2.4. AUDIT & RISK COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS EN BLOC Council Resolution Moved: Cr Nicola Wilson Seconded: Cr Amelia Lorentson That the Recommendations of the Audit and Risk Committee meeting dated 9 January 2026 be received and adopted. 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 11.3 GENERAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS DATED 19 JANUARY 2026 11.3.1. ENDORSEMENT OF NOOSA LOCAL DISASTER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2026 That Council A. Note the report by the Disaster Management Officer to the General Committee Meeting dated 19 January 2026 B. Repeal the Noosa Local Disaster Management Plan 2023; and C. Adopt the Noosa Local Disaster Management Plan 2026 as provided at Attachment 1 to the Endorsement of the Noosa Local Disaster Management Plan 2026 report. D. Authorise the CEO to make minor changes or amendments to the Plan prior to publishing the final document. 11.3.2. RESPONSE TO NOTICE OF MOTION - TRIAL OF REMOTE RESCUE TUBES/LIFE RINGS AT UNPATROLLED BEACHES That Council A. Note the report by the Acting Local Laws and Environmental Health Manager to the General Committee dated 19 January 2026 ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 22 JANUARY 2026 B. Support Surf Lifesaving Queensland as the State’s peak coastal safety authority and Surf Lifesaving Clubs with their funded and managed roll out programs; and C. Defer the implementation of a Council managed trial of remote rescue tubes and life rings at unpatrolled beach locations until: 1. The risks associated with current trials and any emerging issues at Noosa National Park, as well as programs elsewhere in Australia and overseas, have been critically evaluated by Council; and 2. An appropriate evidence-based management strategy has been developed to manage those risks and issues (detailed as Option 2 in the report). 11.3.3. PLANNING APPLICATIONS DECIDED BY DELEGATED AUTHORITY – NOVEMBER 2025 That Council note the report by the Development Assessment Manager to the General Committee Meeting on 19 January 2026 regarding applications that have been decided by delegated authority for November 2025 as provided at Attachment 1 to the Report. 11.3.4. PROCUREMENT CONTRACTS ASSESSMENT WORKING TEAM - CONTRACT AWARDS UNDER CEO DELEGATION That Council note the report by the Acting Director Corporate Services to the General Committee Meeting dated 19 January 2026 for contracts awarded under CEO Delegation, via the Procurement Contracts Assessment Working Team, for the period 1 July 2025 to 31 December 2025. 11.3.5. FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE REPORT - DECEMBER 2025 That Council note the report by Revenue Services Manager and Financial Services Manager (Acting) to the General Committee dated 19 January 2026 regarding Council's financial performance to 31 December 2025. 11.3.6. GENERAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS EN BLOC Council Resolution Moved: Cr Jessica Phillips Seconded: Cr Karen Finzel That the Recommendations of the General Committee meeting dated 19 January 2026 be received and adopted. 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 Nil. ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 22 JANUARY 2026 13 CONFIDENTIAL SESSION Nil. 14 NEXT MEETING The next Ordinary Meeting will be held at Council Chambers, 9 Pelican St, Tewantin on Thursday 19 February 2026 at 10.00am. 15 MEETING CLOSURE The meeting closed at 1.17pm.
Meeting Transcript
Frank Wilkie 00:00.000
To the Ordinary Meeting, the first day of the 22nd of January, the day of the meeting opened at 10am, acknowledged that we were meeting on the lands of the traditional custodians of the Kabi Kabi people, Amar especially, although his past isn't emerging, and reiterated reiterate their invitation for us to join them as joint custodians in respecting and caring for this beautiful place that we all love, and respecting and caring for each other. I'd also like to acknowledge today as National Day of Mourning for the victims of the... the Bondi Beach terrorist attack, and that is the reason that Council is flying the Australian flag at half-mast today as our other government is in the country. The Australian Government has invited members of the public to observe one minute of silence. At 6:01pm. Queensland time on this National Day morning to honour those impacted by the violent British terrorist attack. I know that all councillors are in attendance and that Councillor Wilson is attending online. Can you hear us Councillor Wilson? Nicola Wilson 01:01.746
Can, thank you everyone. Frank Wilkie 01:06.686
Thank you Councillor Wilson. We also welcome Director Richard MacGillivray, who is acting CEO and Larry Sengstock's captain. Welcome to the chairs. I'm for this confirmation of the minutes. Can I have a move and a second for the minutes of the ordinary meeting held on 18 December 2025. I'm happy to move. Councillor Lorentson, thank you. I'm happy to second. Councillor Finzel, all in favour? Amelia Lorentson 01:36.224
I would like to submit this petition, purpose of the petition is the undersigned have requested that Noosa Council redesign the proposed new toilet structure near the big pelican to make it smaller, less obtrusive and maximise the existing grass area. I would like to present this to the CEO for his consideration and also response to the petitioner. Thank you. Frank Wilkie 02:10.913
Just as a question for staff, Chris, this toilet block is the one that's designed for all buildings to save access? Correct, yes, changing places. All of it is a toilet block for the terrorists. Thank you. All in favour? that's unanimous. There are no presentations. We have some deputations, two deputations, 15 members allocated for a deputation. First, our speakers, Willy Ostwald, Jill Brownlee from Friends of Noosa Botanic Gardens, and Robert Wilson, Master Plan for Noosa Botanic Gardens. Willy and Jill, would you like to come to the electorate? Welcome. Willy Ostwald 03:05.100
Did everyone hear me? Okay. Good morning, Chairman Wilkie, councillors, other ladies and gentlemen. Thanks for the opportunity for presenting this deputation from the Friends of Noosa Botanic Gardens. Representing the Friends today are myself, also one of the Friends representatives on their Stakeholder Housing Reference Group for the Noosa Botanic Gardens Master Plan and also Jill Brownlee, our long-standing president and also a life member of the Friends of Noosa. The Noosa Botanic Gardens was established over 35 years ago through the advocacy of a group of Lake Macdonald residents who had a vision and convinced the council at the time to turn what was a dumping ground and an eyesore into a botanic gardens not just a park. The collaboration and vision between council and residents 35 years ago ensured that we and future generations can enjoy this wonderful asset. How often have you heard of the Botanic Gardens being Noosa hidden gem? The draft master plan is designed to guide the future of the Botanic Gardens over the next 25 years. The community feedback clearly endorses the revamped entrance zone and new arrivals area, the establishment of accessible pathways, including the garden promenade, the rejuvenated amphitheatre, including additional seating and shade to make the space more usable, and a community shelter and information hub with kiosk and public amenities. These changes will allow more users to access the gardens and enjoy the eight hectares of collections and gardens. The have carefully considered the draft master plan and although we agree with many aspects, we believe there is a lack of focus on stewardship and development of the plant collections. Without this, there is a real risk risk of turning Noosa Botanic Gardens into a beautiful park with plants, rather than a true botanic institution with purpose, scientific value, and educational integrity for future generations to enjoy. Our primary concern is that the draft master plan has not addressed one of its key objectives, to be stewards of the botanical collection through respecting, enhancing, protecting, and promoting the legacy of the existing and future collections. currently the draft master plan is all about structural improvement to the gardens with next to no planning for the actual gardens and future botanical collections which is the key reason why people visit a botanic gardens in the first place international data attests that a region's botanic garden is usually the first or second destination for most tourists to an area the botanic gardens of australia and new zealand or begans is the organisation that most botanic gardens in australia and new zealand belong to including Noosa botanic gardens begans believes a master plan and i quote should set the direction of priorities of a botanic garden over the medium to long term and will have direct implications for the development of its living collections development and or implementation of a living collections plan should be a recommendation Collections Plan should be a recommendation of any Botanic Gardens Master Plan. A Living Collection Management Plan for the gardens would include thematic planning and interpretation, evaluation of the existing collections, identification of gaps in Botanic Gardens collections, a detailed management plan which covers criteria for assessing whether a plant is to be added or removed from the gardens, records management, managing invasive species, coping with climate change, etc. It would also provide framework and plan for the future of the Botanic Gardens in respect to plantings and collections, thereby assisting in the detailed design stage of the master plan implementation. From the outset, the Friends have been advocating for, if least a living collection management plan as part of the master plan for gardens. We requested that the brief to the consultant include this. At all the Stakeholder Housing Reference Group meetings, I raised our concerns regarding the plantings and collections. Our formal response the draft master plan reiterated these concerns. The gardens has faced and is faced with several issues and challenges. All these bear out the importance of implementing a living collections management plan. It's worth me touching on some examples of these issues in a bit more detail. Noosa Botanic Gardens has had five different garden supervisors over the last six years, all of whom have different ideas on the plantings in the garden. This has resulted in lack of clarity in the thematics of the garden, gardens being planted up and then pulled out 12 months later, plus a lack of forward planning. Existing plant collections have become become fragmented over this time, diminishing the garden's education. over this time, diminishing the garden's educational conservation and curatorial value. There has been little focus placed on record keeping of the plants, which is a key requirement for any botanic gardens. In the absence of council action, the Friends have taken the initiative and have spent many man hours over the last two years identifying, classifying and mapping the existing plants in the garden. This information was provided to the consultants preparing the master plan. Several rare and endangered trees that were mistaken by council staff for more common varieties have been removed from the gardens In some areas of the garden, the plantings are replicated, overgrown, dying, or simply placed in the wrong spot. This has resulted in overcrowding and deep shaded areas in the garden, resulting in poor growth and understory. species, as well as poor growth in the development of the existing trees. The Noosa Botanic Gardens doesn't have its own budget, and there is no maintenance or development program in place. Recently, the bridal walk structure was removed, and it has rotted so badly over recent years. This area can no longer be used for weddings, and we understand that there is no budget for its replacement. Management Plan would assist in overcoming many of these issues, and provide a detailed plan to assist in the future development of the Botanic Gardens. It would also assist in identifying the future funding required to maintain the gardens. The Friends want to collaborate with Council to achieve a Living Collection Management Plan, using the toolkit provided by the GANs as the starting point. We strongly recommend that, as a minimum, the Draft Master Plan be amended to include the immediate appointment of The project working group should include representatives from Council, the Friends, and external horticulturists with Botanic Gardens experience. to value Noosa Botanic Gardens as a Botanic Gardens and not just another park. We are ultimately asking Jill Brownlee 11:13.300
I thought it was probably worthwhile just for those who are maybe not as familiar with what the Friends are all about, just to give you a little bit of a rundown. The Friends have been involved with the Noosa Botanic Gardens since and we currently have over 160 members and we've steadily increased our presence in social media and the like. One of our key objectives is to assist in the maintenance and management of Noosa Botanic Gardens, our MOU with Council. focuses on the collaborative relationship between Council and the Friends. All our activities serve as a positive, interactive link between the gardens, the community and Council. I think some statistics are worth mentioning. Last year we clocked up Last year we clocked up over 2,000 volunteer hours assisting with the removal of fallen palm fronds, of which there are many of them, weeding, pruning, planting and mulching. On average, once a month we conduct either garden walks or botanic themed workshops in the gardens. In 2025, our propagation team not only propagated plants for the gardens but raised just over $25,000 at our three plant sales. Now that the Master Plan offers a way forward, we expect to collaborate with Council as to how best to invest the funds raised last year and accumulated over the last five years. but in our feedback submission as Willy has mentioned we pointed out on page three of the draft plan which states all proposed works around the existing collection will be a matter for detailed design. We'll include the survey so not to blow our trumpets survey of existing collections and key species, we'd like us to reiterate that the Friends have spent the last two years doing just that, so that is already available and won't need to be done. Unlike the proposed structural improvements under the Master Plan, the implementation of living... collection management policy within the draft Master Plan could be achieved in the short term, you know, in the next 12 months, at minimum cost, but will provide huge benefits in protecting and planning the Noosa, Tewantin Gardens. So, as a major stakeholder in the gardens, we ask the council to support the Friends' request for a living collection management plan to be included as part of the Master Plan. Thank you, Jill. Thank you, Willy. Frank Wilkie 13:42.480
Next up we have Pat Spicer talking on the topic of community consultation. Spicer, welcome back. Pat Spicer 13:54.880
Mayor and Councillors, thank you for the opportunity to speak on community consultation. Effective community consultation requires more than notification. It requires a provision of clear, accessible information and meaningful, respectful engagement before decisions are So community input can genuinely inform outcomes. Transparency is fundamental to this process. It requires proactive information, sharing... rather than relying on requests, meetings that are open and inclusive and supporting documents that are regularly available, timely and understandable to the residents. approach relies mainly on its website, limited publicity, selective letter drops, pop-up events, one-on-one engagement with staff, Facebook posts and your say... Council's current... While this approach may be efficient and cost-effective for council, it creates significant barriers for many residents. Reliance on the website assumes residents have the time, technical skills and capacity to locate and interpret lengthy and technical documents. This excludes many people and discourages meaningful participation. Pop-up events often held during business hours and in locations do not support inclusive or detailed discussion. One-on-one engagement requires residents to be already informed. Without prior access to information, such conversations cannot be effective. Facebook is not universally used and should not be relied upon as a primary consultation tool. Requiring QR code registration for meetings creates unnecessary access barriers with simpler alternatives. Finally, your say surveys are widely perceived as instruments for paging sentiment rather rather than genuine consultation. When surveys appear leading or outcome driven, being structured to support predetermined outcomes confidence in the process is undermined and participation declines. I now turn to the case of 62 Lake Macdonald Drive, Cooroy. Council advised residents Council advised residents in 2024 that a letter had been sent in July 2022. Most residents did not receive that letter. One resident who did receive it requested further information but no additional information was provided. Council's intentions for the site were embedded in the Noosa Housing Strategy 2022, Action 5511, with planning activity commencing as early as 2019. A letter drop occurred on the 23rd of May 2024 to residents in Dianella Court and via Facebook at the Council meeting in the community meeting in Cooroy on the 15th of May 2025, the Director of Strategy and Environment confirmed that residents in Carey Street did not receive that letter. A broader letter drop on the 5th of August 2025 to more than 130 surrounding properties was an improvement. However, by May 2024, planning was already well advanced. A land purchase price had been agreed. Grant funding secured. A memorandum of understanding signed. Planning had moved well beyond what could be reasonably described as preliminary or essential behind-the-scenes work. At that stage scenes work. At that stage, meaningful community consultation should already have occurred. Following the May 2024 correspondence, residents requested meetings with council. With broader resident participation through an active email and messaging group, these meetings are described as community consultation on council's housing in Cooroy web page, which A steering committee was formed. Attendance of meetings was restricted, particularly where presentations were involved. Presentation materials were provided only to attendees and with instructions not to share them. This approach is inconsistent with principles of transparency. Open meetings publicly available information and genuine consultation small group engagement alone is inadequate where decisions affect the wider community and set precedents precedents for future development, particularly in hinterland towns such as Cooroy. I now refer to Council's resolution on the 20th of January 2025, which requires that the process for considering and investigating future uses of lots 2 and 3 at 64 Lake Macdonald Drive include community consultation. That consultation is proposed to occur only after after feasibility work at Noosa Heads and Tewantin. Residents are extremely concerned that civil works currently underway deliver infrastructure suitable for housing effectively pre-empting future decision-making and limiting genuine consultation on alternate uses. To avoid misunderstanding, I would like to clearly articulate the community's expectations in relation to community consultation as follows. First, a public community forum, open to all residents, held in Cooroy, on the future uses of Lock 2 and 3 at 64 Lake Macdonald Drive. Second, clear and accessible notification of that forum, including date, time, location and key issues, using methods that do not rely solely on digital platforms. Third, open and transparent information sharing, including a clear explanation of the implications of receiving $178,000 from the Australian Government's Housing Support Program and $4,099,040 from the Queensland Government's residential activation. nformation sharing, including a clear explanation of the implications of receiving $178,000 from the Australian Government's residential activation. in outcomes. Consistent with Council's resolutions and stated consultation processes. Finally, Cooroy seeks equitable treatment. Hinterland communities should not experience reduced transparency or consultation compared with coastal centres. Thank you for your time. The President: Thank you, Pat. Frank Wilkie 22:11.340
The President: We have four submissions for public question time. The first application with two questions is from Ms. Ria Den Braasem. Ms. Den Braasem could be here today and she requested that Ms. Pat Spicer read the questions, which will be answered by Chris Steel, Acting Director of Infrastructure Services. Ms. Spicer, you already have elected. Ms. Ria Den Braasem: Thank you. The President: Let's hear your questions, please. please. Pat Spicer 22:34.090
Through the Chair. Ms. Ria Den Braasem: Through you, Chair. First question. What is the cost per tonne of material removed by truck from 6264... Chris Steel 22:49.451
Thank you for your questions. Council was unable to provide the cost for the tonne of material removed from Lake Macdonald Drive. It would be breaching the commercial rights of the contractor. This is sensitive information. Jessica Phillips 23:07.320
Question 2. Pat Spicer 23:08.700
How many tonnes of material have been removed by a truck from 62 Lake Macdonald Drive so far? Chris Steel 23:16.560
Thank you again for your second question. The amount of tonnage so far approximately is 15,500 tonnes. Thank you Matt. The next application with two questions from Mr John Spencer. And question one will be answered by Acting CEO Richard MacGillivray. Question two will be answered by Acting Director of Court Services Margaret Gatt. Thank you Chairman. John Spencer 23:54.600
My question has partly been raised by a previous speaker. The background to my question relates to the ways in which Noosa Council gathers information on opinions, as is required by the relevant statutory acts. The background is that these consultation processes, or surveys, are often conducted, as we've heard, in-house using council staff. The results are often presented The results are often presented as a very brief summary with no detailed analysis or breakdown and only superficial mention of the methodology. This type of consultation, as we've heard, does not inspire community confidence, as there will perception of bias towards pre-existing council plans. Adverse community reaction to the Noosa River Forefront Plan and now the new Destination Management Plan indicates that carrying out an in-house community consultation process is not always entirely satisfying. Determining public opinion on any subject is a skilled process and organisations exist which specialise in this. One such company claims it is used by 60% of local governments throughout Australia. Obtaining detailed information on public opinion in this way, as part of the planning process, would be cost effective as time and money spent on plans unacceptable to the community would not be compressed. very simply is, would it not improve community confidence in the consultation process if council conducted surveys and opinion polls through an appropriately qualified independent third party? Richard MacGillivray 25:48.013
Thank you very much Mr Spencer for your question. I appreciate it. Council is committed to meaningful engagement that is reflective of a broader community and its practices are underpinned by the International Association of Public Participation, IAP. Globally recognised for its best practice approach to community engagement. Council also has a community engagement framework to provide the context on how to plan, design and implement the community engagement process for identified projects, strategies and decision making processes. Surveys are one part of the conversation with our community as we adopt an integrated approach to community engagement which is consistent with best practice. There are a range of options offered. including face-to-face engagement and the opportunity to provide written submissions. Council staff make an operational decision to design, develop and test community engagement surveys in-house and these are developed by highly skilled engagement professionals. The cost to engage in an independent third party to provide the service can be significant. Some of the complex or high-profile community engagement projects such as the Noosaville Foreshore Infrastructure Master Plan, Pomona Place Plan and the Housing Strategy, we have partnered with specialist consultants to assist with survey design and analysis of the data. In line with our community engagement framework, we endeavour to close the loop with the community by reporting back what we've heard and how it has influenced Council's decision making. We acknowledge that there has been some delays in providing reports for some of our recent engagement projects. We continually review and investigate... to enhance their engagement and encourage community... members of the community to sign up and be part of our newly formed community engagement feedback panel for future projects. John Spencer 27:40.137
Second question, the background to this which is far less important Mr Chairman. The background here is that the audio-visual system we have in this chamber which is used to make it to a level to the public the proceeds of council including public questions such as this is manifested on state-of-the-art. The... the background... Not only can the person asking the public question not be heard but much of the proceedings of ordinary meetings can be hard to hear and the image quality is such that it can be hard to know who is speaking. And motions put on display during council meetings can often not be seen clearly. So my second question is will the council improve the quality of the audio visual system used to make available to the public the proceedings of ordinary meetings and public questions? and public questions. Frank Wilkie 28:36.067
Thank you. Director, Acting Director Margaret Gatt will answer your question. Margaret Gatt 28:41.687
Thank you, Mr. Spencer, for your question about improving our sound system in the council chamber to ensure that public questions are heard as clearly as the responses. I have proposed an immediate and long-term solution. The immediate is within the chamber today. For the immediate solution, we can utilise our portable PA system with two mobile microphones. This system is already used effectively during our remote council meetings throughout the region. By using this PA system, we can amplify For the immediate-- the questions so that the streaming audio picks them up clearly, ensuring that the public question is heard with much more volume and clarity. But in the longer term, we plan to investigate and understand costings to further permanent upgrades for the council chamber. John Spencer 29:27.386
Thank you, Mr Spencer. Thank you very much. Frank Wilkie 29:31.126
The third application for two questions is from Mr Brian O 'Connor. Mr O 'Connor, welcome to the lectern. The first question will be answered by Acting Director of Community Services, Paul Brinkman, on behalf of Kerri Contini. And the second question will be responded to by Margaret Gatt, on Brian O'Connor 29:50.983
Thank you, Councillors. Pomona remains the only town in Noosa Shire without a flagpole at its war memorial. In its responses outlining progress on the Pomona Place Plan initiatives, the Council states that the placement of a flagpole at the Pomona War Memorial is under consideration? An action that has been underway on and off since before the memorial was refurbished and rededicated in 2018. The question is this: this matter having been under investigation for the past seven years, what are the considerations around are the considerations around a flagpole at this location? And has that consideration resulted in any outcomes such that the Pomona community can look forward to permission being granted for a flagpole to be located at the memorial rotunda in Joe Bazzo Park? Frank Wilkie 30:52.396
Mr. Brinkman. Paul Brinkman 31:01.040
Thank you, Mr. O 'Connor, for your question and your continued interest in the Pomona Place Plan initiatives. Council acknowledges your longstanding interest in the proposal for a permanent flagpole near the Pomona Rotunda War Memorial in Joe Bazzo Park. Over several years, council officers have carefully evaluated various factors, including the park's limited space, high community use, safety concerns related to children and pedestrian movement, and maintenance implications such as mowing access and A permanent flagpole in the open park was not supported. These considerations were outlined in previous correspondence to you. The idea of installing a flagpole was included for consideration in the Pomona Place Plan see if it could be accommodated in an existing garden bed. and will be further assessed by This proposal still needs more research and hasn't yet become a funded project. The evaluation process will continue as resources, staff capacity and overall organisational priorities permit. In the interim, Council advised that temporary flagpoles can be effectively utilised for commemorative events offering flexibility without permanently impacting the park's functions. In the interim, Council advised... Additionally, the permanent flagpole located outside the Pomona Fire Station across the road is also available for use during commemorative locations. SPEAKER_14 32:29.300
My second question is this: If it takes seven years to consider something as relatively simple as the placement of a flagpole in a park beside a war memorial at Pomona, what prospect is there that Noosa Council will complete all 52 actions in the Pomona place plan within a ten year time frame? Some of these actions being complex, in need of detailed planning and requiring cooperation consideration and considerable funding from other levels of government. Margaret Gatt 33:12.308
Responding on behalf of direct strategy environment Kim Rawlings. The Pomona place plan has actions with specific time frames for commencement to ensure implementation of the plan can be staged in a sustainable long-term approach. A draft short implementation plan has been prepared showing good progress against many actions in the place plan. This will be continually monitored over time with medium and long-term projects being considered over the appropriate time frames as part of the council budget process Frank Wilkie 33:47.189
The last application of two questions is again from Mrs Pat Spicer. Mrs Spicer, your two questions will be answered by Acting Director Margaret Gatt on behalf of the Director of Strategy and Environment, New York City. Pat Spicer 33:59.731
Through the Chair. Background information. The Queensland Board of Office Local Government 2024 Report, Report 13/2024/25, available on the website. The press release in October 2025 stating Council had been directed not to release information about the fraud so as not to jeopardise ongoing investigations. The report of the December ordinary meeting outlined the rather comprehensive measures that have been put in place in retrospect. The report of the December... But were staff aware of this possible fraud target area prior to the event? So my question is, while there were... question is, while there were restrictions on releasing information to the public regarding the loss of 2.4 million through fraud in December 2024, were all the staff in the financial department fully briefed on the contents of the Queensland Audit Office report immediately after the report was received, as it explicitly warned received as it explicitly warned about the fraud risk in super master file data changes and provided a case study of a recent council loss through such data changes being made to supplier bank account details. Margaret Gatt 35:33.700
Thank you Mrs Spicer for your question. I'd like to confirm that whilst the initial loss was 2.3 million dollars through recovery by the bank and our insurers the current figure is 1.7 million. This is still a substantial amount amount and Council does not take this lightly. We have been making a range of changes and additions to prevent this from happening again. Council was notified by the QAO in March 2024 at the fraud event that targeted the City of Gold the calculated attack on Noosa Council. As also documented in our previous reports to the Audit and Risk Committee and to Council, the recommendations from the 2025 QAO Noosa Shire Council Interim Audit Report have been implemented or substantially progressed. Council has met all its reporting obligations. Council have conducted regular mandatory cyber fraud training to better equip our staff for such activities. Council has strengthened processes for updating, maintaining and securing the vendor credit master file, including the development of a vendor maintenance policy. Council is in the process of establishing an independent risk-based financial accountability program. To review and audit the accuracy and proper use of financial information and council has substantially progressed the implementation of third party payment protection software. To validate banking information. Thank you. Frank Wilkie 37:01.292
Next question, Mrs Spicer. Pat Spicer 37:03.072
Through the Chair, I don't feel that answers the question because it doesn't say when the staff were informed back in And that was my question. The report that Margaret Gatt has done has been exemplary and I admire the way she's undertaken her role. I'm gonna put it right now in front of I know I have no right to coin. Background information. Housing strategy. The housing crisis requires action by all levels of government. Council has acted in this area by amending the Noosa Plan to allow greater diversity in housing, making it easier for housing to be built on land owned by churches, etc, allowing residents to build granny flats or smaller houses on their existing residential lot, and providing incentives for developers to build affordable housing. Council has Were originally set up for four essential services to the community. Roads, water, waste collection and waste water. Responsibility of local government today are quite extensive, of including infrastructure, local roads, footpaths. stormwater, drains and bridges, waste management, public health, overseeing public health services including food inspections and managing public pools and other facilities, animal control, registration, parking, planning and Land use and zoning, building approval, signage and advertising, community services and facilities, parks and recreation, libraries and community centres, arts and culture, aged and child care, safety and environment, fire prevention, emergency management. Environmental management, government and representation, representation to other levels of government, local laws, strategic planning. While this list is not exhaustive, it serves to indicate that Council a large area of responsibility. The why question is one I get asked regularly and can't answer the question, so I'm asking: Why is Noosa Council taking on the State responsibility of providing housing by spending millions above grants to remediate and install all infrastructure for housing at 64 Lake Macdonald Drive, Cooroy, as well as entering into a contract with Coast2Bay to build 26 units when it is in fact that the site does not meet the housing strategy actions of ready access to services, transport and proximity to work? Thank you, Mrs Spicer. Frank Wilkie 39:56.022
You're ready to go. Margaret Gatt 40:01.020
Thank you, Mrs Spicer, for your second question. I'm responding on behalf of Director Strategy Planning and Environment, Kim Rawlings. The housing crisis currently gripping Australia is one that neither the State or federal governments are going to be able to solve alone in a short time. Rather than sitting back expecting the problem to be solved by other levels of government, Noosa Council along with many other local governments has chosen to be part of the solution. Despite the belief that this is not a local government responsibility, local governments have a responsibility. responsibility to ensure that their communities are places where people want to live and families can thrive with amenities and services critical to people's livelihoods. Local governments are specifically required to plan for the needs of their community under the Local Government Act. This could legitimately include land use and development outcomes to support housing. Many councils across Australia are increasingly exploring how they can support affordable housing in response to local needs including Sunshine Coast and Moreton Bay amongst others. Councils also have a critical role in enabling housing outcomes through planning, servicing and often land. Noosa Council's 2018 Social Justice Charter commits Council to implementing policies and providing services that decrease inequality to doing what it can to ensure Noosa is a diverse community. there are affordable places for people to live. At the 2021 census there were 2,461 low to medium income Noosa Shire households in housing stress. Since then the situation has only worsened. To illustrate, the median weekly rent for Cooroy has increased from $500 a week at the time of the 2021 census to $800 in the September 25 quarter. To illustrate the median situation has only worsened. This is a 60% increase in four years. in endorsing the 2022 housing strategy, Noosa Council committed to encouraging greater public and private investment in more social and affordable housing in the Shire and partnering with the registered community housing providers and others with the aim of providing more social and affordable housing. This included investigating council owned land which might be put to the use of the purpose of housing loggers. The land at Lake Macdonald Drive was just one subject, one site subject to feasibility investigations with others being in the centres at Noosa Junction and at Tewantin. These actions are specifically listed in the housing strategy and therefore do meet the Thank you very much. A guide for local governments in delivery of affordable housing produced by the ALGA Australia Local Government Association, Housing Australia and Australian Community Housing has recently showcased... Noosa Council's efforts, including the Cooroy land-based contribution to social housing delivery. Frank Wilkie 42:59.164
Thank you very much. Thank you, Mrs Spicer, for your finance and advocacy. Ladies and gentlemen, we now take a ten-minute adjournment. Thank you. Okay, we're back again. Welcome, everyone. We're now up to item nine of the agenda. There are no Mayoral minutes. Item ten, we have have two motions which were included in the agenda. 10.1, three-month trial of alternate shark mitigation measures during southern whale migration. Councillor Lorentson, would you like to move the motion? Amelia Lorentson 01:00:29.710
I do. do. I'd like to move the motion that council, and can I ask for just a correction, that council write to the State. I'd like to move the motion. SPEAKER_04 01:00:42.885
So delete Minister for the Environment and Tourism. It's actually the Minister for Primary Industries, Tony Parrott. Point of order. Point of order. Brian Stockwell 01:00:53.925
Question was what's on the board now, what was submitted or was the original submitted? Because there can't be an amendment of a motion. Amelia Lorentson 01:01:02.265
That's not the, that's actually not the That was given to me by the CEO when I actually noted the mistake a few days ago. So the advice, and I can pull out the advice from the CEO, because I attempted to move this, make the change about a week ago, and was told just to change it on the floor. So happy to... Frank Wilkie 01:01:37.400
I'll make a call. Please change, change this. It's a minor change Amelia Lorentson 01:01:43.296
So... It is. That's been authorised by the Chief Executive Officer of Noosa Council. Appreciate it. Thank you, Mayor. That council write to the State requesting that during the 20... 26 whale migration period, the Queensland Government consider a three-month trial replacing traditional shark nets with shark drumlines or other contemporary non-lethal mitigation technologies. That allow for the safe passage of migrating whales with Noosa main beach proposed as the trial location. This trial should apply specifically to the southern migration period where whales, including vulnerable calves, are travelling south and... and where the majority of entanglements are known to occur. Thank you. May we have a second if you like, please? I'm happy to second. Thank you, Councillor is one of the most significant natural events for our region. It is central to our identity, our visitor economy, and our community's deep connection to the ocean. As a UNESCO Biosphere Reserve, we also carry an internationally recognised responsibility to lead in environmental stewardship and to champion approaches that protect both people and nature. As a UNESCO Biosphere... This motion reflects that responsibility. Responsibility. Every year traditional shark nets pose a known and preventable entanglement risk to whales, especially during the southern migration when mothers and cubs travel closest to shore and when the majority of entanglements occur. occur. These incidents are distressing for the animals and traumatic for the community members, volunteers and responders who witness or participate in rescue efforts. These incidents are responsibility. They also create a paradoxical safety issue. A distressed whale can attract sharks, potentially potentially risk to beachgoers rather than reducing it. Nets do not create a barrier. They do not stop sharks from entering swimming areas. And when a whale is caught in a net, the thrashing, the blood and distress signals can draw sharks closer to the shore. Human life is our highest priority and recent events in New South Wales have reminded us why this conversation matters now more than ever. Human life is to the shore. In the past week alone, New South Wales has recorded multiple shark A stark reminder that outdated technologies are not keeping pace with modern coastal risk. We owe it to our community to ensure that the tools used to protect them are the most effective available. Modern technologies effective available. Modern technologies such as shark drumlines are more targeted, enable rapid response, and significantly reduce bycatch, while still focusing on the three shark species most associated with serious incidents. They are contemporary, evidence-based tools used increasingly across Australia because they provide better protection for beachgoers than passive nets. The Cardno Report for formerly titled Queensland Shark Control Program review of alternative approaches and commissioned by the Queensland Government in 2019 reinforces this. It remains the most independent, scientific assessment of shark control equipment used in Queensland. Importantly for Noosa, the report found that replacing the two shark nets at Noosa with additional drumlines "could potentially maintain captures of the three most dangerous target shark species while reducing captures of other sharks and bycatch by approximately 97%." In other words, equal or better safety outcomes for people with dramatically less harm to marine life. Council has already shown leadership on this issue. Last year the Local Government Association of Queensland endorsed the investigation of alternative updated shark mitigation technologies with overwhelming support from 77 councils across the State. This motion reflects that This motion reflects that evolving position and aligns with best practice in coastal management, and also with our obligations as a biosphere reserve to model innovative, sustainable solutions. first brought the LGAQ motion to this council, I faced resistance, but I stood my ground because I knew how important it was to our community. That motion went on to receive overwhelming statewide support, and I'm taking that same- principled approach today. I've not withdrawn this motion out of fear that it may somehow jeopardise our relationship with the State on other advocacy matters, because it it won't. Respectful, clear and constructive advocacy strengthens relationships. It doesn't damage them. That is precisely why I prepared and will now table a sample letter with is our table sample letter with this motion to show fellow councillors exactly how we should intend to approach the minister. Respectfully, constructively and with a refined simple request. It makes clear if you read the letter that this this is collaboration, not confrontation. You may hear after I sit that we shouldn't raise this again because the Minister has previously declined a full season trial. But this is not the same request. same request. It is materially different in scope, different in timing and different in intent. It is materially different. We're not asking for a six month removal of nets. We're not asking for a full migration season trial. We're asking for a short targeted three month southern migration trial. Targeted three-month southern migration trial and some community community members Thank you. So I want to note that some community members who who originally did not support the earlier proposal have already indicated that they're open to this more refined approach. Some have even suggested even a two-month window that we should be throwing to the State. That is what finding middle ground looks like. And this approach has never been put forward to the minister. Advocacy is not about asking once or twice and walking away. It's about listening, refining and evolving our position. And that is exactly That is what binding members are looking for. Exactly what this motion does. Relationships with the states are not damaged by respectful dialogue. They are built through it. Strong relationships are formed when councils show they are willing to adjust, to collaborate and to keep the conversation open. Not when they fall silent on There's a quote that I love using, "If we do nothing, nothing changes." And in five months, the whales are going to begin their migration. If there is an entanglement, and history tells us there likely will be... I want to know that we, as a council, did everything we could to prevent it. This motion is not about conflict, it's about responsibility. It's about protecting human life. It's about about protecting marine life and protecting the mothers and calves that pass our coastline every year. It's about standing up for those without a voice. It's about living up to our role as a UNESCO biosphere where innovation... environmental protection and community well-being must go hand in hand. The worst case scenario is that the Minister is going to say no. But what if he says yes? The risk of momentary momentarily upsetting a minister can never, never outweigh the risk of another whale or calf becoming entangled off our shores. One is political discomfort, the other is irreversible harm. This is a reasonable, respectful, evidence-based request. This is a reasonable... It reflects community expectations, it aligns with emerging best practice and demonstrates leadership. And it also aligns with both the State and Noosa Council's priority of protecting human life. again councillors Again councillors if we do nothing, nothing changes. I hope you support the motion in front of us. Frank Wilkie 01:10:22.683
Thank you, Council of Lords. I'd like to move an amendment. I'll just read this. It says that we note the attached correspondence, which is four pieces of correspondence, to and from the State Government on Noosa Council's request to trial the removal of shark nets during wild migration season in conjunction of deployment of non-lethal mitigation methods, including shark drumlines and aerial drone surveillance, and b formulate a range of advocacy strategies, not limited to litter lighting, to achieve the objective of a trial for shark net removal during wild migration season. These strategies are to These strategies are to include advocacy for a three-month trial during the southern migration period when whales, including vulnerable calves, are travelling south when the majority of contaminants are known to occur. Point of order please, through the Chair. Point of order. Chair, I raise a point of order understanding Orders 29. My original motion is narrow, precise and entirely self-contained. It directs Council to It directs Council to take one action only, to write to the Minister with a refined request for a three-month southern migration trial at Noosa Main Beach. The intent is clear, the scope is limited and the operational impact is minimal. The amendment before us does not simply adjust or refine that motion, it fundamentally alters its character. It introduces a broad advocacy program, requires staff to develop multiple strategies and shifts the focus from a single targeted request to a much wider campaign to sharpen it to removal across the entire whale migration season. This is not an that "retains the identity of the original motion as required by Standard Orders 29.1. It is a new motion in substance, scope and effect." one are explicit. An amendment must be in terms that retain the identity of the original motion and must not directly negate it. The identity of my motion is in its simplicity. A single letter requesting a specific three-month trial. three-month trial. The amendment replaces that... The amendment replaces that simplicity with an entirely different proposition, a multi-layered advocacy strategy that goes well beyond what was contemplated. It does not retain the identity of a motion, it transforms it. Furthermore, standing orders are designed to prevent amendments from being used to introduce new subject matter or impose new operational burdens to staff, yet that is exactly what this amendment does. My motion requires one letter. The amendment requires strategy development, ongoing advocacy work and potentially public-facing campaigning. These are new obligations, not refinements. Amelia Lorentson 01:13:25.376
They were never part of the original My motion requires motion. And cannot be inserted through an amendment without breaching the intent of Standing Orders 29. It's also important to note that Standing Orders exist to protect the integrity of decision-making processes. processes. They ensure that counsellors exactly what they are voting on and that motions cannot be reshaped mid-debate into something materially different from what was originally put forward. Allowing this amendment would undermine that principle. no longer resembled the one I gave notice of, and that is precisely what Standing Order 29.1 is designed to prevent. Finally, the amendment alters the purpose of the motion. My motion seeks to councillors would be voting on a motion that reopen a conversation with the Minister through a refined, reasonable request that has never been put to the State. The amendment pre-empts that process by escalating the matter into a broader advocacy campaign before we even have made the refined request. we even make have made the refined request. That is a substantive shift in the intent and standing orders do not permit amendments that change the purpose of a motion and for all those reasons chair the amendment does not comply with the standing orders 29. Frank Wilkie 01:14:41.089
Thank you for that, Councillor Lorentson. The intention of the amendment, it does not negate the intent of your motion. It is intended to improve the chances of success for the idea at a state level. Formulate a range of advocacy strategies. I'm proposing we have a discussion and a council discussion forum, or council-only forum, where we can talk about ideas such as advocacy to the State, face-to-face delegations, so on and so forth. It is not an expensive exercise. It's about to increase the chances of success for this idea of a three-month trial. So my ruling a three-month trial, so my ruling is it does not negate the intention of the original motion and that it be allowed. Amelia Lorentson 01:15:31.200
I'd like to move a motion that the ruling of the Chair be dissented from and I also would like to move that... Chair, given that you are the mover of the amendment, I respectfully submit that it would be inappropriate for you to rule on a procedural matter relating to your own amendment. I therefore request that the Deputy Chair or CEO rule on this point of order. Frank Wilkie 01:15:57.913
As chair as the mover of the amendment, I'm entitled to speak in favour of it. I believe I've made the right call. Let democratic processes take their call. the amendment. If councillors have any concerns about its nature or the course of action it's proposing, it can be voted down. That's the reason why I'm saying we have heard your... Amelia Lorentson 01:16:26.174
Through the chair, can I ask the CEO, my understanding with standing orders is that when I move a motion that the ruling of the chair be dissented from, does that not trigger a vote of the councillors? Richard MacGillivray 01:16:42.028
It does. It does. Amelia Lorentson 01:16:44.308
It does, yeah. So why is that step? Frank Wilkie 01:16:47.688
It needs to be put to the councillors now whether. Thank you, but that was not offered. Thank you. It is part of the process, The Chair has a right to argue the reason why he or she has made that decision. Richard MacGillivray 01:17:08.641
So we can go to the dodge. to the what? Around whether the Chairman's ruling be descended from. But the Chairman has a right to vote on it. Correct. Correct, yes. So councillors were basically voting voting around, around and in the the Standing standing Orders order was Clause Clause 29.1, around whether or not that the amendment to the motion shall be in terms that's retained the identity of the original motion, in terms of what Mayor Wilkie has put forward, whether that retains the identity of the original motion and does not directly negate Frank Wilkie 01:17:43.655
We're actually voting on a motion, we're actually voting on a motion that the Chairman's ruling be dissented from. Yes. And my argument is that it be allowed to go through the democratic process and rights, stay or fall based on the consensus of the group. Question? Jessica Phillips 01:18:04.164
If the amendment was from someone other than the Chair, I've just got to get my head around if I haven't had this before, the amendments from the Chair, so if it wasn't from the Chair, how does that from the chair, how does that differ from how this process would work currently? Frank Wilkie 01:18:30.013
We're not voting on the amendment. We're voting on whether the ruling of the chair, that the amendment be allowed to be debated and put to the vote by the councillors. Jessica Phillips 01:18:43.350
That bit I'm aware of, sorry. My question is how would it differ if it was, say, Karen's amendment, the chair votes whether the... How does it work if it's the chair? Because that doesn't really feel like work if it's the chair? 'Cause that doesn't really feel like it's... Richard MacGillivray 01:18:59.506
Yeah, so just from a procedural point of view, so we do, we just got some clarification, we do need a seconder around the dissension motion that's being put forward. Brian Stockwell 01:19:10.226
So we need another councillor to second that request whether there's the dissension under a clause And can I ask the question under 31.7, which is the dissent from chairman's ruling, are there any provisions that suggest the way it's handled varies depending on the role of the chairperson in the matter being dissented from? I can't see anything in there from A to F that Karen Finzel 01:20:07.397
How would this work if we, like, go to the vote before we've even debated the first motion? Amelia Lorentson 01:20:15.277
This is just an amendment. This is just the amendment. So then it goes back to the original motion and we debate that. Karen Finzel 01:20:23.857
And then you would have opportunity. Frank Wilkie 01:20:29.415
So the process is a motion can be moved and then once the motion is moved second and the mover has spoken to it An amendment can be moved, which is what's been done. It hasn't been seconded yet. Councillor Lorentson has challenged the right of this councillor to move an amendment and when I've ruled that the amendment be allowed to be put to debate and vote, Councillor Lorentson has moved that the chairman's ruling that the amendment be allowed be dissented from. So if this procedural motion is if this procedural motion is carried, I could not, we could not accept the amendment as part of the debate. Richard MacGillivray 01:21:20.456
In addition, so as mentioned, so the motion for rule of dissension needs to be seconded before you can proceed to the vote. So, there needs to be a council to second whether that request for dissension before it gets to the vote. Before it goes to the vote. Karen Finzel 01:21:38.291
Question through the Chair to the Acting CEO. If no one seconds this, does this just fall? Amelia Lorentson 01:21:47.771
No. The dissent does, but the amendment stays. Karen Finzel 01:21:52.332
Clarify, does the dissent fall for no seconder? Richard MacGillivray 01:21:56.332
If there's no seconder, yes. No seconder. Frank Wilkie 01:21:58.472
Thank you. Okay, seconded by Councillor Wilson. So, we put it to the vote. I still have a question. I don't, I I still still need to understand how the Chair can rule on something that's to do with our own motion. So, I need to understand if it was someone else that moved an amendment. Amelia Lorentson 01:23:00.360
Can I ask a question to the CEO through the chair? In terms of the standing order, the standing order is 29.1. Can you, other than read what it says, explain to us what it means? Um, Richard MacGillivray 01:23:19.788
So this is going back to the basis for your calling of dissent? The dissension, absolutely. Um, look, I'm happy to provide comments. Obviously Clause 21, 29.1 is basically the.1 is basically the amendment to the motion should be in terms which retains the identity of the original motion and does not directly negate the motion. Um, so whilst the procedural amendment. Motion that's put before council is essentially what is being sought is whether or not the, um, the, the, the position from the chair, um, is from the chair, um, is agreed upon or not. So in order for this to progress, given we have a seconder, my advice would be for the councils to make the decision on whether that, um, amendment should be allowed based the outcome from the dissension ruling itself. Um, so my advice would be is to let the councils make the vote in relation to this to allow whether the amendment, um, be retained or not. Amelia Lorentson 01:24:31.464
Um, another question through the chair. So, uh, if it's found that it is outside section 29.1, um, in terms that that, uh, in terms that the amendment has actually introduced new subject matter or extends the scope of the motion, does that, um, stop the stop the Mayor from adding maybe still an amendment, um, to the motion, um, that possibly modifies, uh, what, what's being put in front of us now? VEGETABLES Richard MacGillivray 01:25:07.448
Through the Chair, look, um... If you're asking for my specific opinion. Amelia Lorentson 01:25:13.102
No, it's not an opinion. See, I don't want your opinion. I just want to understand and give clarity to the councillors here that if the decision has gone the decision has gone outside the scope and the intent of the original motion that doesn't stop the Mayor to still proceed with another amendment that doesn't impede on the scope or intent of the motion. At the moment it's very broad. My motion is very, very targeted and specific. Frank Wilkie 01:25:46.600
Point of order, point of order, just another question. The issue that you read out there is does the amendment, does the amendment negate the original motion? And the answer, yeah, and that's, yeah, that's, yeah, that's, yeah, that's the key issue. Richard MacGillivray 01:26:05.032
Yeah, just to answer the original question, you are correct, Councillor, that at any stage later the mayor or other councillors can make further amendments. Yeah, just to answer the... In response to Mayor Wilkie's comments, absolutely. in terms of the voting for councillors, it's in relation to essentially around the amendment put forward and the dissension that's proposed is around whether or not that amendment is in line with clause 21. Question, do we get to speak a bit about a procedural motion? No. Amelia Lorentson 01:26:51.380
Exercising my rights to speak. Exercising my rights to Because I'm the author of the notified motion, I can speak very clearly and exquisitely about the intent. Frank Wilkie 01:27:02.220
Excuse me, Councillor Lorentson, do I have already spoken, I'm giving you all the answers. Richard MacGillivray 01:27:09.240
And, happy to clarify, so only the mover of the procedural motion and the chairperson the procedural motion and the chairperson may speak to the procedural motion in that order. So, therefore, Councillor Lorentson and then the final response from the chair. No other councillors may speak to the procedural motion. Brian Stockwell 01:27:26.728
So can I just confirm for councillors who haven't had this process, a vote in favour on this one is a vote that you think that the amendment doesn't retain the identity and /or directly negate a vote against means you think the amendment is acceptable, is that correct? Richard MacGillivray 01:27:48.230
So a vote for the motion of the second chairman is that you believe that the amendment does not retain the identity and /or does not or negates the original motion motion. the vote against The 'vote against' means you are happy that what is proposed is an amendment to the motion. Jessica Phillips 01:28:06.252
So it's opposite to what you think it is? It is. So a vote against allows the amendment to be debated. Yes. Amelia Lorentson 01:28:15.652
And a a vote for allows the original notified motion to proceed. Yes. Frank Wilkie 01:28:22.934
So, do you want to call the vote? Do you want to call the vote? Yes. Do you want to call the vote? Those who agree that the chairman's ruling be descended from, raise your hands. dissented from, raise your hands. Those who believe, that's Councillor Lorentson, Phillips and Wilson. And Finzel, those who believe the Chairman's ruling not be dissented from. That's Councillor Wegener, Stockwell and Wilson. So, the amendment is, that's carried. That means the amendment is not allowed. Richard MacGillivray 01:28:58.364
Back to the original motion. SPEAKER_04 01:29:02.264
So, can I just clarify that for the procedural motion, that's carried. Amelia Lorentson 01:29:13.752
Okay. Frank Wilkie 01:29:17.412
Anyone else wish to speak to the original motion? Notice the motion. I will. Jessica Phillips 01:29:36.540
When I first put my hand up to run for council, I remember meeting some community members that had spoken passionately about this because it's been quite topical and I think for years swimming in the ocean I hadn't really thought too much about it, but there's definitely many of our community that are asking council to step into this space. From my perspective I've always had these kind of almost contrary groups of people approach me you know fishermen saying they can't even catch a fish without the shark taking it first and then we've got you know absolute. horrific scenes of whale calves being caught off our beautiful beaches so that's definitely not something we want either but the one thing that stuck in my mind because I hadn't met Councillor Lorentson at that stage when I ran for I was getting to know some of the community groups and they'd said how passionately she'd been involved in the shark net so I thought when I get to it I'll probably reach out and see where you're at with how much work has been done so I think for me I've probably this is years ago me, I've probably, this is years ago now, knowing that this is a space that you've sat in, I think most people would know that you're out in the water more than definitely me at the moment. First of all, then, part of that, speaking to that, is just that I want to probably acknowledge that you have been in this space for a long time, and I like your tenacity of not letting something go. I don't really want to get involved in, like, a political debate over how this all works. That's why today disappoints me, because I just want to, like, the work that you did, I it properly. It's simple, it's clear, and I can't bang on on other days about clear communication and then go against it here. So I guess even though I sort of understood the amendments, for me it's just making a real, like, what happens next after... making a real like what happens next after today it's pretty clear for me in this notified motion so that's why I'm going to support it I guess there's a lot of other opportunities for through our council only discussions to bring up other ways maybe the council can move forward in other advocacy spaces I know that's how I've had to bring through my e-bikes Frank Wilkie 01:32:46.226
Bring up the original amendment and I'll have changes to the wording. I would like it at least discussed. In part B, change the words to "councillors discuss". So get rid of some. Formulate a range of advocates. So that part B has been changed to "councillors discuss a range of advocacy methods not limited to letter writing to achieve the objective of a trial for shark net removal during the wild migration season". You don't need the next sentence. Yeah. I'll just leave, yeah, just say these are to include, leave it as is. These are to include advocacy for a three-month trial during a sudden migration period in the wilds, including volume of cars that travel south when the majority of contactments are bound to occur. May I have a second effort to test this amendment, please? you, Councillor Wegener. Councillor, the idea is good, but context is important. That's why I've attached the correspondence to and from the State government about our On every occasion we've written in a respectful, clear and collaborative way. the State government has made it clear it will not be removing the sharp nets for any amount of time In this case, continuing to write on essentially the same topic and the same method risks weakening the weight given to Noosa Council's advocacy on state issues. I think we should continue to advocate on this. be effective. It's too important, but it's important that advocacy... It will take some time. If we're genuine about successfully achieving the goal of net removal, we must think more carefully... This is why the amendment proposes we discuss a more strategic approach to advocacy, not limited to lead by, but can include that to achieve practice of having a notice of motion every time we have a new idea, we need to have a process that's seamless, can result in council conversation, and it can just happen. This involves consideration of use, we can talk about use of delegations, working with the community, face-to-face meetings, careful consideration of the timing of the advocacy as well. For instance, to coincide with the lead coincide with the lead up to the next state election, when policy positions are known to shift. For example, this amendment is brought in good faith. As a means of Noosa Council being successful in achieving the position we and many groups in the community are seeking to achieve and this does not No gate, a letter being part of that. And I'm suggesting we have a chat about other things, ways we can achieve the same end, including ways of delivering a message about the three-month trial. For example, do the council amends. Face-to-face meetings with ministers. There's an opportunity coming up in a couple of weeks where that can occur. I'm just saying, we don't give up, but we don't keep doing the same thing over and over doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. And publicly signifying this with a notified motion, it's likely to make the minister give in deeper. But, respectful, clear... clear communication has been the hallmark of all communication to date. We all just need to think a bit more strategic and I'm sure just in the council discussion forum we can do that. And that's all this is asking. Pat Spicer 01:38:46.353
Let's think a bit harder. Point of order. Amelia Lorentson 01:38:49.893
I can't sit and listen to this. Excuse me, Councillor, what's your point of order? My point of order is that we are actually re-prosecuting amendment that has just been voted against. Changing three words does not change. And this is the part where I have requested through the Chair whether we could actually just seek... Sorry, Councillor. We've already had that discussion and councillors will vote according to their conscience on this. That's not a reason to stop debate on an amendment that's been moved and seconded and debate is underway. Question through the Chair to the CEO. Why are we debating the same amendment? Frank Wilkie 01:39:36.169
Excuse me, I can answer that question. It is substantially different because it does not involve staff time, a complex array of strategies. It's a councillor discussion forum I propose. going to finish my speech uninterrupted please. I'm drawing to a close anyway. So councillors, this does not make up the original motion. We all want the same things. It gives us an opportunity. Anyway, I've said enough. Thank you. Councillor Wilson, you have your hand up. Nicola Wilson 01:40:19.920
Thank you. I'm a little bit uncomfortable talking about this topic today and I just want to acknowledge Nico and his family in New South Wales and the other victims of the shark attacks in the last few days. But, just on a kind of admin kind of comment, the amendment should say, pardon me, that it should read from that council. So, that council, councillors discuss a range of advocacy methods. So, grammatically it doesn't make sense for a staff, but also, if councillors discuss a range of advocacy methods, there's no action from that, there's no way we can actually measure whether that's happened. So, I'm just Frank Wilkie 01:41:13.620
Thank you, Councillor Wilson. Any other councillors wish to speak to the amendment? Councillor Finzel. Karen Finzel 01:41:21.520
Yes, thank you, Mr Chair, for the opportunity to speak. We talk a lot about, you know, advocacy and we've Advocacy and we've sat here this morning we've heard community come in and present to council very good points around community engagement and how we can improve that on the attachment with the reading on this agenda item we've got the meeting minutes for oceans for all the trial of replacing shark nets during whale migration season dated I'll just check with the 09-25. Sandy Bolt was in attendance and there's quite a number of people present I won't go through that but this is quite extensive and people are able to see that online. I do note that the Noosa World Surfing Reserve, Trevor Back, against proposed trial, the reasons he could were lack of consultation on the Mayoral minute, two, absence of non-biased data based on fact rather than emotion, and three, no evidence of what will replace the next. Now, we've heard this morning around the table, community coming to us, and we have voted quite extensively. We've talked through all our discussions, through all the leaders that we can pull on through council, which is open to councillors, to represent our a fair and effective way. I won't support this amendment on B, because as councillor Nicola has stated, there's no measurement around this. Our community is called for action. I would prefer to see that this provides opportunity and based on only one of the people that I can mention here today that I'm using for my debate. Again, it's back I, you know, we can't just back to our community. This also is a state issue. Happy to be advocating. We have supported around the table time and time again. We've done the letters, we've supported it, we're listening to our community. However, our community is also calling for action. So if it means community wants to get together and advocate and there's several opportunities that I feel is probably more effective and hear their voices heard than what we can do today having a councillor discussion around advocacy methods. How do we measure that? We that? We have to collectively come together and work together as a community. As an elected representative, I'm here today to represent fair and equity, every voice across the community. Not just one, not just some. go beyond council boardrooms, council advocacy groups, reaching into our community who have told us time and time again what they want and they want action. I feel the best way to support the action of the people that want to see a trial is again to write to the Minister. And then call upon the community to continue to advocate. I will support where I can. I will put my hand to the plough. But I will not support councillors again just having a range of discussion around a meeting that we cannot even measure the effectiveness or how we reach that advocacy. And then how do we then communicate that? And then, how do we then communicate that back to community? I think that it's ineffective. Yeah, we can have a discussion, but when we're reaching in for major change that leads the way of how from now and and into the future, sustainable conversations, I talk about this all the time, we are in a point, we are facilitators of change. This is a challenging intersection that we sit at and we have to look at new have to look at new ways of being, new ways of conversations around the table and new ways of governance. When we talk about the levers that we can pull on, yes there's many, but we are also limited as all the people here at the table. We run out there for community, we run for election and you land in here and we have our own constraints. Collectively, we need to pull together, to work together, to be a strong, united voice for generations now and into the future, and I think we can do better than support councillors' discussion around advocacy methods. Collectively we need constraints. We all know what they are, we all know how to do them, and I think we need to have a stronger voice in supporting our community and our ocean animals and our environment for future generations. These are very significant times that we live in. We're making major decisions for the future of our young people, of our families, of our ageing population, our environment, our wildlife. These are very significant decisions being made by people like us around tables. We are at an intersection of change, from white babies, from the cradle. To the grave, across the globe, we see the unrest. Today we're seeing as a nation, we're lowering flags, we're lighting candles, we're We're looking at being the light overcome in the darkness. And we have to be, I am very mindful today of the people across our nation who are suffering. And I will not be supporting another talkfest when our community has called for action. Frank Wilkie 01:47:26.886
Thank you Councillor Finzel. Do people wish to speak to the amendment? Brian Stockwell 01:47:31.666
I'll give the balancing argument. And I do it from someone who's spent 25 years in state government, who's written the drafts for responses to ministerial letters. engaged directly with ministerial officers. And there's two levels. There's obviously the bureaucracy, who have done the report, which is referenced in Councillor Lorentson's speech, and there's the ministerial advisors who have political appointments. The first step in writing to the ministry is understanding who's going to answer it. And in this one, we've already had several answers, so it's unlikely to get past the ministerial advisors. So, let's be rational. The chances of success of the original motion are few. quite low. Just in the way that advocacy works. Writing letters to the minister is easy, it's simple, straightforward, but to suggest that it's taking action is probably not realistic in the perception that it's going to make a difference. And everyone around this table understands the around this table understands the importance of change and we've adopted approaches that have not been successful to date. Hence why the Mayor has suggested that we try and do more. So for me, the amendment is adding on to the original motion in that it's saying if we are passionate about issue, we should be trying to do more to enhance the likelihood of success of our advocacy. It's as simple as that. The original motion has a low chance. Do we want to spend some time trying to improve that chance? Amelia Lorentson 01:49:23.993
Thank you for your opinion, Councillor Stockwell. I stand back. I'm not going to support the amendment and I've already sort of made clear my reasons. This again, in my opinion, again, in my opinion, negates my original motion. My original motion is one single specific action to write to the Minister. Councillors can, regardless of whether this amendment goes up or down, they can still discuss a range of advocacy methods. I'm part of Oceans Members that have been sitting here. We've been part of this movement for the last six years. I'm part of Clean Oceans Foundation. I'm part of Surf Rider Australia. I've been a member of the surf club for the last 16 years. My children are lifeguards. I'm in the ocean six to seven days a week. If you want to join the range of advocacy methods, our doors are open. There are other opportunities. Welcome to come and sit in a meeting at any time. Please give a respectful tone, Councillor. I'm passionate. Please give a respectful tone. Totally accept that. But in terms of discussing a range of advocacy methods, that's going to transpire. That's going to transpire if you're passionate in this space. There are tons of opportunities for you to get involved. Again, going back to my opinion is this amendment negates the intent of and the scope of my original motion. I also think it's a breach of Standing Orders 29. I'm not going to be supporting. Frank Wilkie 01:50:56.458
Thank you councillor. Any other councillors wish to speak to the amendment? Tom Wegener 01:51:04.400
I'd just like to quickly note that the advocacy, we talk about we're not doing enough, but the Noosa Biosphere Reserve Foundation has done incredible advocacy for learning about about the situation, about learning about the behaviour of sharks, about learning about alternatives. They started with the symposium that sort of started this whole thing off. They have the current bull shark program which is being funded partially by the Biosphere Reserve Foundation. And I think the best thing that the Biosphere Reserve Foundation supported was the Surf Safe Noosa campaign which educates people on shark safety and that is a wonderful campaign. So we are advocating. That's why I think that that this is this is this is meaningless in a way that we're already doing stuff we need to continue to continue the pressure on I think that the destination management plan and will will address these things in you know in a better way and with working with the NBRF and continuing their their advocacy on learning about shark behaviour and working within the system is better. the system is better. That's the way I think we should move forward. Frank Wilkie 01:52:19.139
I will close. Look, of course, if we discuss a range of advocacy methods, it's discussing and implementing a range This is happening already. I've had face-to-face meetings with ministers about this. And that will continue. So even if this amendment doesn't get up, it signals to the community that we are thinking-- broader than letter writing. Letter writing that we know is going to get pushback from the minister. That we're not going to give up there. And that the advocacy is going to continue beyond letter writing. Because this is too important. It's not about us. forms of advocacy for that idea, which is instead of a six-month trial over a while migration season, a three-month trial. It is a different approach. It was about giving that idea to was about giving that idea to the State through other methods other than a letter, a front-on letter, which we know is going to receive the same response. councillors thank you for your feedback on this. Councillor Wilson, I do note your comments about the charter tax down south and that is always the drawback. is always the drawback with raising issues like this only through a notified motion, which is a very public form, every time we have a different idea, whereas the advocacy can take different forms, it doesn't need to be via a council resolution. Alright, thank you for your feedback councillors. The important thing is that we continue to work together and that will continue beyond just a little writing. I'll put the amendment to the vote. Those in favour? Councillor Wegener, Stockwell and Wilkie. Those against? Councillor Lorentson, Phillips, Finzel and Wilson. The amendment is lost. We go back to the original motion to which Councillor Lorentson and Phillips have spoken. Anybody else wish to speak to the original motion? Tom Wegener 01:54:50.400
Having been involved in the SHARP /SMART program and really watching all of this, I believe that we are far from taking an evidence-based position on the adequacy of shark drumlines and drones. There is a lot of work to be done on these, on these SHARP mitigation ways. And there's a lot of misinformation when people say SHARP nets do nothing to stop SHARPs. especially white sharks. Well, do we have an evidence-based, science-based opinion or study that says that the SHARP nets don't? Because really, really smart people put them there in the first place a very long time ago. So I think that there is a, I want to support evidence-based solutions to this very serious problem with the shark attacks on the Australia taking out the nets at this time isn't doesn't is not based on what we consider evidence-based in my that's my thought and I think so I won't be supporting the motion with it. Yeah. Frank Wilkie 01:56:05.500
Look, I'll speak to the motion, but if the council's one of the right to the left and then the minister again, we can do that. I'm not against advocating putting this idea to the minister. By the same method, but we'll try it before. also, we ought to be investigating other methods of advocating as well. So if a letter I said it was part of that, but I don't know if she would have had it. We were paying for it. feedback? As I say, it's too important an issue to not think carefully about and not be persistent about it. So I'll be supporting it. Nicola Wilson 01:57:19.257
Thank you. I'll support it. I think it's a little bit redundant given what we're already doing, but it doesn't stop us doing other advocacy. And I think it's good to keep the pressure on. I'm not sure at the moment if the Queensland State Government will support this, so I think it's good to just keep giving our opinion on this. I will support it. Frank Wilkie 01:57:41.634
You, Councillor Wilson. Any other councillors wish to speak? Councillor Finzel. Karen Finzel 01:57:48.540
Yeah, I'd like to thank Councillor Lorentson for bringing this. I agree, I think we've got to keep the pedal on. I think, you know, writing letters to State, you know, they're free to respond in whatever manner they like. We're here to represent the people. This is at the forefront of our people in our community, you know, we've done all our surveys, livability surveys, all surveys where we've engaged the community, you know, environment continually with consistency comes up number one. I support it. I support it, I think writing letters. I think writing letters and keeping it front and centre for the State is, you know, advocacy, you know, at its best. It's not up to us what to measure those outcomes. the State will make their own decisions. It is redundant in a way because, you know, they are aware of where But I'm happy to support it. And with regards to advocacy, we are continually advocating in our role as councillors daily, every day that we're calling on whatever mechanisms we have. why I did it. didn't support B was the same reason. I feel that we're already doing those jobs. I think it's back to community. I want to congratulate all the people out there every day that are out pulling junk from the ocean, that are looking after our beaches, that are looking after our environment. All kudos to them. And, you know, supporting a letter to represent their voice and the importance of what that is to them, to our community, and to state I'm happy to support. But I'm also with Councillor Wegener that we do need to have more discussions, and I'm not an expert. We want to have the evidence. We want to hear from the scientists and the specialists and the people that are out there daily collecting... and the people that are out there daily collecting the data, doing the measurements, being in the water so I think yeah we can drive this forward probably next time there might be better ways that we can do this but this is what's before us now and so I'll support the letter to the State. Frank Wilkie 01:59:42.106
You Councillor Finzel. Any other councillors wish to speak before Councillor Lorentson who closes? Councillor Lorentson. Amelia Lorentson 01:59:51.466
Just address a few things that were raised around the table in terms of the notified motion and with all sincere and dear respect to the lives that have just been taken and those that have been part of the attacks down in New South Wales, the notified motion was put to council before those incidences, so I would like that on record. Secondly, in terms of Councillor Wegener, the notified motion does not seek to remove the does not seek to remove the nets, it seeks to replace the nets with what the Cardno report which is the Queensland Chart Control Program review of alternative approaches that was commissioned by the Queensland Government in 2019. Part of their recommendations where they found that replacing, not removing, found that replacing, not removing, replacing the two nets at Noosa with additional drumlines, quote, could potentially maintain catches of the three most dangerous target shark species, which is the tiger, the bull bull and the white shark, whilst reducing catches of other sharks and by catch by approximately 97%. That is, to date, the most comprehensive, independent, scientific, assessment of shark control equipment used in Queensland. Thank you for the conversation around the table. Thank you for allowing me to speak over my five times and also for pulling me up when I do get passionate. respect the processes and I also respect my obligations as a councillor to speak respectfully around the table. What the motion in front of us, before I speak to that, I also want to acknowledge some incredible people that are sitting here in the chamber today and that's Albie Curtis and Peppy Simpson. I have been walking alongside these two incredible water men, water people, of the most respected people in this community who live and breathe and who are literally the voice of our marine animals and I stand here proud to represent you. What the Notified Motion here is is a refined three-month targeted trial that has never ever been put to the Minister, not once. The question before us is simple: is the small risk of creating political discomfort? Is the small risk of getting a no or from the Minister? Is the small risk of the Minister not even replying to us? Is that greater than the very real risk of seeing another whale or another calf entangled in our nets in five months' time? Is that greater than pool. I don't believe it is. we're proposing in a letter, and again, I've provided a template, which I really encourage everyone please to read. It's a measured, respectful, modern letter that aligns with the State and Noosa Council's own priorities, which is to prioritise human life. Replacing passive, static nets with shark drumlines, deploying pingers to deter whales and dolphins, trialling alternative hooks, expanding drone surveillance. Every one of these tools strengthens human safety. Every one of these tools surveillance. The State's and council's number one priority while also giving whales and their carts and other endangered species like turtles and dolphins a genuine chance at safe passage through our waters. We all know what will happen in months the migration will begin again and if there is another entanglement we around this table can say that we tried that we took a responsible evidence-based step to prevent it. it. So again, take this opportunity to thank, great conversation around this table, and to the councillors, you know, there's, someone told me many, many years ago, you've got two choices in council. Do the right thing, or do what's right. And every day, I try to do what's right. Jane Goodall, to end in with a quote, she reminds us that what you do makes a difference, and you have to decide what kind of difference you want to make. And today, let's make a difference, guys. Frank Wilkie 02:04:45.300
Councillor Wilson? Yes. That's unanimous. The motion is carried. Now up to 10.2, independent review of community service surveys. Councillor, would you like to make your motion? Jessica Phillips 02:04:58.420
Thank you. I have a notified motion this morning, which I'll read. My recommendation for independent review of community survey is that council requires community engagement surveys that are developed to support consultation and /or decision making for significant council projects, undergo an independent projects. Undergo an independent review by a suitably qualified third party prior to release to ensure methodology, methodological integrity, neutrality of framing and confidence in the reliability of the data used to inform council decision making. And B, request the provide a report back to council for further consideration and /or decision that explores the potential opportunities and cost costs in line with council's standing orders. Frank Wilkie 02:05:53.495
Thank you. Can we have a seconder for that please? I'll get you second. So Councillor Lorentson just showed as your, sorry Councillor Wilson. Councillor Phillips. Jessica Phillips 02:06:05.060
Okay thank you. First of all I just want to start by acknowledging the staff that we do have in this space of community engagement. engagement. because at no point through processes that I want to do in this role is to ever sort of undermine or you know question the credibility or expertise in the room so that's how I want to start today but probably from day one I've sat in here and day one I've sat in here and heard deputations or on community around consultations. We've heard it again today and so for the last few months with the CEO I have been working on how to look at opportunities to rebuild trust with community around this our engagement through the specific surveys that we do. I want to I want to just take you back to 2008 for a second when I graduated from the police academy as a very young constable and I got given all these pro formas from the sergeants around how to have questions with because I had to follow these sort of standard questions and I remember standing at a break and enter reading through my sheet questions answers and at the end you know I've my senior officer sort of stepped in without a proforma and asked questions that I'd completely missed because I followed this proforma and he took me aside after and he said look the proforma is a great Jess but you're not listening because you just You're not listening because you're just following this sort of process right and he sort of started my journey of what he said active listening looks like and he said if you're actively listening and the way you phrase a question will give you the outcome and then sort of through my experience the outcome and then sort of through my experience then I gained so much more around how that actually looks so I was part of a full review with a QPS around interviews because we used to interview with questions that were eliciting a certain response and then we looked at this the way we they interviewed today which is called investigative interviewing and it's all around open-ended questions and how do we get the most from from our questioning techniques That took so many reviews and I'm sure you've watched you know movies where someone's sitting in you know the police officers demanding it you know that the person locked themselves into a narrative or a story so anyway my point is questioning is the way it's phrased can Questioning is the way it's phrased can give you a certain outcome and in my experience now when I came to council I remember sort of standing up and you all remember I would read from a sheet of paper because I felt like I've got to say the right thing and if I fumble over it and say um you know people are gonna think I'm not an expert communicator but that's actually not reality you know communication is eye contact it's body language it's all of the things that come into play and when we take off offline or we're not face to face and you can't see my body language that's so interpreted so differently because around 80% of our communication comes from non-verbals so a smile a head nod the gesture so I'm listening the way the gesture. So I'm listening the way we, you know, communicate. That's why when on paper, when we write an email or on Facebook, you might get a comment that says a certain... Brian Stockwell 02:09:38.502
Point of order. We're dealing with getting third party review We'd be here to be having a speech on good communication. I think it's widely off what the motion is on... Jessica Phillips 02:09:50.799
I'll bring it in because I am going to... Thank you. I am going to talk about why. So through communication when we're speaking like this when we're doing our surveys we don't have that we don't have someone from council standing actually through the DMP we have that great response where community when they were face to face with our director she said said to us how much different the communication was when they were out there and we've heard it today around when they do pop-ups it's different so the purpose of today is around the actual surveys because when we put out a survey the questions have to be really fine-tuned around what we're trying to achieve so we're hoping that community can give us their honest feedback and for me the three major things that we've probably seen with DMP planning scheme scheme the foreshore plan some of the feedback we got was the questions gave us the outcome and today I just want to the motion was more around if we have that third party we talked about in the statistical valid information that comes out of the survey results we can't really confidently say that prior to that it's gone through a third party review that really gives us confidence that there's no unconscious bias which has and and it really gives us confidence that when we have that data and the the outcomes from the survey that it really um it really gives us um it really gives us confidence so sorry I apologise for I was on track until the point of order I just want to bring it back to the points that I wanted to raise because it did tie into effective communication so confidence So through... So I might go over my five minutes because I've been thrown off a little bit. So The community are asking around the nation about trust between local, state and federal government. They talk a lot about feeling misheard, misrepresented. I worked with the CEO on this notified motion and he was he considered it that it really will give us an extra layer. It's not going to please everyone. I know that there's no outcome today that's going to completely give us you know that but I'm trying to build trust with our I'm trying to say every time we make decisions in this room we have gone through a really robust process. I'm not saying that that doesn't happen today. I'm just asking for another layer. It's not about undermining the organisation or the process that we currently have, but it's actually simplifying and strengthening and making our process more mature and up-to-date with what can be done. So I do hope you consider what I've put up and support it. Thanks. Thank you, Councillor. Frank Wilkie 02:12:57.130
Any other councillors? We should move an amendment, please. Brian Stockwell 02:13:06.640
So the amendment deletes the A and rewords B to request the CEO to provide a report back to council for further consideration that explores the potential opportunities, implications and costs of obtaining independent review of surveys to be used as part of the community engagement take out the of community engagement on, oh no, of the community engagement on significant council projects and plans. Frank Wilkie 02:13:32.303
Can we have a seconder for the amendment please? Councillor Wegener. Thank you. Councillor Stockwell. Brian Stockwell 02:13:41.243
I want to start by saying I the objective that Councillor has outlined in her supporting information, particularly with respect that what she is attempting in this motion is to support transparent and defensible decision making, align council practice with reconnoitred standards in research, social science and community consultation, and that it reflects Noosa Council's commitment to high quality engagement and evidence based policy. It's therefore unfortunate that it was raised as a notice of motion without any high quality engagement, nor significant evidence base. We've heard that justification is that there has been some issues raised by the community and I hear them. We heard some this morning. We heard that it's leading to lower participation rates which if we get the statistics you'll find that probably we're probably one of the highest level governments in Australia in terms of participation on significant projects and the fact that we do get statistically valid responses to surveys suggests that participation isn't being affected. We've got massive participation. We've got very high expectations in the community. We've got people in our community who do know a lot about surveying. We heard that there's concerns about not having the survey expertise and we know that our community consultation coordinator has extensive experience in that discipline and a PhD. And if she was in consultancy, she'd be one of the people we'd be paying to do third-party reviews of surveys. So by raising it as a notice of motion, it doesn't give us the a notice of motion, it doesn't give us the opportunity to fully consider the implications of this isolated approach to one element of consultation. There is no urgency to make this decision now. There is no significant consultation coming up. surveys that doesn't allow us to consider it in full context with the evidence base, with an understanding of how surveys are currently portrayed, like the two biggest surveys we've run are done by the leaders in the field in Australia. So is that the target So is that the target on? Maybe not. So what I've done is removed the direct developments. The direct development in A is basically saying we're going to set the policy then we're going to ask for a report about it. I've just suggested let's get a report and actually that will come with a prior workshop or something. So we all have an understanding of what this might mean. I would like to make my decision after receiving the advice of our qualified and experienced staff and some have decades of experience in this field. want to hear what our staff think about what is the most effective use of ratepayer dollars. Because A really commits us to higher cost consultation on significant projects and as was said in the response to one of the questions, quite frequently we do have independent experts as consultants to these projects. I want to say how do we best get community input and community engagement? Is it paying consultants to do third party review? Or is it investing in upskilling our staff? Because maybe part of the issue is not the community engagement area but other parts of the council that could benefit from understanding how to construct surveys. And that's a great example of building the capacity within rather than committing to paying consultants out into the future. And that's a great construct surveys. And orders. The amount of money we would spend on third party going to receive better results if we invest in other aspects of engagement. We've heard recently we've upped... graded our Your Say Noosa page and that's a platform now that we can receive a lot of informal inputs from the community and the page itself is leading edge and it can analyse the sentiment. So maybe the importance of formal surveys aren't going to be as high in the future. to be as high in the future. So the amendment doesn't negate the motion. So the amendment... As I said, I understand where we have done surveys of some concerns and always we should be to encourage staff to have that process of continuous improvement and innovation. But what it does say is if we are committed to good engagement, then notices of motion aren't the way to do it, really clearly. way to do it, really clearly. And if we are committed to evidence-based, we don't do it on a one paragraph background information to a notice of motion. We do it after considering all the facts and I understand why it's But I think we've got time to consider it in more depth and to come up with, might be the same recommendation, but we will have considered the evidence-based and considered what is best to spend the ratepayers money on in terms of improving the inputs from our our significant projects and our plans. Frank Wilkie 02:18:42.957
Thank you, Councillor Stockwell. Jessica Phillips 02:18:44.477
Question to the CEO. During the process, the lengthy process I've gone with the CEO, Larry Senstock about this, I put to him questions when we go for grants that it could be part of the process. So I just want to clarify because he did say to me that it's certainly available to us that we through the, you know, when we apply for the, because I've specifically said it's for the major significant council projects that. just to clarify that there's a really strong potential it won't imply any costs to council because it'll be part of the consultation budget that's put to the projects I just want to clarify because it's Councillor Stockwell's raised going to imply costs but I already checked with this that it would be part of the consultation but like a budget that's already part of the project I'm raising the question because it negates what The question to starts ask with with how, how, what, what, why why, are we when. Can you clarify when we go for our major council projects that there is a budget that has consultation. In it the CEO to confirm for the councillors around the room he has told me that it can be part of that process that it's an external third party rather and it won't cost council anymore because it'll be part of that big um the project budget. Richard MacGillivray 02:20:31.858
I'm happy to give some advice on it obviously challenging in the sense that each project will attract different types of funding potentially some of it may be partial some of the maybe co-contribution so whilst-contribution, so whilst Council as part of its request for grant can incorporate communication and planning as part of its budget bid, it potentially may vary, so I guess it's not a blanket confirmation that it will always be covered without any additional cost to Council, but in cases where we have received grants... cases where we have received grants some of that can incorporate costs for private consultancies in terms of design but also engagement as well so there's no one-fits-all that can be in certain situations but also there may be situations where council may need to fund that will co-contribute to the overall project costs. Jessica Phillips 02:21:23.037
Just a follow-up question and I appreciate Richard that you're not who I've had these conversations with that you're not who I've had these conversations with so I apologise but when I was discussing this with CEO Larry Senstock that's part of B which was going to come back to the report to us so we weren't making financial decisions through this notified motion I just want that to be very clear. Karen Finzel 02:22:14.524
However, I will rephrase that. When we come together around the table, I think we're called to be respectful. Thank you. And it is my job to ascertain a question. If a councillor is speaking for a long period of time and a question still hasn't been is not obvious, it's the chair's role to evince that question, get that question clarified so that the meeting runs according to standard orders. Now, I'm going... I'm going... Please, if I explain... Please, if I explain something, let's not use gender-based discriminatory language to describe behaviour, if that's not appropriate. So, thank you, Councillor, for getting to the question eventually. In response to your point of order, Councillor Finzel... That's the Chair's role to get councillors to cut to the chase with questions. Councillor Finzel. Councillor Finzel: Thank you. Yes, thank you, Mr Chair. I appreciate your interpretation of the standing orders and what's expected around the table. I just think that we can... Is this a point of order? Councillor? Councillor Finzel: I just... I'm going to exercise my right to speak. I'm going to support the amendment for a simple reason because it's the correct process. It clarifies the correct process because Part A requires community engagement. A requires community engagement surveys take place with review by a certified party, whereas the correct process is to have the report to Council. Council is first, we're done first, about the costs and implications of obtaining the independent survey reviews. So it achieves Councillor' objective, but it puts it in the correct order of process. The other reason I support it is because there's a lot of discussion in the community about counselling relying a lot on consultants. So it's very important that if we're going to go down the track of applying to more consultants, the costs of that are understood. costs and political implications of that are clearly understood by counsellors before we commit to that path. The other reason is a cultural one, and that is culture starts at the top, and the tone tone set by councillors and the words and the language used by councillors does have an impact on staff. So we're talking about independent, neutral, unbiased language and part A does mention it does question the integrity, the neutrality and the reliability of the staff's work. So by removing part A we go to part B which is a more neutral. neutral and unbiased resolution that's unlikely to impugn the integrity, the neutrality and the confidence and the reliability of staff work. So it still achieves the same outcome. The outcome? It's the correct process. It's correct process and uses more neutral and unbiased language. I'll support the amendment. Amelia Lorentson 02:25:50.625
Councillor Lorentson. So a question through the Chair in terms of process and even language. Councillor you've raised that you've been in discussions for some time with the CEO. Can I ask was any of this advice afforded to you? Jessica Phillips 02:26:07.972
Actually we've been tic-tacking for months about the wording and the CEO was satisfied with the end result. week before so there was definitely a process around how to make sure that as I spoke to answer your question he helped me through the process and satisfied with the wording. Amelia Lorentson 02:26:29.059
Another question. question through the chair you raised. Nicola Wilson 02:26:33.841
I had my hand up. Amelia Lorentson 02:26:35.381
Sorry. Frank Wilkie 02:26:37.801
Councillor Wilson, sorry. Councillor Wilson, sorry about that. You have a floor Councillor Wilson. Nicola Wilson 02:26:43.761
I want to speak against the amendment. I think it substantially changes the original motion put forward by Councillor. And also, unfortunately, I didn't hear most of what Councillor Stockwell said, because there's been a bit of an audio issue. But I think to begin with, he said that this wasn't in any way supported by supported by community feedback. And I don't think the amendment in any way helps that point. So there has been community feedback that the surveys are biased and multi-pronged and lots of different issues with the surveys. And I don't think this amendment actually goes in any way to solve that. Frank Wilkie 02:27:33.967
Thank you Councillor Wilson. Councillor Lorentson. Amelia Lorentson 02:27:37.647
I might just speak to the amendment in front of us. I'm not going to support it either. I go back to section 29 of the standing orders and I believe that the amendment materially alters the original motion original notified motion because it changes an immediate requirement. The original notified motion when you read it requires surveys undergo independent review. The motion or the amendment in front of us requests a report that explores opportunities rather than a directive to implement independent reviews. me what I'm reading in front of me delays action and weakens the original intent and also we've heard through Councillor Wilson that she's been advised over many many months that the wording was fine and that the CEO was satisfied with the original amendment as it stood. questions for councillor Stockwell does your amendment does that just require that there be a report to council informing councillors about the costs and implications of doing independent review or surveys before council makes a decision decision on whether they do it or not or yeah yeah that that is the intent thank you you're not saying that councillor councillors don't do it you're saying you of the get implications a review of costs before deciding to do it it's to be informed by staff prior to making a decision in that I'll speak against the amendment please Jessica Phillips 02:29:28.586
It does change the intent of my notified motion completely the community continually taking time out to come and do deputations I don't want another report I want a part of it but my point is we actually they just keep asking for us to do something they want action I feel that they're spending a significant amount of time coming in asking for us to review and look at how our surveys have been conducted today again we've heard it so it doesn't meet my intention at all around what I'm asking from around what I'm asking from the organisation. Councillor Finzel. Karen Finzel 02:30:13.239
Yes, question through the Chair to Councillor. During those ongoing discussions, did you discuss the viability of... putting the energy into when the survey is actually set up? So that I'm interested to hear how those discussions went so that it was more of a set up stage rather than the review at the end. Jessica Phillips 02:30:37.357
Yeah, that's exactly right, Councillor Finzel. Finzel, it's not about the results that we're getting from the surveys. It's not about the... It's the set up and the wording. And I didn't want to, again, with respect to staff, I wasn't wanting to highlight that we all have unconscious bias and when they're working on projects. So this was just more to give community real satisfaction that it has gone gone through somewhat a third party to review that there's no leading questions or any type of wording used in our questioning that already sort of gives us an outcome because otherwise we're relying only on the statistical valid information that has come out of the survey not in the preliminary development of the survey. Does that answer your question? Frank Wilkie 02:31:25.860
No questions for Councillor Stockwell. Your amendment is part of the report back to council. In terms of explores the implications, is that about the work that's done already, this process is done already? And the impact on staff of going to a third party consultant? Brian Stockwell 02:31:49.162
What do you mean by implications? Oh well the first one you said opportunities and costs. implications are broader than just the opportunities and costs because there will be implications that are non-financial. So it's about what are all the implications? For example if we're in a tight time frame and we've got this requirement and we have to go out to a third party review, quite often as Frank Wilkie 02:32:33.786
Information they need to make an informed decision about whether they make this big change. Amelia Lorentson 02:32:42.946
Question through the Chair. This big change that you reference, Mayor Wilkie. the moment, in terms of significant projects, so I'm referencing botanical gardens, Pomona placemaking, destination management plan, our state amendments. Who currently designs and Who currently designs and writes council's engagement surveys and my understanding is that we actually are already engaging with consultants to help design our survey and engagement processes so the so the is that correct through the chair? Richard MacGillivray 02:33:23.863
Yeah through the chair yes so already council and I think it was alluded to in response to a public question time this morning that we do already engage consultants around public engagement consultants around public engagement strategies and so we bring on highly skilled consultants to help us around the different methodologies and we set about being one of those methods of how we garner and gather feedback from our community. Amelia Lorentson 02:33:49.870
In terms of engaging or outsourcing the engagement process what's the criteria used to select providers just out of curiosity. Richard MacGillivray 02:34:02.830
Through the chair I don't have the specific don't have the specifics on that at hand so I can take that on notice and get back to you specifically around that maybe it's through a broader tender process or through a more human approaches but I'll come back to you on notice with a response Councillor And a question to the author of the notified motion. Amelia Lorentson 02:34:26.355
So given that we already are outsourcing and engaging independent parties, can you just clarify that your notified motion sort of just mandates it for significant projects? We've got huge public interest or concerns around it. Yeah, correct. That's why we, the CEO and I, worked on the significant part of just so it wasn't, because there's constantly council are putting out small surveys was more around the significant one and it was kind of off the back of finding out through the DMP process that the questions weren't actually written by the consultants, they were written in-house and that was one of the most recent ones that we got feedback that they felt, the community felt that the sort of decisions were made through that that process rather than meaningful consultation so that was kind of what triggered the final part of me putting this this way I've also raised it you know I've had community surveys on our council only discussion forums quite a few times I think we've spoken about comms so I think this was the only next step for me and I worked with the CEO on that as well. Frank Wilkie 02:35:47.080
Anybody else wish to speak to the amendment? Councillor Stockwell? Brian Stockwell 02:35:53.980
So I appreciate I'll move closer to the speaker that Councillor Wilson had difficulty hearing but what she suggested I was saying was not correct what I said is I acknowledge that you do see community feedback and input around our surveys. And I know that there is room for improvement in everything we do and surveys is one that we have a number of people who quite frequently And I want to put it on record, the process on big projects of getting a third party involved, I've got no objection to. But it's really important that when we as councils come here and say the community has been asking to this, without the evidence, then we should question it. And I question that Councillor can talk on behalf of the community when a mere handful of people based on social media and Reel have raised it when we've got 30,000 or more voters. We can't just take informal input. just take informal input as being representative. And we can't make decisions on policy on the run. And this is what this will do. This is making policy decisions on the run. And we can't say we're committed to high quality engagement if you've talked to the CEO about this for four months but haven't talked to your colleagues. It's poor practice. So, if I'm going to make decisions about community engagement, a subject that I've had a lot to do with in my career, you know, I've had many decades and worked with community to win many state and national awards for my community engagement, and I'm not saying that I disagree with this being one of the options to improve the way we do it. What I'm disagreeing with is to put up a notice of motion and expect a decision without the evidence base and with the quality of engagement with your colleagues to get there. Frank Wilkie 02:38:05.027
Thank you, Councillor Stockwell. Those in favour of the amendment? Councillor Stockwell. Councillor Wilkie. Those against the amendment? Phillips. Councillor Lorentson. Councillor Wegener. Councillor Finzel. Yes. Councillor Wilson. The amendment is lost. We go back to the original motion to which only Councillor. go. Tom Wegener 02:38:43.380
I understand Councillor' concerns. We've discussed it quite a bit around the table and informally. But I think this whole notice of motion thing is, in my opinion, a waste of time. We're spinning our wheels so much time here. Next, I think that we're trying to force what we should be doing trying to force what we should be doing. I think our job is actually when we're around the table and a big project comes up with us we can sit down with it with it with the team and say okay the survey questions we're not real happy with them in the past maybe we should have a look at that. look at it at that time we don't do this notice of motion and create a new bureaucracy a new level of bureaucracy when the our job is to actually oversee and manage these big projects so I'm not going projects so I'm not going to support this because as you know I'm very very against micromanagement I'm very against numerous layers of bureaucracy I suggest that we'd be much more efficient and much more productive if we in my opinion did our job around the table better and I think we'll our job will evolve we've learned as we learn we go forward but through the next program we go forward. But through the next program, if we say we want the questions, our consultation, we can get our fingerprints on that consultation. That's what we do. That's our job as councillors. Frank Wilkie 02:40:17.208
You. Thank you, councillor. Any other councillors wish to speak to the notice of the motion? Councillor Wilson. Nicola Wilson 02:40:29.900
Thank you. I will support this. I think in my almost two years as councillor, this has come up several times And we don't get to see those questions before they go out. So I don't like micromanaging either, but this is really important that when something goes out to public consultation that it's not biased and I know from being in education when I've been writing multiple choice questions for assessments, it's hard. This is not something that, you know, this is something that has to go through lots of layers. A review and testing and you can be too close to it and I just think we need someone independent to be part of this process and that should just be a given every time and but it's a big kind of project. big kind of project and we've gone through it with the foreshore plan, we've gone through it with the planning scheme, we've gone through it with the DMP and I think now it's time to just say, okay, this isn't working. We're getting the feedback that it's not working and we need to do something. We need to bring in some people who are need to bring in some people who are not involved in these projects and get them to help us out here and make sure that every community consultation Karen Finzel 02:41:56.440
Look, thank you for the notice of motion. I think we can get better efficiencies than raising through notice of motions, I do agree with that, but I will support this coming to the table today. We've been passionate about that, we all have been, and I think I'll support it in terms of continuous improvement. Some of the conversation around the table today has been a bit, like, thought-provoking about how we've arrived at this situation. But having said that, you know, I think with quite what Councillor Wegener alluded to is that, you know, we need to do our jobs and yes, we've had significant things come through and it's all learning. So I think that's where we find ourselves at that intersection today because we do have and have had opportunity to engage with staff. opportunity to engage with staff and consultants and specialists at the table through processes. So I don't think it's completely broken. I appreciate where you're coming from because it is about how can we do better? How can we engage with with the community in a more tangible way that really represents their voice coming back to us? And I think, you know, it's to be commended for everyone, all the staff, all the councillors, the CEO, everyone. We're all here for the right reasons. all here for the right reasons to engage our community and have meaningful consultation to inform our decisions we inform. So I'll support it today in terms of, you know, how we can do better, how we can give voice to our people better, how we can support our staff to do their jobs better, and how we can... can make it a more trustworthy process so that our community feels that we have all done the best we can in terms of continuous improvement. How we listen to what people say around the table, how we give significance to that voice and how together we can move forward to build that consistency and trust that we will commit to rigorous process and to rigorous process and reviewing what's before us. Thank you. Frank Wilkie 02:44:14.453
Thank you, Councillor Finzel. Councillor Lorentson. Amelia Lorentson 02:44:17.853
First, I'd like to just thank Councillor for exercising your rights to bring emergent issues to the table through notification. This is an emergent issue. I've been in council now six years and even today, the theme of all the deputations were centred around The motion in front of us is really quite simple. It's a motion about strengthening public confidence in our engagement processes. We already do this but we need to do it more and particularly in matters that have significant public interest and matter. the community. Independent review, and I need to make this clear, independent review has got nothing to do with questioning the staff. We have great staff, very skilled staff. Independent review is about supporting them. It's about ensuring that significant, for significant projects, we have a second set of expert eyes to check the bias, clarity and reliability. I've been, you know, in universities for 10, I think possibly 12 years. It's a standard practice. In research, it's a standard practice to have a second set of eyes. Social science, as Councillor Stockwell mentioned, in policy development. And it's also increasingly common in local councils. So this is best practice. Again, especially for the new, not the new councillors, they are experienced councillors, but at the beginning of this term, we saw firsthand what happens when community surveys are perceived as leading or unclear through the Noosaville Foreshore Management Plan, even through the Destination Management Plan. So this motion in front of us helps prevent that. And again, I thank Councillor for bringing it forward to us. It protects the integrity of our data. It supports transparent decision making, shows the community that their input seriously, and most importantly, it supports our staff. Brian Stockwell 02:46:47.226
Won't repeat my arguments within the, that I made in the amendments for why I can't support this, but I will support Councillor Wegener. The right time to make these decisions is when a particular project or plan is in front of us. It's not to have a blanket without a chair. Because, in some instances it will be perfectly reasonable, and as you suggested, maybe something that's built into a grant application doesn't fit. For others, it may be that it isn't the appropriate way forward. That's the key to it, and the reason I can't support it is it's committing Council to a policy position outlined for significant projects, but the term significant project isn't defined. Is it just those projects that are highlighted in our corporate plan? Is it like we did last year, list a range of different consultations, some got more consultation than the other, but then one of those wasn't the... Botanical Garden, so Councillor Lorentson suggested it's a significant project. What does significant mean? We haven't set up that. These are all things that should be addressed if we're going to go down this as a policy approach. We should have it clear, it shouldn't be left up to others to interpret what's intended, and I think it should be one that we make, you know, the best time to make it is when we've got a significant project or plan in front of us and we're deciding how to do it. Frank Wilkie 02:48:15.762
Councillor Wilson, do you have your hand up? Nicola Wilson 02:48:20.100
Thank you. I just have a question, sorry, before Council stop or close. It's my understanding that this is common practice for Sunshine Coast Council. Could anyone confirm that, please? Richard MacGillivray 02:48:35.045
Look, I can't confirm or deny that, specifically on, again, if it's on significant projects in terms of what scale that they do or a third party review of a survey, so I can't give that to you right now, but I could make some inquiries and get some advice back to councillors on notice. Frank Wilkie 02:48:56.248
Question on notice? If there would be a question on notice, Councillor Wilson, would you be able to hear that? Amelia Lorentson 02:49:05.451
Most of it, yeah, Thank you. Councillor Lorentson? Just my understanding is that it is best practice in a few councils, and I would also be, just a question on notice, having a look at Moreton Bay Council and Brisbane City Council. Frank Wilkie 02:49:31.480
Almost quick, to the motion. I am relieved to see in there that it involves significant council projects only, but as Councillor Stockwell said, there is some vagary around what that actually means. So, as long as we're able to have a discussion around... able to have a discussion around what constitutes a significant project, then we'll make it in line with what we understand is happening already. The planning scheme amendments, for example. The Noosaville foreshore master plan. I did have concerns about something about the irony of a motion that seeks to have greater collaboration and engagement come through a notified motion process which doesn't necessarily involve councillors. Like a lot of these issues that we've seen come through as notified motions can be the subject of councillor discussion forums where we have a collaborative... collaborative understanding of what a council would like to achieve and reports can be brought to the organisation which gives the councillors when it comes to making a decision all the background data and costs involved rather than requiring councillors to make that decision without that information before them I note that part B there says that CEO will provide a report back to council that mentions the costs. costs and potential opportunities in line with Council's standing orders and perhaps that's where the implications can also be outlined for Council's, Council orders to be considered. So, although I have some misgivings... I agree with the principle that significant surveys ought to be, have the independent third party analysis. I will support this notified motion but I would like to hope that Councilors can take a collaborative approach down... about what they're hoping to see and achieve, which is in line with what we're trying to achieve with our community engagement, through our council discussion forums, or council-like monitoring discussions, or just talk... when we're here together. That way we can all be on the same page, and understand and help what we're trying to achieve, and have a consensus view on pathways, which are often good for the betterment of the community, and that's what we're all here for. So I will support the Noosa motion. Jessica Phillips 02:52:25.260
Thank you. I'm with you, Tom. Actually, the notified motion process is not, was not my ideal. I really don't want to, I think this is really inefficient for staff and for us. Especially for this, but I got to the point where I felt like I had raised it at Councillor only and I'd raised it in discussions. So I kind of felt like, what's my next step? In the DMP, we did ask for the questions and that wasn't provided. I really do think I'm someone that thoroughly tries other avenues because I'm really not in it for the politics at all. So I got to a point like I... So I really wanted to be able to go back out to community every time it's mentioned and back our staff. Like I think that, like Councillor Lorentson said, it's actually about saying no, you're wrong, it's been through an independent process because we speak about this all the time, there is a lack of of confidence in local, state and federal government at the moment. I can't control what they're doing, but I can only control what we do in this room. It's up to us individually to say what matters to our community, how do I do that effectively, whether this right process, maybe, maybe not. To me, it's just really being able to say, no, it's gone through independence, like the staff knew, and if it comes out, how... that it was completely clear that the questions were you know not leading then one thing to celebrate as a council when we get the outcome and the data and we sit here and we endorse the project we can stand confidently and put a part of our speech that confidently and put a part of our speech that we've seen the independent process through the whole thing and that's what I wanted to achieve by it. Wording matters. The wording, the fact that we just got hung up on significant is exactly why we should go through an independent review because wording, the word, can be... interpreted differently. I'm really happy to discuss offline what significant means, Mr Mayor, because yeah, you're right, it can be broad. Happy to make sure that it's not. But I do sure that it's not. But I do hope that you can understand why it got to this point today and support it. Thank you. Frank Wilkie 02:54:52.224
Thank you Councillor. I'll put the motion those in favour. Councillor Lorentson? Yes. Wilson, Finzel and Wilkie. Those against? Councillor Wegener, Councillor Stockwell. The motion is carried. So councillors would you like a break? Margaret Gatt 02:55:06.832
Yes please. Frank Wilkie 02:55:08.152
Adjournment. 15 minute adjournment. Welcome back everybody. We're now up to item 11, consideration of committee reports. 11.1.1 the CDO update as part of the audit and risk committee recommendations. 11.1.2 QAO KPMG 2025 audit committee briefing paper. 11.1.3 workplace health and safety annual report. 11.1.4 Recruitment management audit final report. 11.1.5 briefing paper on outstanding ICT action items. 11.1.6 update on the review of outstanding action items. 11.1.7 draft annual rolling works plan and standing agenda item. 11.1 Agenda item: 11.1.8 Discussion. I recommend new Chair of Audit and Risk Committee. 11.1.9 Confidential Fraud Event Analysis, Corrective Actions and Status Update. 11.1.10 Confidential Public Interest Disclosure Update. 11.1.11 Audit and Risk Committee recommendations on block and moving second of the Audit and Risk Committee recommendations dated 12 December 2025 to Councillor Wegener as a committee member and second to Councillor Wilson. All in favour? Yes. That's carried. The Audit and Risk Committee recommendations dated 9th of January 2026. 11.2.1 QAO KPMG closing report. 11.2.2 2024/25 annual financial statements. 11.2.3 Noosa Noosa Shire Council Annual Report Draft 2024-25. Annual point: 2.4 Audit and Risk Committee Recommendations on Block. We have a mover and a seconder for those recommendations. Carried. Thanks, Councillor Wilson. Seconded by Councillor Lorentson. All in favour? That's carried. Then we have the General Committee Recommendations. Yes. Then we have the General Committee Recommendations. 11.3.1 Endorsement of Noosa Local Disaster Management Plan. 11.3.2 Response to Notice of Motion. Trial of remote rescue tube rings at uncontrolled beaches. 11.3.3 Planning applications decided by delegated... Authority November 2025. 11.3.4 Procurement Contracts Assessment Working Team Contracts Award under CEO Delegation. 11.3.5 Financial Performance Report December 2025.11.3.6 General Committee Recommendations on Block. Moved and seconded by the General Committee. Thank you, Councillor. Seconded by Councillor Finzel. All in favour? That's carried. We have no reports... Thank you, Councillor Wilson. No reports direct to the ordinary meeting. There is no confidential session. The next ordinary meeting will be at Council of Chambers, 9 Fogden Street, Tewantin at 10am on the 19th of February, 2026. Thank you Councillor Wilson, I believe it's 3am in the UK. Thank you for being here today. SPEAKER_04 03:16:35.700
And thank you councillors for your contributions today. Frank Wilkie 03:16:40.300
I declare the meeting closed at 1:17. Thank you, thank you Councillor Finzel. Thank you. Related Noosa Council Meetings
← Browse all Noosa Shire Council meeting transcripts
