>> Mayor Libby Stapleton: Welcome, everyone,
to our council June meeting. I'm Mayor Libby Stapleton.
>> It is a pleasure to welcome
so many members from our community into the chambers
tonight.
This meeting is also being live streamed.
Welcome to those tuning in online and of course welcome to my
fellow councilors and officers here with us this evening.
I will also acknowledge that councilor Hodge is joining
us by Zoom.
Thank you.
Live captioning will accompany the live stream and the
Council Chamber is fitted
with a hearing loop hich transmits directly to hearing
aids. We hope that this
assists those who may have hearing difficulties.
If anybody is having trouble hearing me now let me know.
Thank you.
The Surf Coast Shire local government area spans the
traditional lands of the Wadawurrung People and the Gulidjan and Gadubanud
Peoples of the Maar nation.
And the main council office is on Wadawurrung country.
The Wadawurrung people have nurtured and protected these lands
for thousands of generations and I'm so grateful we have
the opportunity to live and work and play in such a
beautiful part of the world.
We also wish to acknowledge the traditional owners of
the land in which each person is attending.
Acknowledging any Aboriginal people who may be viewing
the meeting tonight and pay respect to elders past,
present and future.
I must say it has been a cold start to winter.
I have enjoyed being out and about celebrating
with our community.
The lovely festival was held earlier in the month and
it was special to be able to enjoy in The Garden with
so many local residents.
Also celebrating the unveiling of a magnificent sculpture.
Made possible thanks to a generous donation from member
Anne Williams.
It was a wonderful day for a small local event that
celebrates community coming together.
And attracts visitors to the region during the colder season.
Also recently enjoyed a community lunch with more than
100 guests at the new reserve which was held to honor
local resident Lorraine Griffiths as the winner of the cup
for services to the community.
We were deeply moved by stories of Lorraine's
commitment to foster 140 children in her home over the
past 20 years.
While guests enjoyed a lovely lunch with views over the bay.
It really is a wonderful new venue for the Surf Coast
and I would definitely encourage anyone looking for a venue
to consider it for their next function.
We held our very first climate emergency pitch fest
here last month.
Where local groups schools and individuals pitched
possible solutions to minimize the impacts of climate change.
The community were able to vote for the two most
innovative ideas with the winners being the Jan Juc
Parent Advisory Committee who will run a carbon-neutral festival
as well as a school for their project Ride The Change.
Which is about increasing the use of electric box by families.
Congratulations to all submitters on what is a really exciting and
important initiative by Council.
Also this month I had the privilege of presenting the
recipients of our small grants program.
21 projects shared in more than $41,000 in grant
funding selected from a field of 38 participants.
More than any of the previous grants over the past
six years as I understand it.
It was a lovely feel-good event and so inspiring to
hear about the range of innovative projects incredible
projects coming from our community across the Shire.
We have an item for council to consider the new grants program.
I am looking forward to that discussion later on.
Last week I was fortunate to have the opportunity to
attend the annual national
assembly for the Australian Local Government which saw delegates
from most Councils across the country come
together in Canberra for a few days to discuss key
issues facing our communities, and to hear from some
terrific guest speakers, including many federal members of
parliament. Discussions ranged from challenges around
affordable accommodation affecting communities around
the country and importantly increasing challenges of
responding to natural disasters in our community.
The assembly passed more than 100 motions
including one to support the Uluru Statement from from the heart.
One interesting fact I heard was from leading economist
who explained that local government is the most
productive level of government that collects just four
percent of the national taxation revenue.
With rapid exclamation of construction and general
living cost, ALGA will continue to advocate for more
sustainable and transparent funding and community
services and infrastructure.
We do have a number of significant reports being
presented to council tonight.
For consideration including the adoption of our 2022,
23 three council budget.
We have an update on the Surf Coast aquatic and health center.
And a potential submission regarding the Anglesea River
and Alcoa extraction.
All of these items are in community interest and we
really look forward to getting into the meeting and
debate tonight.
Moving onto our meeting the community should be aware
that Council meetings operate according to our adopted
governance rules which include the following procedures.
During the meeting the mover of a motion or an
amendment may speak for a maximum of five minutes to
open the debate.
Then a further two minutes to make a closing statement.
Any other councilor, including the seconder, may speak
to a motion for more no more than three minutes.
If councilors would like to ask a question for moved a
motion please raise your hand and keep it raised until I
acknowledge you.
I would like to remind the community as councilors we
are bound by the behavior and obligations of our code
of conduct.
Aiming to work collaboratively to achieve the best
outcomes for the South Coast Shire.
We aim to be respectful in all that we do.
Decisions and debate tonight will adhere to these
values and principles.
With that in mind and governance rules I would like to
recite the pledge as a sign of our commitment.
As Councillors we carry out our responsibilities with
diligence and integrity
and make fair decisions of lasting value for the
wellbeing of our community
and environment. Now I have not received any apologies
for the meeting tonight.
Is anyone aware of any apologies?
No?
With noted councilor Hodge is with us be via Zoom.
councilor Wellington.
Okay so Wellington will be joining us.
Thank you for confirming that.
So we don't need to move anything?
Confirmation of minutes we have a recommendation of
that Council meeting held on 24 May moved by councilor
Sean and seconded by councilor Cr Gazzard.
All those in favor, the motion is carried unanimously.
Thank you.
Are there any leave of absence request from councilors?
And conflicts of interest?
If a councilor or an officer has a conflict of interest
you must declare it now and do so just part to be
discussed at which time the Council or officer would be
required to leave chambers or
online for the period that the matter is being
considered and once resolved obviously I would be able
to return to the meeting.
Any declarations of contents of interest?
No? Thank you.
Any presentations from councilors this evening?
No?
And public question time.
So as you would know members of the public who wish to
ask a question to council are able to submit the
written request in accordance with Council's governance
rules.
We have 10 community members submit questions and
renovate total of 15 questions to be addressed this
evening.
Firstly we have questions from Jane Morris.
Would you like to come up to the table and read your
question for us?
>> History House at Anglesea
is a 70 year old building constructed for domestic use.
>> It has not been updated.
There's no insulation and facilities are not disability
compliant.
The building has internal, and external it is used
constantly by organizations and museum visitors.
The toilet is used by the community garden, market and
other community precinct users.
We are custodians of precious artifacts and documents.
We keep these on behalf of and we know our
responsibility of keeping them safely in good order and
condition.
So we ask will a council reconsider the priority of the
refurbishment of history house?
And acknowledge that the upgrade of this facility is urgent?
We have been working on this upgrade for the past five years.
>> Really appreciate you coming in to ask us your
question tonight.
As you may be aware on tonight's agenda this subject is
actually part of the community development program
report and given it is on the agenda it might be
difficult for councilors to speak to it.
I will ask our CEO to respond to your questions.
>> Thank you for your question.
The community project development program investigation
on tonight's agenda has found a staged upgrade of the
Anglesea history house at the estimated cost of
$300,000.
Council previously invested $7000 in 2020 to initiate
the initial community project investigation and
response to the community budget submission at the time
council allocated $15,000 to stage I of the project
that can patch in the workstations.
Identified as immediate for the work.
We note this work was paused as further design
revisions were requested.
In March 2022 to the community project council allocated
another $6800 towards revision which is contained in
tonight's reports.
Council has many priorities to consider when making
investment decisions.
This project is one of many council will consider and
future funding opportunities.
Offices recommend pursuing grant funding opportunities
offset the total funding amount required to complete
the project.
We also note that the storey shared as part of the
2022, 2023 renewal programme that will be built in the
coming years.
>> If you have a supplementary question I will take that.
>> J Morris: Really it is a statement not a question.
Our garage is being replaced by the Shire.
Because the size concern of the safety of the garage.
A huge safety issue with children there.
It is not going to advantage us in any way at all.
>> Okay thanks.
Anything more on that?
>> Thank you for your question.
>> The next question is from Teresa Walsh who I believe
is with us in the chamber.
If you would like to come forward.
Thank you.
>> Teresa Walsh: I live in Hopkins Street Regency.
East lead to instant reserve.
Both roads have unsealed sections.
Most pedestrians and vehicles are using them as it develops
particularly the subdivision behind the reserve and more people use the common.
Heavy vehicles found adjacent industrial land found the surface
to deteriorate rapidly.
Potholes are a major problem in winter.
And dust is a major problem the rest of the year.
Corner adjoining two streets is narrow and dangerous and there
are open drains next to the roads that add to the risk
if a driver loses control.
Drivers often fail to slow down to suit conditions.
The road has been graded only twice since mid 2020.
Residents are experiencing unreasonable amenity impacts
and are concerned about public safety.
My questions to the Council are are all
councillors familiar with the unsealed portions of
the streets? And do they believe it is acceptable?
Has council made provision in this budget to resheet
these roads and undertake a more effective schedule of
maintenance.
>> Thanks for your question.
We really do appreciate your interest in the matter.
>> I will respond to the first
question about councillors being familiar with the
condition and I guess as councillors we understand
there are more than 500 kilometres of roads that
council manages.
And their assistance in place to manage the road
network.
But not all councils will be familiar with the specific
roads that you've referred to this evening or that
loads in question.
We do undertake regular inspections under road management
plan which runs that maintenance requirements and
response times.
As well as yearly conditional and to prioritise the
programmes including the resheeting
and I will ask someoone to respond, too.
>> The resheeting of Lennox and Hopkins Street isn't on our
programme for 22, 23.
But still in our current understanding of the state of
that section of road.
We will be doing another detailed assessment of the
state of our roads and 2022-23.
Which will be a good opportunity to really understand
the current stage of section of road.
More specifically how council identified effects on
roads, pathways and road relation infrastructure.
Defects in these assets are not as you kind of
identified dirt roads can change
rapidly depending on weather conditions.
Whether it is wet or dry or hot or cold.
Which does make understanding the current state that
can shift quite rapidly.
And so it is very important.
One of the things we value is actually hearing from our
community exchange when something has changed
particularly by can change very quickly.
So we encourage the community to let us know if
something has changed.
There is a concern and a broader sense we do regular
inspections but it's probably only a few times a year
and conditions can change quite rapidly.
So we appreciate is raising the question tonight.
We encourage people and we encourage people who live
under roads what they are so subject to where the
conditions of traffic volumes to let us know if there
is a change.
>> I don't know whether you are familiar with that.
It is an open drain built our house on that corner of
Lenox and Hopkins Street.
We had just five small lots and our house faces the
common.
But the other houses face small industrial area on the
other side but they have an open drain is problematic
in winter.
And terrible in summer.
With mosquitoes and I think that the levels of the
drain don't seem to be correct.
It is just stagnant water.
>> I think that is an issue we are aware of.
My understanding in terms of the drainage issue is in
the summer once it dries out some next summer there
will be some that will happen on the drain.
>> We have a lot of questions to get there tonight.
I don't need to rush you but I will need to ask the
next person.
>> Thank you.
We really appreciate you bringing that.
Thanks Teresa.
Our next question is from Patricia Robinson also
regarding road management and Lenox tree and Hopkins
Street and Patricia's question is how council is
supposed to grade my road under its road management
plan and has councils scheduled the road over the past
five years met the requirements of the plan and that is
probably a continuation of the response but I will hand
it over to you Robin.
>> Thank you Patricia for your council tonight.
Does not specify the amount of times a road should be
graded each year.
As I was mentioning to Teresa it is based on condition
rather than the time.
It does outline the intervention levels at which
council should grade roads.
When undertaking inspection of the road either plan
inspection or reacting to resident's concerns the road
is assessed against these intervention levels and if
required for grading.
And the second question as council scheduled the
grading over the last five years as council has been in
accordance with the intervention levels required in a
management plan we understand it over the last five
years.
Then maybe road defects that have not been reported to
council that are not addressed immediately but as soon
as we receive a customer request we inspect to assess
if it requires attention based on our intervention
levels in the plan.
As far as we are aware.
There has been one customer request to Lenox Street in
the previous 12 months which was June last year which
was a drainage matter.
We encourage anyone who is concerned about the safety
of their road to please let us know.
And thank you very much Patricia for your question.
>> Mayor Libby Stapleton: We also have a question from
Jackie Bennett.
Her question on her behalf.
Jackie is also a resident of Hopkins Street I've seen a
budget that a number of unsealed roads on the backlog
list but my history is not included.
I am frustrated and concerned about the condition and
safety and Hopkins Street and would like to know
condition when the condition of the roads assisted for
the quality and depth of the surface to the adequacy of
drainage and safety on each.
The second part was kind of a copy of the most recent
condition report regarding to resident's place.
That is another one I will refer to.
>> Thank you very much Jackie for your question.
Council undertook its last condition audit of the
network in 2019 and another condition audit is due in
2022, 2033.
So this coming financial year.
At the last condition audit the gravel section of
Hopkins Street between Lenox and Wiccan Street was
classified to be fair to poor condition.
The upcoming condition audit will assess of the right
condition will similarly deteriorated the drainage was
assessed to be in good condition.
This condition audit also identified Lenox payments to
be in fair condition and the drainage to be in good
condition.
Opposites have more recently reassessed the drainage in
Lenox Street and identified where it meets the
undertaking which will occur in the summer.
Safety signage is not assessed as part of the road
condition reports.
And we are able to provide a copy of the condition
data.
>> Mayor Libby Stapleton: Thank you.
Next question comes from Patrick Carr.
I understand Patrick watching online.
I will ask Patrick's question on his behalf regarding
drainage management and the important role of nature
strips.
Patrick's question.
Two questions.
First one at the May Council meeting social councillor
Sean and Councillor Allen spoke eloquently of the
system ageing drainage system great difficulty in
coping with the greater frequency and intensity of
rainfall and lack of funding from state government to
fulfil council's mandated duties.
We also have future subdivisions and services that will
increase this form of order into the existing drainage
system.
It is estimated there is a minimum of approximately 700
acres of combined interest groups in the Shire.
That should be better used simply to resolve some of
this volume of rainfall before even reaches the
drainage system.
I practically no dollar cost.
Creates nature strips that absorb this excess water.
My question is.
Does the Council acknowledged that 700 acres of nature
strips provide a cheap and crucial and soaking up
rainwater to minimise wealth into the drainage system?
And the second part.
As council does why does the Council continue to allow
compacted gravel as an alternative nature strips finish
in the use of architecture stripper etc. in the
knowledge this is compacting the soil increasing water
runoff and adding a further financial burden on that
could be avoided.
He thank you for your questions and ongoing interest in
nature strips and council does acknowledge the
important role that nature strips pay pray drainage
system into the drainage system.
Vegetated areas in nature strips reserves and are very
effective in absolving stormwater runoff and prevent it
from running directly into the system which occurs with
gravel, concrete and other nonporous services.
To your second question I will refer to response again
to Robin.
>> Thank you Patrick for your question for this council
meeting.
council's previous major strict guidelines allow for
gravel surfaces within the nature strips.
Council as we have spoken to previously is currently
looking at developing a nature strap which we consider
which services are permitted moving forward and
engagement with the community will occur in the coming
months on this.
We look forward to your contribution to the engagement
process.
>> Mayor Libby Stapleton: Our next question is from
Adams.
I think Rod is here with us.
>> Can I just ask a question just in relation to the Hopkins Street.
Will they be categorised as requests for servies?
>> A reasonable assumption.
Thank you councillor Wellington.
>> Hello everyone.
>> Welcome.
>> I tested positive this afternoon for covid.
>> That's not much fun.
I live on black gate Road.
With the first property on the quarter of black cat
Road.
We run a horse adjustment facility and we've got
courses on adjacent.
And so each day generally people come twice to feed
their horses.
We've got about 50 to 60 owners of horses.
Twice a day and travel up and down the road.
Recently I had a horse in a flood pull over because of
the core occasion and experience to try to get a 600
kilo horse that is cast in the flood back up on its
legs without endangering itself or the horse.
So that is a little bit of history about why am here
today.
I've got a couple of questions.
My first question is when is black cat Road do first
reshaping and what is the process for and my second
question is is council aware of the dangerous state of
the road impacts the running of our business and the
welfare of horses being.
>> These are questions RCL will need to respond to.
>> Thank you for your questions and coming along
tonight.
There is no sections of black gate Road that is
currently on our programme for next financial year for
reseeding.
The two sections of black gate Road have been
identified on council's renewal backlog that required
council does not have sufficient funds to undertake
that regime in this coming financial year.
They are likely to be a priority for consideration in
the 2023 2024 financial year.
Council is undertaking new condition as I mentioned
earlier.
In this coming year and this will identify where these
roads sit in prioritisation of the program.
These sections are between and directly east of Gaza
poor road.
With regards to the ceiling of gravel roads this has in
the past been undertaken for special charges schemes
where the benefiting residents contribute to the cost
of the upgrade.
And we have one for consideration on tonight's agenda
information and special charges schemes available on
council's website.
Currently offices are looking at options to undertake
some ceiling some of our roads and to bring a report to
council later.
This year.
She in relation to your second question.
Council undertake regular inspections of its road
network and its road management plan and undertakes
routine maintenance to ensure it maintains gravel roads
as we were talking about earlier due to the often
conditions subject to the source of vehicle use that we
talked about tonight.
The roads do not take into consideration the specific
impacts of particular businesses.
But we are aware safer vehicles without a particular
focus on the type of uses.
Council has recently inspected black gate Road to make
the roads safe and these works have been anticipated to
be completed within four weeks.
That depends on weather events and things like that but
opening while there will be done within the next four
weeks.
>> Thank you.
Each.
>> Our next question is from David Dennis.
David is not able to be here so I will read his
question on his behalf.
It is also regarding black gate Road.
Question one from David.
Many potholes more than 100 millimetres deep and 500
millimetres wide.
As the Council complying with the drug management plan
2010 125 which requires a certain response times to
inspect and rectify.
Aunt David's second question is the Council liable for
any noncompliance with the road management plan.
I will hand that over to you.
>> Thank you for your questions.
As I mentioned in the previous answer.
We have done an inspection of the road.
There will be work happening within the next four
weeks.
To ensure that some of those issues are rectified given
it meets our management plan intervention levels.
Subject to obviously where there are chronic conditions
in relation to your second question.
Council has historically achieved a high level of
compliance with its road management plan.
Any liability arising from the road management plan is
dependent on the specific incident circumstances or
outcome.
And thank you very much for your question.
>> Our next question is from Joe who I know is in
attendance.
If you like to come up to the microphone and ask a
question.
Thanks Joe.
>> We are extremely disappointed.
>> We are extremely disappointed to see offices
recommendations for a community led model and concerned
this great community initiative is potentially going to
fail.
In relation to the library of things.
We proposed to professionally run fully funded model
which helps reduce consumption and waste to landfill.
2020 at the start of 20 twentyone.
Sustainability Victoria announced a funding programme
aimed at circular economy initiatives with funding for
feasibility studies and implementation.
We approach the Council because a funding for projects
such as we proposed is allocated through the recycling
Victoria councils fund.
Funding feasibility funding of up to $80,000 was
available for collaborative projects between councils.
With up to $500,000 available for implementation.
Three rounds of grants have been held.
Sustainability Victoria has advised that another round
is likely to be held in 2023.
My question is equally council support the alternative
option one recommendations.
>> Again appreciate you coming in and talking to us
about things.
As you know this is also an item that is going to be
debated on tonight's agenda.
Rather than councils responding I will ask ACO to
respond to.
>> Is very hard to be able to locate used and read my
notes.
My apologies to all of you as I have been.
Contained in tonight's report describes the many
benefits of the week things.
We do think it is a fantastic initiative and identifies
a strong alignment with councils plan objectives.
We agree it is an exciting initiative.
It is important to note the offices advice includes
reports recommendations set aside council funds that
can be used for more feasibility work or other
initiatives to advance the library of things concept.
The advice includes the reason why alternative why
alternative option one which contains a reasonable
feasibility study is not preferred.
There is no agreement from key original partners from
study at this point.
Council may still be able to do a feasibility study
under the recommendation report part of what we are
trying to say in this response option is the option the
recommendations that we have put up in the Council
report.
The intention if that is to leave our option as open as
they can.
So if for example there is interest in a regional
concept we can still do feasibility in that vein.
It doesn't preclude us from doing that at all.
Part of the concern would be if we went with option
one.
That precludes us from doing anything else.
They spent a very specific recommendation which is why
we have not recommended that.
As our perforation options.
We have not tested the concept of the regional
possibilities outside of the other chief executives or
that conversation has not happened as far as I am aware
of.
The concept was endorsed by council to be investigated
at the March 22 two Council meeting offices have
provided options for council to consider which includes
community led model and professionally run model.
All options have different funding contributions
required and council must consider all options and the
financial impact of its contribution.
But also staffing resources.
Further informing the officer recommendation is given
existing priorities and staffing levels it would not be
possible to dedicate a high level of council resourcing
to its initiative in the coming months.
>> Thanks Joe.
I will ask Sue to come up and ask her question also on
the library of things.
>> Further into Joe's question three, one of the three
top areas that the community gave as feedback regarding
climate action is zero waste.
So we all need to do what you need to do.
Probably the opposite.
I am confounded by offices recommendations to undertake
a community driven slot based on my understanding of
the weight recommendation is written.
Despite all the evidence identified during our
investigation clearly demonstrated our community does
not have the capacity nor the willingness to establish
research and existing law show the most successful and
most sustainable.
Community lots all case challenge continual challenges
associated with funding.
Resources.
Insurance volunteers and ongoing management and
leadership.
One G 21.
When we spoke to them during the working group take
work that was undertaken indicated they are interested
in partnering funding to apply for funding.
Please Institute conduct a feasibility study into a
professional run lot.
The alternative option included began to offices 2033
plans.
It seems and it seems.
Sorry if I cannot one comments the first recognition
seems confusing to me.
So hence our question.
>> Thanks.
Perhaps there does need to be clarification regarding
that.
Again, will have to consult a firm option one, that is
something you want to wait until we get to the item on
the agenda to find out what motion is moved there.
And I will hand over to Robin again because it is on
our agenda tonight to respond.
>> Thank you.
It is important recommendation to get that the
recommendations not intended doesn't commit to a
library of things model.
That wasn't the intention of that recommendation.
But the investigation has identified that this option
is feasible.
Should a community group wish to pursue it.
Offices are aware that working group involved in this
investigation prefer feasibility study and a physical
regional library of things which see as delivering
multiple benefits for the community and environment.
Many models have benefits and a recommendation seeks to
leave many options open given council maximum flex
ability and how to progress.
Per the answer the previous answer I was given.
It is important to note the offices advice included in
report recommendations that can be used more
feasibility work.
Or other initiatives that advance the library of things
concept.
The advice includes one which contains feasibility
studies because there is no agreement from regional
partners to undertake the feasibility study I haven't
spoken to her about it.
I wasn't aware there was any interest.
And I have not spoken to any of the other chief
executives about either at this point.
>> Can I make a comment on that?
>> Yes.
>> As part of the working it was agreed with the
offices that one of our working group members from the
community the G 21 would make contact.
And had a conversation about it.
And she was extremely positive and supportive of it.
That was fed back into the working group to council
offices.
>> I still think the recommendation for council to
consider tonight does not preclude that at all.
It wasn't the intention to preclude that.
It was really about keeping the options as open as
possible given we think it is we like the library of
things.
As a concept it is finding the right model.
And that context to consider it in.
So I think I've answered your question.
Thanks.
>> Hopefully you were able to stick around and listen
to the debate later on in the evening.
Our final question is from Helen Robinson.
Not sure if she is in the chamber.
It doesn't look like I will read the question on her
bath.
Another question regarding black gate Road.
Between the surface Coast Highway and extremely
dangerous road.
It has been an appalling condition for the past 40
years and is on drivable at the present time of large
potholes.
It is meant that cause to our vehicles and expense.
His council aware of this dangerous section of road?
And what is the plan for action for sustainable
solution to this issue as the current remedial grading
does not work?
And again I will hand that over to our CEO to respond
to.
>> I feel like I'm getting a little bit repetitive.
But council undertakes regular safety inspection of all
of its roads networks which undertake multiple times
per year.
This is in addition to yearly inspection of the
network's overall condition which is used for planning
councils maintenance is prioritised to ensure the
ongoing safety of the road.
And we really do encourage community to get in touch
with us if they come across a road that is in a
dangerous condition and an officer will inspect and
assess the road condition.
Thank you again Helen for your question.
Community.
>> Thank you to everyone in our community who submitted
questions tonight.
We will not move on to our first report for the evening
which is item 4.1 created the adoption of eight 2022,
23 budget report.
And there has been a lot of hard work put in by
councillors and staff with progression community the
community for your contributions to this process as
well.
We have a recommendation before us is.
Do I have a mover?
Thank you.
Each councillor Cr Liz Pattison would you like to speak
to the moment?
>> Cr Liz Pattison: Is so lovely to have all of you
here listening in this Council meeting.
It is a real pleasure to have you coming.
I'm sure you've got your own reasons but it is great to
have you here anyway so thank you.
That has been built around delivering the 20 2125
council plan and is up for adoption as part of the
recommendation tonight.
The budget has been environmental leadership and I'm
proud to note the 2020, 21 was the first has been
mutual organization.
It is something that we can all be really proud of.
Budgets are a balancing act.
This is also a prudent budget.
Very important that we are in accountable and viable
council.
Once again that is another thing from our council
claim.
The rate increase is 1.75 percent.
That is the state government included in this budget.
Important tonight out that even though the overall
budget increase is still 1.5 percent.
Across the whole Shire.
And that increase is essential for council's future
viability and ability to support our community and meet
our aspirations.
In this budget there is 34.6 million have been
allocated to capital works and of the budget
commitments.
It is great to see significant funds as part of the
capital works allocated to the redevelopment.
In this budget.
That split over two years.
But it is a total of 4.3 million.
With conception starting in March next year which is
good.
And for the adoption of this budget and items in the
agenda items we will discuss.
We will hopefully move towards across the whole Shire
in the redeveloped pool and hopefully we will see the
pool as well.
Asset renewal funding is also a priority due to the
number of asset in life.
Eminence needs.
That obviously was a big discussion today so that is a
big focus as well and due to this growing asset
requirements.
By nine percent.
There is a backlog of work which needs to be
prioritised with placement over the coming years.
It is a significant liability for council we need to
prepare and prioritize.
To ensure we are spending asset renewal and capital
work budget appropriately and to best meet the needs of
our community.
One good thing is the recent grant money has meant we
have been able to allocate an additional dollars to
answer it roads and maintenance the unsealed roads
really impact everybody.
All of us in our community day today.
As we have all heard from today.
With budget covers the very broad services that
community.
That are needed in our candy.
We have talked about roads.
Across the seams there so many other services I've
picked out a couple that I think are interesting.
And I would like to just share them with you.
First nation reconciliation.
One of the key focuses is the implementation of our
reconciliation.
Reconciliation action plan which is wonderful that our
council is progressing across healthy connected
community its expansion of the small grants programme
increasing net worth $35,000.
The expansion of health health services and development
of the social infrastructure plan.
When we look at our environmental leadership we are
working on management plan and then if we skip down to
sustainable growth we are commencing the settlement
strategy to go to population growth and manage its
impacts.
Then if we look at robust and diverse economy one of
other things.
We are looking at responsible programme to reduce waste
and carbon emissions.
And without creativity there is 90,000 to expand arts
and culture program.
Then once again.
Accountable and viable council.
We have the business improvement programme and previous
budget the organisation set to reduce cost by 320,000.
And that is an ongoing we have other initiatives for
the business improvement program.
As you can see it is a really broad budget and it
covers lots of areas that are council office has worked
entirely for the betterment of our community.
And so yes.
I encourage you all to recommend a budget for adoption
tonight.
Thank you.
>> Think you said I would like to take the honour of
formally sectioning the budget tonight.
I think the deputy mayor and council for moving the
budget and speaking so eloquently and I was tempted to
hide my notes because councillor Patterson has stated
many of the facts that I had intended to stay tonight.
Should make it a little bit more concise with the
budgets on the agenda for the Council.
It is the most important in my opinion the most
important of the year.
There is a saying that someone has to pay the piper.
So we bear that in mind.
Once again it is very exciting about having a new
bridge being built.
And receiving external funding for this.
Over $2 million will be and then the next budget will
have another fund in excess of 2 million towards that
important asset for the community.
And district.
In my own sister used to work at the kiosk there.
In the 1980s I have lots of fond memories of the pool
and I know firsthand how important it is once again.
I would like to echo Councillor Patterson's comments in
regards to increases in funding for unsealed roads.
We heard about that tonight with the public question
time.
I'd also like to note that is having an upgrade.
And that is one of the most picturesque roads and my
opinions in the Shire.
A beautiful crossing of the river and sometimes I go
along there if there is a flat to have a look.
I have a great interest in the river and I also like to
keep an eye on different roads when I can.
I did drive along like it roads so I thought I would
make mention of that.
The new federal treasurer mentioned that he would
cheque every line of eight budget and be very frugal.
I believe the Council has done that.
And I have actually read the budget twice.
And I believe it is very important to be as frugal as
possible I know people in the community are aware I am
in favour of having Christmas decorations and we are
saving money by not having them.
And I am mindful of the fact the community
organisations can put in a submission to receive
funding for them.
I would like to congratulate councillor on her I
believe 18th budget tonight and also councillor at
Wellington on her 10th budget.
And I think it is also fitting to note UCR first budget
tonight as well.
I congratulate her and the Council on her stellar
efforts.
Would anyone else like to speak to this motion?
>> Thank you.
I speak in support of adopting the financial report.
Declaring the rights and charges for the 2032, 23 year
periods in doing so was to focus my comments upon the
framework in which the budget has been constructed.
Firstly the right framework of limiting the increase
apart from supplementary rights to 1.75 percent opposed
by the state government.
Create a financial problem for local government.
Caused by the current and projected underlined rates of
inflation.
The rate of inflation measured by the consumer index is
5.1 percent.
And after adjusting I believe they current instrument
for unusually large price rises and falls instantly .7
percent.
Adjusted by one point somebody five.
Real inflation of 3.7.
Therefore there was a lag between the state governments
setting the rate with the real rate of inflation
impacting now.
On the Council's operations and projects.
And in readjusting the capital rate at a later time.
Secondly we as councillors are restricted and our
ability to lobby for and endorse discretionary funding
and spending.
Due to our asset commitment if interested and community
members wish to look at the budget report on page 25.
You will see the backlog of assembled renewal in the
three years prior is 1.2, 2.4 and $7 million
respectively.
And in this budget the backlog is 13.8 million.
With the allocated dollars the 8.9 million.
This is a historic outcome of previous building
programmes and when the assets enter the renewal
programme which is reality but it restricts our
options.
I mentioned these two things to stress the financial
situation that we face.
New capital infrastructure and large initiatives are
restricted to those for asset renewal allocations.
Will need to consider locally raised funds to leverage
new initiatives.
By the previous Council ring tomorrow for the reserve
development on the condition the community raised one
dollar for every five borrowed.
More historical societies dollar for door dollar and a
$100,000 project.
I applaud the budget initiatives highlighted in the
report for my fellow councillors and I recognise the
commitment of the finance team but for the time being
and most importantly an allocated surplus.
Rise by seven percent.
We may need to reassess Council priorities and
spending.
>> I just got a couple questions for clarification
before I make comments.
His $90,000 in the budget for an integrated water
management plan and I'm just wondering is that it?
And is the plan or are we just planning in the next
financial year?
>> Thanks for your question obviously at the moment we
are in that investigation and coming up with a solution
space.
So that money relates to that piece of work.
But we do have money and our budget for some of the
work we are doing around the maintenance and renewal of
some of our wetlands.
There has been work done on the wetland down we have
some work we want to do and so there is money within
our renewal budget which is separate from that $90,000
to do some of that work.
We also know the federal government has committed $1.9
million to also support us in that process as we
understand and have developed the integrated water
management plan and understand what is going to be
needed.
They will be needing to look I suspect for further
funding to support any significant infrastructure
upgrades that may be required.
>> Thank you.
I hope we don't spend another year planning.
We need to get on and do something to address that.
I have another question about the cost of fuel
particularly with the cost of inflation generally and
how that has been affected into the budget.
We hear the centre is increasing but I think it is
$300,000 a month.
Construction construction cost.
And I'm just wondering if generally the instruction
costs and presumably the days for our road maintenance
and equipment will be double the price we paid last
year.
What does that mean for our services to the community?
>> Thank you councillor Wellington.
Question that is a really important question.
One of the things just relate this week we have been
talking about in terms of our budget and when this
budget was obviously developed.
People it is an evolving issue.
So there is some licenced escalations factored in.
We have some contingency.
But it really realistically depends on what happens
during the year.
And if we need to review then we will review.
But at this point we are comfortable with the budget.
Albeit we wanted to watch to see what happens in the
market.
>> Last one.
>> Reduction in the cost of materials and services and
is probably a more specific question on the same lives
line.
But how realistic is that given the economic situation
that we are in at the moment?
>> I might refer that one.
Thank you councillor Wellington.
Finance manager.
Are you able to assist?
Or.
>> 2021 is 30.8 million in the forecast for 2022 is
29.9 million.
>> Fluctuation in the forecast they were 1.4 million
higher than the next year budget.
Some other areas are in relation to expense to capital
works which art projects they go through the income
statements of goods and services.
So they also reduce in the budget year.
It is not that our services we are delivering are
costing us less.
>> We are confident the forecast is reasonable I guess
for the budget that is the question really I guess.
>> Yes.
Thank you very much.
>> I did have one more question that was important for
the rural areas.
Not sure if anyone can answer it tonight.
It just occurred to me with the municipal charge.
A lot of firms I've had multiple titles that form a
single property effectively.
I just wondered, are they subject to municipal charge
for each of their titles?
It might just be one farming enterprise on multiple
titles?
Can anyone answer?
I understand if you can't answer that.
>> I'm happy to refer that to our finance manager.
>> We will only receive one charge for continuous
property.
>> One charge for continuous property.
Thank you very much for that.
>> You have three minutes but don't feel like you need
to take the full three minutes.
>> I will support the budget obviously.
But I do have a lot of concerns about the economic
environment and probably the optimism of the budget.
I'm really concerned our capacity to deliver services
to people were here tonight from the number of people.
I think it is just the time of the year.
This happens every year.
We get this massive problem and they are not here
tonight.
Actually bombarded really in the last probably month
for 6 weeks or more some other councils have concerns
about the state of rural roads.
I see in our customer satisfaction survey we have a
copy of this week.
I don't know if that's secret or whether we could talk about it?
>> I think it would be on the know you government
website.
>> The satisfaction for unsealed road maintenance
maintenance is at an all-time low.
Anyone who has been watching council has been in
council for the last nine years.
At this point.
But when you know that every year my concern about the
lack of service for the world community and I've been
told in the past the world community has high
expectation.
I disagree with that.
I think there are major problems with the maintenance.
I think it is really hard to beat relying on residents
to put their complaints in.
People don't like complaining particularly enrol areas.
Often gets the point of exhaustion particularly if they
have to keep on asking and asking.
Can you come into my road?
Then they get a grade and they know it is not going to
last them next major rain downfall because the roads
are really in need of renovation.
So I'm really concerned we have put a lot of money this
year fortuitously and unsealed roads.
That is cause for celebration but if you choose to look
ahead.
Over the next three years.
We actually did pretty quickly and I did look at the
figures.
They are going into 120,000 and 2003 for the 900,000
following years.
Then 250,000 the year after.
So we actually this year we will have some extra money
for roads.
Call a lot more than previous years but the cost will
be dealing with will be anonymous.
The prioritisation of those I would like to see as
being much more transparent with the community about
how we prioritise core everyone who lives on and
unsealed road should get something with the rights who
says here is the assessed condition of the road and
here is where you are and the priority list.
Here is where you are on the backlog list the asset
renewal backlog is right after road after road of
unsealed roads that cannot be re-shaded.
We have got a major problem.
To the people I love your idea of a library of things.
But in the context of some basic services I am not just
about rights and rubbish.
Roads to me are critical and you look at these roads
like gospel road.
We have had major concerns about.
These are all agreed around the people from everywhere
use them to try and bypass the highway.
That residents that live there.
>> Understand you are still speaking but you are over
time.
>> Am happy to support the budget but I'm really
concerned about these issues.
Lots more I could say, no doubt I will end other forms
but thank you.
>> Would any other councils like to speak?
>> Before I do can I just ask a question?
When will we have the opportunity to decide to move
agenda items out the chain so that people can listen to
them?
>> Sure thank you.
As regards to budget I think people have spoken well I
am particularly concerned about the contrast between
the rights 1.71.75 percent and inflation rate and the
construction cost exclusion rates which are well into
double figures.
Depending on what the work is.
So I think we have heard quite a bit.
Rightly so about the challenge that brings and also in
question time I think that really brought home tonight
something we are going to have to get used to.
Which is people really disappointed the things they are
passionate about getting commitments from us.
That is unfortunately the job that we have to do.
I think it is really difficult for people community and
the community development programmes which we will talk
to you later on is particularly prone to this square
ideas are coming from community we have a certain
capacity to address them.
Which itself is about us budgeting for the workforce we
think we can handle.
So there are limits to that capacity in terms of the
workforce and the capacity to do the work.
And also to become a funding partner to help those
community projects.
Come to flourish in.
Those are really difficult positions for us to be in.
I think when I look at things we are not able to do I
find it pretty depressing.
I'm sure that is the same for people out of our
communities.
When you look at the things we are able to do.
While there is the counterpoint to it.
There are some really important things we are able to
do.
A few of them include a education communications
officer.
We are hoping to move from roughly 64 to 75 percent
roads diverted from landfill education and
communications officer will be an important part of
that.
Trying to help people do the right thing and to
contribute to that particular economy if you heard from
Joe.
Another one is our drainage investigation which are
following the terrible flooding that we saw in January.
Particular the flooding of the age care which was super
distressing for residents and for their loved ones.
And we know with climate change Lee probability of the
increase events is going to increase.
So the item there is a great one to see.
We have also got $3 million allocation to landfill.
And also note that as it's fairly typical contributes
roughly 25 percent of rape.
Revenue and it is getting about two percent of spending
in this budget.
>> And others other councils that still want to speak.
I know it does.
>> I do commend the budget and I think it's going to
thank the offices for the great work that has gone into
it.
It is tough to represent.
>> Would any other councilors.
>> We had apparently easy economic conditions for far
too long.
This is hidden.
All levels of government.
>> Handing out money through other physical policy.
Some of which we have contributed to.
One thing I am appreciative of is I've been on a
continual learning curve since being elected.
I have once held the opinion that if government federal
being offered.
It would be remiss of me to not accept them.
To contribute to the infrastructure projects we have in
the local government area.
I am at a point where I think we need to be building
and rightly so.
Imagine a call hurtling towards Cliff.
That clip is our super fearless spending.
I want non-passengers in the car and I want to put the
brakes on and turn the car around.
I'm not sure this is that feeling shared by my
colleagues.
After hearing questions tonight on road and drainage
networks we need to focus on our control.
Being made throughout this budget.
But I'm not convinced they have gone far enough.
For this organization.
All of this is being driven by the Council plan.
But also an ideology I did not subscribe to and that is
big government.
Government getting bigger.
Doing more costing more.
It just is not sustainable.
One that gets involved in more and more of society more
costs are born.
You kind of get away with that.
In a high inflation environment that makes everything
so much harder.
This will result in one or both elements coming into
play increasing.
With 1.75 percent state government we are very
constrained there.
What is in our control?
Spending.
I want to see this desire to continue to increase rates
by the maximum amount available.
Actually turnaround local government cost less to run.
We can charge you if you want to find some that you
want to spend your money on you should be free to
choose to do so.
It should not be up to government forcing everyone's to
paint more and more to do more and more.
If you are financially struggling yourself.
I am going to start with ample time on the clock.
But I think you get my point.
I may not be supporting the budget.
>> May I just have a question?
We are moving the budget for the financial year 20
tonight to 2023.
I felt as though some people or some councillors I
should say are a little bit alarmed as to what their
application.
>> I think you've had your time so I am going to see if
Councillor Hodge would like to speak to the budget.
>> I thought yes or no.
It is the 2023.
>> Yes yes it is.
Thank you.
>> Doing quite a lot of work on this.
Submitters.
Into a different type of financial concern.
And it is disappointing that we can't help anyone that
we can.
councillors and also our stop can help to try to find
other ways or try to get to their goals.
Especially we had terrific unfortunately we couldn't
support them but I have no doubt educate them into
other areas and continue working with them.
I would like everyone to look in the budgets document.
But to get a snapshot.
If you go to work all of the councillors we are right
across the shore.
That is what's on the agenda for the next year or so.
We are moving into different times now the cost of
legal money for us.
And that's true.
I think we are over the $570,000 no doubt this will
occur more in the future.
One thing a positive one people comment to me most is
and I know that has been a long time one section done.
And these things happen.
Unfortunately we are trying to do our best.
We are probably going to put a budget through that is
enabling in some areas.
And it is constraining.
Our families and friends and really try to get the
projects done still trying to do the spin and do things
for the community.
But unfortunately hopefully we can help in the future.
Thank you.
>> councillor Cr Kate Gazzard.
Lucky last.
>> Cr Kate Gazzard: I think this has been a tricky
thing to be involved with.
Having not been part of such a big budget before as a
first-time councilor.
And it was quite confronting looking at our financial
position and not being able to fund everything we would
like to fund.
So thank you for the financial team for all the hard
work you've put into this.
I think the budget has set out really nicely and I
really like the emphasis on environmental leadership.
And I think the trouble that we have with roads will
only be worsened with unique climate change.
I think that's something we need is a whole community
to be addressing.
And I think it is really important part of our budget.
There is also $90,000 to expand all arts and culture
program.
None of the 35,004 community grants.
Such an important part of our enabling community and so
that's really good to see and our budget.
>> councillor Patterson would you like to make any
closing comments?
>> Cr Liz Pattison: As everyone has already spoken
today.
Our current budget there are restrictions and the money
that we have available as discussed tonight and we need
to be fiscally responsible.
Our council is focusing on enabling our community to do
more.
And that is really important in the restrained budget
environment we have periods and as we've already
identified there are many great things are council are
doing.
We are lucky to have such enthusiastic residents who
have many great ideas and a number of which were
presented for hearing submissions as Councillor Hodge
has identified.
In summary this is a balanced budget which works to
progress our council plan and I encourage you to
support the budget.
Thank you.
>> We will not put the motion to revoke.
All those in favor.
Against?
And the budget is carried.
Thank you councilors.
>> Item 4.2.
So this next report is to discuss the Surf Coast
aquatic and health centre which has come back to
council for consideration in light of the huge
escalation construction cost this year.
Essentially this means that councillor.
More money is needed to build this facility.
Undertaking significant works to explore various
options available to us.
With grief extensively over the past month on these in
an effort to balance the needs of our community without
needing to be financially responsible.
We do have a recommendation from offices to consider.
councillor Patterson and the secondary key councillor
Cr Adrian Schonfelder.
>> Tonight as identified before us.
>> Cr Liz Pattison: To ensure it meets the needs of the
community whilst being physically responsible.
Fiscally responsible.
Restrictions that proposed design allow for this.
The proposed design allows for 2 or more waterfalls to
cater for water safety as well as exercise and
rehabilitation.
The 25m outdoor pool due to rising costs in the
construction market.
The design of the Surf Coast aquatic centre needs to
be revisited and we cannot afford to delay this any
further.
Inflation cost will result in likely projected
increases of 300,000 a month.
The recommendation seeks to progress at the same time
as seeking alternate funding arrangements which make
sense in the context of the inflationary costs and
delay costs if we don't progress.
There are a number of avenues identified in the
reports.
Which could be the golden ticket and resulting funding
of although it's still would be an outside pool.
All funding arrangements are being considered.
If anyone knows that are interested in supporting our
pool.
I'm serious.
All funding would be greatly appreciated and we are
seeking state government etc.
If the motion is passed.
The recommendation before us is about balancing
community needs learning to swim and hydrotherapy with
the ability sustainably operate the pool.
In relation to ongoing operating expenses.
The model proposed best meets our communities now
within the scope of a reasonable budget.
Is committed to environmental leadership and is
designing a pool that is fully electric aligns with
these values.
The designs also committed to environmental principles
throughout the design process and the length it is
constructed.
The fully electric model will come at a price of around
2.7 million.
This is the most responsible and achievable option in
the context of an electric design.
The extent the electricity is applied will impact the
overall cost of the electric option and can be
determined as finding a sort and progresses over the
coming months.
This will be as part of the cost benefit analysis that
will take part in the design process.
It is important to note this is a regional facility.
It will create a population of around 23,000 and is
likely to be used by many from across the region.
Already families travel for swimming lessons at the
swimming pool and unfortunately that is scheduled to
close in around October this year.
And we have a thousand students that we need to go
elsewhere for swimming lessons whilst this pool is
progressing.
The additional pools will provide a large number of
kids that need to learn to swim as well as hydrotherapy
for rehabilitation and for our ageing population.
So tonight this recommendation is about water safety
and healthy communities.
Our community needs and wants the health and aquatic
center.
There has been extensive support to get this project
moving and that includes extensive funds that has been.
We need this to continue to work to balance community
needs in our budget to get the best outcome we can for
the community.
>> Thanks.
And councillor Cr Adrian Schonfelder.
>> Cr Adrian Schonfelder: If I may I would like to
thank the wonderful surf life saving club volunteers
throughout who do a wonderful job and along with my
fellow councillors it was a tremendous honour to obtain
the opening of the new surf life saving clubs.
I know that swimming is a very popular pastime in our
community and I believe there is great support for the
people.
I believe the pool will enable a healthier community
and many of us are aware of the concept of a 20 minutes
neighbourhood where you have services available within
20 minutes.
And I believe along with other pools we would have that
availability to our community along with medical
facilities including new hospital to be built.
I represent the councils at the municipal associations
of victorious state council.
And last year and also last week.
I attended with our CEO's and a number of the delegates
for the very generous grants we have received for this
project and I know that other councillors from other
shires and much smaller town I think that is very
important to note.
I used to swim every day and 20 years ago I did.
And I was probably 20 kilos lighter as well.
I am is very keen swimmer and I have mentioned this
privately.
I will mention this publicly tonight.
It's not an easy thing to say.
My cousin actually drowned.
His name was Leslie Anderson.
And I believe that even if one life is saved.
It is well worth building the pool.
Thank you.
Speak.
>> Would any other councillors like to speak to this
motion?
>> As we note circumstances have changed significantly.
The original plans may have been had we received
significant community funding.
I hope this will serve as a motivator to the community.
For future projects we should be prepared to stomp out
our own community sourced funds.
Like how the community is done for many of their
projects.
I can accept decisions that have been previously made
with regards to allocation of funding but I will not be
supporting any further grants or borrowings.
Nor will I support the ASD options.
I think they are cost prohibitive to this project being
affordable.
As such if the motion in question does not succeed I
would like to foreshadow an amendment note and
amendment notion.
I don't think it's amended.
But technically it might be alternate.
>> Thank you.
Would anyone like to speak?
>> I would like to ask one question which may or may
not be able to be answered.
So the current proposals we have our 50 metre outdoors.
25 metre outdoor seasonals will.
Which will be heated as I understand over the warmer
months.
And the impact on the ongoing cost on council.
The ongoing cost on the original proposal was something
like the 25 and $700,000 a year ongoing in terms of
operating cost and what the report says if we have a 25
metre outdoor pool on a seasonal basis.
There will be a more modest reduction in the ongoing.
But if we then are gifted by the state government
enough money to turn the outdoor pool into a 50 metre
outdoor pool also needs to be heated in the off-season.
Has anybody looked at the cost on the ongoing if we are
hitting 850 metre pool on a seasonal basis outdoors?
>> I believe that has been looked up but I will refer
to the CEO.
>> I don't think I am incorrect in saying it's knowing
the report.
Have a mistake?
>> If you go to page 145 of the report it is option A.
50 metres which says 50 metre outdoor pool to indoor
warm water pools and the uprooting costs are $696,000 a
year.
Deeply so it is effectively $100,000 a year.
Additional cost from what the current proposed model
provides.
>> Thank you.
I will speak briefly.
I don't think I was at the Council meeting.
I think I was off 60s the last decisions on this
facility was made.
And My view is we need to live within our means.
I just feel, I'm sorry if councillors feel if it is
alarmist.
But I cannot see how on earth we are going to be able
to maintain services to the community if we continue to
expect except ongoing and cost of the level of hundreds
of thousands of dollars a year.
And I suspect what will happen with this is if we agree
to indoor heated pools and an outdoor seasonally heated
pool.
And they are all good things of course they're good for
the community.
I don't think they really relate and don't use this.
But never the last I absolutely agree with this.
But within our means.
And I just don't believe it is affordable.
I don't believe it was affordable under its previous
format where we were willing to take up 1/2 million
dollar a year ongoing operating cost and I don't
believe it is affordable under what will will probably
happen with this weather construction cost will blow
out again further than they have now done the life of
the project.
I can just hear it now.
You know we've got this and that we can't complete and
we need extra money for.
And by the way the operating costs are going to go up
as well.
In the meantime we have these basic services across the
Shire that we are not able to fund.
There needs to be a plan that actually covers it all.
I'm not going to support this because in all conscious
I cannot.
Even though I can see why we can build an aquatic
facility for $30 million that we can afford.
Why do we have to have the bells and whistles in round
one?
If the state offers us more money for gains development
entities going to cost us an extra $100,000 a year we
should say no thanks.
We don't want that.
We can't afford $100,000 a year to run additional to
run this facility let alone whatever else it is going
to cost us.
I do agree with councillor Cr Liz Pattison that we
could dismiss the option of contributions.
It is a public hospital.
We had the most extraordinary community support for the
hospital.
There are people in various portion of the community
that will support public facilities.
I don't think we've even tried.
And I don't think their support is limited to securing
people when they're sick.
I think a lot of people are very committed to the
notion of being proactive preventive infrastructure
that helps people stay well and we have even tried.
So I don't agree that it is not an option at all.
But I will not support this in its current form.
>> Thanks Cr Heather Wellington.
>> If I make a plane of order.
My concern is that councillor Cr Liz Pattison did not
dismiss any public contributions.
>> It's not up to councillor Cr Adrian Schonfelder to
start debating my debate after I finished.
I asked what the point of order is which actually which
category of point of order has I made a mistake?
That's not a point of order.
>> I will take both of those as comments and continue
with the debate councillor Cr Gary Allen thank you.
>> Cr Gary Allen: I intend supporting the
recommendation because we are not making a decision
about the pool tonight.
We are really enabling the officers to go and adjust
the scope of the pool.
For us to consider in the future whether we are going
to support or not the adjusted scope.
On that basis I am prepared to support the
recommendation.
I am pleased in the report that council will not be
committed to any further borrowings as I certainly
would not support any notion that required any further
on behalf of this council.
I believe talkie should have a pool.
It would have to be within the $40 million that is
already being committed I cannot see how that can be
achieved.
It would lead to excessive ongoing cost that would be
prohibited.
Let's see with the adjustments come up with.
And I would just like to take this opportunity because
in the previous debate the long pause was mentioned
twice.
I would just like to correct input on record that the
pool is not a pool run by the Council.
It was a pool donated by the family and the community
knows it.
It was enclosed by the previous, it was run by a
private facility and is expensive for families to
access.
And it is very poor maintenance order.
I would just like to put that on the record.
Thank you.
>> Would any other councillors like to speak?
>> Cr Rose Hodge: I just want to start off with
expenses or improvements.
[Inaudible] Torquay people put their hands in their
pockets.
Politicians realise now fantastic.
[inaudible] 5 million borrowed and I think they are
certainly putting in a fair piece of it as well.
I would support it.
But we've got to be, I agree we should not be spending
any more money and I am sorry, that's I know only two
or three people but I have been asked if left after 25
minutes.
[Inaudible] At least lead there.
Talking Torquay desperately needs it.
You know 25 years ago we really need it a facility
here.
All along the coast.
Would be economically for this facility.
So I will support this.
I look forward to it.
And their achievement can really look at this and see
perhaps but I will be supporting it.
Within our means.
And hopefully in the future.
And not have to go to July.
It is with everything that we are doing so I think it
is something we need to do but we have to be extremely
careful with having financial complications.
>> I also support the recommendation as answer engines
and support option C. When I look forward to 10 or 20
years and I try and imagine with an aquatic and I just
can't imagine it.
I think Torquay is a town of this size and population
and diversity and demographic that needs a facility
like this.
I also think these populations in the city
nearby also are going to be big users of this facility.
I note that construction costs has a payoff in allowing
us to provide the kind of utility usage that is going
to increase usage of the pool.
It is an important point that is actually an investment
in capital past that will help us to minimise the
recurrent costs all in all I think the team has done a
fantastic job complex putting this complex picture in
front of us I am grateful to the members of the
community particularly the advocacy group that has been
championing this project for many years and has done a
fantastic job that 30+ million dollars in funding.
And I understand they are reluctantly too inclined to
accept as opposed to the 50 metre pool half and that is
the kind of I guess generosity of spirit I think is
fantastic on their behalf.
All in all this is a difficult one.
I think we've got a great way forward and I supported
along the lines he pool.
>> Cr Kate Gazzard: I will support the call.
I think we need to pull and mostly for swimming lessons
put the other will be hydrotherapy and rehabilitation
which is important for the health especially in an
ageing population as well as health and wellness and
exercise from the gym facilities.
I am regretful that the people who will be disappointed
and miss out are the lap swimmers and some squats and
competitive consumers who is a lap swimmer myself I
would love a 50 metre pool year round.
But I think within the scope of our finances that is
just not possible.
So if it was no pool at all I think it is best that we
do which is a 25 metre outdoor pool and I feel very
strongly that we be this be fully electric and not
powered by gas even though that is an additional 2.7
million.
Our policy to have all new buildings have a six green
star rating.
That would come at an additional cost of $5.1 million.
I think being satisfied with not having the pool heated
by fossil fuels and attempting to get four or five
stars is adequate at this stage.
So I'm happy to endorse option C. Thank you.
>> Do you have any closing comments?
>> Cr Liz Pattison: A quick one.
Once again, I would like to thank her government
funding which is a huge portion of the funding required
I guess there was some comments ranged around why we
need to have a health and aquatic centre and why can't
we have a pool.
I guess it is to do with the ongoing operating cost.
It is the other aspects of health and aquatic centres
the caf?.
The help.
The life suites.
The injured indoor hydrotherapy pool.
That's what funds and aquatic center.
You don't get a lot of money some lap swimming.
And so that is the model.
To enable it to be sustainable for council going
forward.
That's why we are putting forward a health and aquatic
center.
And I guess it is important to note that is being
factored into our long-term financial plan.
The operating costs of this pool.
So we are considering this is long-term sustainability
of the Council and the ability to fund the ongoing
operating cost of the pool.
As we've all talked about.
As with many of the other councillors.
>> Thanks.
I will not put the motion to a vote.
All those in favour please raise your hands.
And those against.
And the motion is carried to.
>> Think you councilors.
Now before we move on to 3 item 4.3.
I am aware that we have members of our community in the
gallery and watching online with a key interest item
4.8.
Which is the reverse treatment in our groundwater
extraction submission.
Given the same interest I will ask if there is a mover
and a second is for a procedural motion that 4.8 on the
agenda be moved forward move for councillor Wellington.
>> We will do for .8 than 4.5.
Are you happy with that councillor Wellington?
>> Actually 4.58 is the Anglesey River is the Anglesea
River.
Anti- Alcoa.
We need to vote on the seizure motion.
All those in favor.
Thank you.
The motion is carried unanimously.
Moving on to full .8 of our agenda this report is in
relation to the Anglesea River application to steamed
extend its pumping trials through its groundwater
extraction.
There is a recommendation for council to acknowledge
increasing concerns about the Anglesea River to endorse
the submission regarding application extinction Alcoa
application and to provide submission and resolution
for the praetorian Minister for water.
The minister for energy environment and climate change.
The minister for resources.
The original Corporation.
The Department of the environment made order.
Management authority and Australia.
A mover for the recommendations think you and a second
councillor speak Cr Kate Gazzard.
Would you like to speak to the motion?
>> I am very pleased to see this.
I am proud that we are making the submission I know I
was working on bringing a motion to council along the
lines of the submission.
But it would have sent nowhere near as good.
I'm really grateful to the offices who have put a lot
of work into this.
Super grateful to the members of the community to have
produced particularly that underpins this motion and
has provided such a great resource if they stick
optimally.
I would also like to acknowledge this additional owners
I've spoken to about this at the state that the river
is in.
I would also like to acknowledge the community that the
state the river is in.
And I would acknowledge against the hard work put in by
the Anglesey River.
And Prof. Ralph has been a contributor the University
of Melbourne.
Who has been a fantastically valuable and voluntary
expert contributed by the discussion paper.
This is not we are not even talking tonight about
insisting that anything particular has caused the
crisis.
So what we are doing as we are supporting for a
thorough investigation of particulate a lot of
inquiries which has long-term and ongoing extraction of
groundwater from the space and formation.
Spend the main cause of the crisis that's affecting the
record.
Seduced has suggested or has concluded diminished down
due to climate change of course and there is a
fundamental difference between those two positions
because climate change is something in the far
foreseeable future we are not going to be able to do
anything about.
Whereas pumping these is something that we can do
something about.
We can do something about it tomorrow.
So there's a huge difference in the implications of the
two possible causes.
And we have to really rattle through this.
I would like to stress that the frames is Angel Buse
went to the river.
And a stress on the system.
And in fact stress from climate change make management
even more important I would like to raise five points
about these in the report.
Sioux City is not a necessity.) To fulfil their
obligations but it has to be noted the people would
fill eventually naturally the rainfall it may take a
for 50 years for that to fill naturally.
Either way the pit goes down to -40 metres which is 40
metres below main sea level.
The second point I would like to make.
Historic groundwater extraction is called diverse
impact.
They also say in their frequent updates.
Depending ecosystems.
In fact as a discussion shows that have been
overlooked.
Ignored or inadequately investigated.
Again that is what the submission is about.
I ask you to picture a doctor who is running some tests
on a patient who actually bled to death a couple of
days previously.
The doctor and test are not finding any adverse
reactions would we expect them to?
No.
Would we expect them to take into account the patient
has Artie died a couple of days ago?
Yes we would expect that to take that into account.
The oversight body wouldn't take that into account as
well?
And the patient having bled to death.
And this case tests are being run system on a system
that has been depleted through half a century of
groundwater extraction of course we would expect that
system has been draw actively Street drastically
changed by that history.
That is to be taken into account by the regulator.
At the moment it does not look as if that has been
taken into account by the regulator and the agencies.
>> An extension of time to councillor?
>> How much actual extra time do you need?
Three minutes?
That is great.
I'm assuming you're moving into second and all those in
favour.
Thank you.
The motion is carried unanimously.
>> I will try to be as quick.
>> You get two minutes to close at the end as well.
>> Don't worry have got that.
Management agencies rejected groundwater extraction as
a cause of acidity problems eventually the link was
acknowledged in a recovery plan was developed.
I am not suggesting this is the same situation but
there are similarities.
If agencies my point.
If agencies including have made submissions about the
situation they should be made public.
That would be in line with those agencies which talks
about honesty and transparency rightly so.
Let's not forget features results through through FOA.
The charter existed that talked about honesty and
transparency about the local community how to apply for
months and passions to receive the survey data.
The fourth point.
We do hear the angle river it was naturally primed to
is very true.
As if to suggest it's death is acceptable.
Recovery is a fantasy and ongoing groundwater
extraction is not a problem.
In fact a naturally vulnerable system like that needs
extra care.
I think that is a conclusion we can come to on that
one.
Not that we should have given up on the system.
If it wasn't historically an apartment history?
With history has been regardless to bring those
significance to the rightly an Institute?
Supported daily after outdoor education, activities
including fishing and nature study for almost a
century.
Fifthly, the project angles was anything about its
merits and risks.
It is apparently continued on.
Should a project that is about celebrating nature light
on a process that may be profoundly harming a local
environment.
The merits and risks of that proposal.
Listen to me there is a lesson for Anglesey life after.
The discussion paper shows exportation this groundwater
without properly understanding the complexities and
vulnerabilities of the system profoundly damaged I
think there is a lesson for us to bear in mind in
development on our Alcoa land.
There is also potential for unwanted outcomes from an
an adequate understanding of the complexities and
vulnerabilities of the unique sense of place an appeal.
Framework master plans give me confidence that the
potential for harm has been recognized.
This is a subject I hope we can return to on a future
occasion.
Need to understand the risks and processes before we
can choose the right of these options.
I will conclude there.
Absolutely essential to Anglesea economy and place.
Here's a chance for us to do our bit for future
generations and to all of the people who love Anglesea
but are not likely enough to live there.
Thank you for the extra time.
I appreciate very much the submission.
[APPLAUSE]
>> councillor and Cr Kate Gazzard would you like to
speak?
>> Cr Kate Gazzard: Think you think councillor is to be
Cr Mike Bodsworth for your moving words.
I think the decision is excellent.
I'm happy with how it has been written.
It reads extremely well.
I think it covers everything we would like to cover.
The help of these dressing Anglesea River I find
distressing.
Unfortunately sometimes the prettier looks like crystal
clear water is an indication of the poor health.
And previous years.
And I think it is quite weak I don't believe we can
slowly laid the blame on climate change.
And I find it quite upsetting that Alcoa not being held
accountable for the use of the groundwater which is
huge amounts of groundwater at a very high the health
of our waterways is okay for human health and this is
something that I think we should be funding for.
>> Would any other councillors like to speak to this
motion.
>> About the troubles.
It is just awful to read this report and then hear you
speak about it and the dire strengths strengths that
river is actually end.
I endorse a submission that says no further pumping at
all until we actually understand the impacts of what
that pumping is doing.
I should declare that I was on the board of water
between about 2006 or something like that.
So I've kind of had that.
I think that's long enough gone to not constitute any
conflict of interest in this issue now.
A couple of comments I would like to make.
One is I think a solution is excellent.
I'm rather concerned it was made on behalf of council
without council seeing it.
To me this is a critically.
This is an issue of strategic importance between two
significant organisations and a clearly should have come to Council.
I think the reason it didn't I look back on the dates.
And it says to me that were rewarded.
Put a very short timeframe on which the request for
submission and the closing date.
Is that correct?
So Council offices put in a submission which council is
now being asked to endorse.
Unfortunately I think most or all of us would agree
with the submission.
But I do have some concerns from a governance
perspective that it's happened.
However the only comment I would like to make.
I think it's an excellent submission.
The only comment I would like to make which council
does not support support extraction.
That is proven or is highly likely to have a
detrimental impact on the river and now my reading is
that ought to be reversed so what we are not supporting
as many extraction unless there is no proven that there
is no impact.
That would be my view of what we should be supporting.
We should not be saying we don't support it if it's
proven to have detrimental impact.
We should be saying we don't support it unless it's
proven not to have.
Because conservatism.
Unless I'm misreading this and what is it intended to
say.
I believe we should be conservative of back groundwater
pumping and I just didn't think that this is a highly
critical suggestion about what is causing or at least
what is significantly contributing to the problems in
the river.
I don't think we should take while you know if it is
proven to be harmful that is almost in a sense the
approach has been taken over the years.
If it's not proven to be harmful we will do it.
I don't agree with that.
Unless I'm misreading something I think point D should
be amended.
I'm happy to move that amendment along those lines.
Depending on what councillor Cr Mike Bodsworth and
councillor Cr Kate Gazzard think about that.
>> We pause the clock.
Just a second councillor Christian Cr Rose Hodge.
Is that in relation to the question that has been put
forward?
Or is that something question?
>> Cr Rose Hodge: We had a big discussion on and it was
not just the office system.
>> Mayor Libby Stapleton: Just to clarify.
councillor Cr Heather Wellington there was a short
timeframe.
Offices brought it to a briefing which was on request
from councillors because we were keen to explore the
opportunities for submission and given the short
timeframe.
Offices approaching Southern reward on the
understanding that you would need to come to council
for resolution that I dropped submission will be put
forward but we would go ahead obviously supported
tonight.
>> I guess my point is there is no authority to make
decisions to put submissions behind that door.
The authority.
I'm not criticising officers for doing this.
I can see what's happened.
I think the problem sits with an authority with expect
to southern rural water imposing a timeframe like this.
An organisation like council.
To make an important on this absolutely critical issue.
But the point is if there is a submission to be made by
the council it should be brought to until we can make
it.
There's no and has been a concern of mine for a long
time.
I'm not criticising officers I'm making a point.
I'm concerned the process from a government perspective
is not appropriate.
I don't care whether it's brought to a briefing or not.
There's no authority at a briefing to make a decision.
>> The decision on the submission has been made in the
rooms here tonight.
That's my response.
I believe the submission is very good except for point
D. I suggest that should be changed.
>> Is not point D in the recommendation?
>> In the submission itself.
>> Mayor Libby Stapleton: Okay and councillor Cr Kate
Gazzard and councillor Cr Mike Bodsworth are you happy
to accept that amendment?
>> Cr Mike Bodsworth: I'm not happy to accept as an amendment.
I think that where council sits in the management
structure makes it less suitable to me that we would
make such a definitive statement about it.
I think that I gather from this that it has been
calibrated at a kind of level that is not suggesting
the definitive handle on things.
And we can make that understand what councillor
Willington suggesting.
It is good the way it is.
And I don't support amending it.
>> councillor Barker and councillor Willington would
like to speak to the amendment?
>> Cr Heather Wellington: The amendment is council does
not support extraction unless such extraction is proven
to not have detrimental impact and nor its.
>> Am happy to support that momentum.
>> You've changed your mind?
>> I have.
>> Am happy.
>> Thanks for that.
>> We are going back to councillor Cr Heather
Wellington original time.
>> I would just wrap up.
Thanks for accepting that very much.
I think it's important.
We have to stand up and say respectfully to our other
organisations that we work with.
And we want to be able to have a say and we would've
liked a little bit more time.
And I would like to think about the process for the
future that I strongly support the submission and I
think it's a very well written and very critical
submission for us.
>> Any other councillors that would like to speak to
this motion?
councillor bonds with would you like to make any other
comments?
>> Cr Mike Bodsworth: Make me think about the
expression of extraordinary climes dictionary evidence.
Maybe extraordinary claim here is not that level of
groundwater extraction that length of time would cause
catastrophic impact on a system like the river with its
geology the extraordinary climate is that it would not
it has been 3.5 billion order extraction per year just
under 50 years.
It would be an extraordinary thing for that not to have
catastrophically damaged the river.
That has been occurring right in the middle school
leaving the swamps.
Where a lot of the coming from high and dry.
City compounds which gets washed down the rivers.
It is absolutely plausible explanations which need be
permanent which most is so forgive me for that.
The good news in the end is not if the hypothesis is
proved to be great proves to be correct I hope it has
explored thoroughly enough to say yes or no.
Then the solution may take a long time.
But it could be as simple as stopping pumping.
That's it and we need a recovery plan which sets out a
bunch of term options.
To salvage what makes logical values we can.
In the long term the system may recover by itself.
Thanks very much for your support.
The motion to.
>> I will not put the motion to a vote.
All those in favor.
>> The motion is carried unanimously.
Thank you councilors.
And well done.
The next item is.
We have also brought forward item 4.5.
Which is the community project development programme.
I'm just mindful that.
>> We have community ready.
>> A break for a minute?
>> Mayor Libby Stapleton: We do.
We brought this on before so the community can hear.
If you need to take a break then go.
>> The purpose of this report is for council to discuss
the community project development program.
The June update.
And we do have a recommendation in the agenda.
The discussion to have a mover for this motion?
?
As per the recommendation?
>> I would like to move the opportunity of option.
If I could.
>> Had that been alternative option one I assume?
>> Thank you.
A second or for alternative option one?
Would you like to speak to the motion?
Please.
>> Okay thanks.
We talked about these items in time.
So I'm going to try and cut things short a little bit
by not repeating what we covered.
Some of the ground we covered in question time.
This is a programme where project ideas that are coming
from communities after all we has a very small smart
community and municipality.
They come up with a lot of fantastic ideas we are lucky
to have them and we are also looking to have a very
small team hear who can process ideas and try and help
them come to flourish in.
Have a great order of projects which have come to
flourish in.
I know that members of the district society of
successfully delivered recently which is more recently
which is an amazing one.
We also had to know their names which was fantastic
too.
As referred in our discussion of the budget.
We are just not able to connect commit to many of the
things we are about to commit to.
So would like to acknowledge how disappointing that is
for the people who are putting these project proposals
forward.
With regard to the history as Jan talked about in her
question.
Part of this recommendation pertains to the visibility
of that proposed work.
But a huge funding shortly extremely that is going to
be extremely hard for the community group to find.
At the moment we don't have it either.
We are in a position where all we can do is try and
find it.
And explore the options that might be open to us.
That's what we have done in the past.
But it is a tough one.
And I'm glad we are able to do if it worked there.
I'm really sorry we cannot do more.
Differ with regard to things.
We also talked about that quite a bit.
The reason I don't support the recommendation and I've
moved to option one.
It is when I first got involved in this proposal.
As Joe outlined before.
It was put forward by the community.
The group that Joe's been hitting.
>> Can we pause the clock for a second?
I think option one is not the full resolution.
I think we have to alter.
I think it's just got the alternative.
>> The recommendation has a detailed .1.3.
I think just to be clear the recommendation but instead
of .2 and the recommendation he is suggesting bullet
point to an alternative option.
Is that correct?
Okay.
>> If I'm speaking out of term apologies just let me
know.
Could we add in to the recommendation because I think
in the recommendation is the community led model that
is the problem.
Whether we have community led model for the proposed
regional feasibility study so it encompasses both and
gives the most flexibility.
So just in terms of process.
I think council Cr Mike Bodsworth moved alternative
option one.
So we probably need to have the discussion around
alternative option one.
You could foreshadow and alternate motion.
If council Bosworth proposed motion doesn't.
>> Sorry for interrupting.
>> Cr Mike Bodsworth: I'm confused now I will just past
press on where I was at.
Where I first got involved up to the present day that
group has been fairly adamant or as has remained really
confident.
For good reason.
For things to be implemented through a community led
model run by volunteers is not feasible in the long
term.
But it's likely to fall over.
There are lots of examples of that happening.
They have always suggested a way to go.
Patient is an institutional scale stress.
One that says before professionally run and involves
partnerships between council hopefully our council and
potentially along G 21 potentially Corporation.
As we heard earlier those partnerships at the moment I
have not been formed.
As far as we've seen a great from some of those
partners.
But we also heard has been approached but there was
some strong support there.
I think that it is worth persevering and that's why I'm
supporting this alternative option.
I think it's worth persevering and allowing
particularly the library of things to put their best
foot forward.
I think there haven't been in the room a couple of
really important occasions had there been in the room.
I think they would've made a big difference to the way
people are seeing and thinking about it.
I stressed also we are talking about and fulminate a
library of things.
We are talking about supporting feasibility study if
there were a feasibility study that includes exploring
those partnerships.
I think that summarises my reasons for supporting that
option.
It's about this came from that working group from the
community.
And I think we should respect their expertise on it.
We have been playing catch-up and done a great job at
doing that.
Playing catch up on the street we concept.
We are nowhere near where these groups are rotting on
their understanding of it and what can be achieved and
how.
I think we should just proceed with that and placing
our confidence in them.
>> Just to clarify.
The alternative option one that you've moved provides a
different recommendation for item 1 in the original
recommendations item 3.
Their recommendations around the historical Society
building and the great landscape plan are somewhat
different in the alternative option just to clarify.
>> Questions.
>> In the context of option one put forward.
I was just talking to what would the likely impact of
progressing with option one based on the library of
things if this is the motion that is passed today.
So just wanted offices given work they've done to
provide some feedback.
>> Sorry the motion at hand.
>> I will refer that through our ACO.
>> What we don't have currently is an agreed
partnership with regional bodies to take the
feasibility studies.
There is still a question remaining about where we
could undertake that work for getting those
partnerships to agree for feasibility study.
As opposed the intent of the recommendation written
affirms the feasibility of a community led model.
That is the investigation discovered it doesn't say is
off the table.
Between with the investigation found which is a
feasible model.
And there could be a retention of council's money to do
some more work in the future without identifying that
work.
As mentioned before that regional partnership has not
been established.
There is another question around council's capacity to
undertake a feasibility study or even apply for a grant
in the coming months.
Existing priorities that would probably be difficult to
achieve in the last half of 2022.
That is not the recommendations has been framed.
It may not be that original feasibility could get off
the ground quickly because of those reasons.
And just on a community led model we have heard their
other community groups.
One in particular that have had a player luminary
conversation for item sharing.
There might be some other groups out there that are
looking at this as a feasible option.
>> Can I just ask a follow-up question just to clarify.
If the recommendation that offices have put forward in
our agenda.
If that was supported.
Will that preclude the feasibility study of things for
exploring the option for others.
>> Are we talking about a whole shire of things?
Or are we talking about things driven by the community
believed.
>> These are feasibility study at this time.
It's not really proposing anything specific.
>> A facility that will distribute?
Were there any other questions before we move on?
>> I would just like to foreshadow that in the event
the current motion lapses that we retain to the
recommendation that I would propose the recommendation
right council.
>> I'm confused.
About what we are voting on.
Mike's let me be clear to recap for everyone.
councillor Cr Mike Bodsworth moved the motion.
The motion was not for the recommendation in the
report.
The motion was alternative option one.
While councillor Cr Mike Bodsworth was speaking to
alternative option one.
Managing general manager councillor Jan Juc Parent
Advisory Committee reminded us that the alternative
option that is being put forward does not come
pensively encompass item 1 and three in the recommended
options being performed by offices.
Are you with me?
>> So are we voting on recommendation number one and
number three and talk .2?
>> Not on the moment we are not voting on anything.
What we are debating is alternative option one.
As it's written.
councillor Patterson has foreshadow that in the event
alternative option one is not carried she would
foreshadow the recommended option as presented in
offices.
That's where we are at.
So far only councillor Bosworth has spoken to this
motion.
Second councillor seconded.
She speak I will give an opportunity to speak if anyone
else was to speak to it.
We will take a vote and see where we are at.
>> Cr Kate Gazzard: On for the confusion.
I think these projects are fabulous.
I'm so impressed with the idea.
I think it is a really excellent proposal.
I guess my worry is if there isn't that scope for a
regional feasibility project in my just slow things
down.
Compared to if we go with the recommendation and there
is different options available.
If councillor Cr Mike Bodsworth feel strongly option
one is the best way to go.
I'm happy to support that.
I think the I think I would like to foreshadow that we
bring number one and three from the recommendation into
option one if that is if we are able to do that.
>> I think the mover and the second or agreed as an
amended motion then we would be able to continue.
So councillor Bosworth.
Are you up with what councillor Cr Kate Gazzard
proposed weight which is essentially the opposite
recommendation if you take .1 and .3 from the offices
recommendation and .2 from the motion that you moved
and make that the motion.
>> I think we need the motion on the board.
>> Are we able to do that governors with the zoom?
Or are we not?
councillor Cr Mike Bodsworth at the moment we haven't
recommendation that has quite a bit of data.
1.1, 1.2 and so on.
The suggestion councillor has made is we hold onto that
recommendation.
Remove all of .2 and replace it with your bullet point
from the alternative option one.
>> And governance could show us the office of
recommendation just so I can make sure recommendation
that is the opposite recommendation.
Is that we keep one and three recommendation from the
office of recommendation.
Just to give everyone a 2nd to look at that.
Then if we move on to the motion that councillor has
proposed which is alternative option one.
The second bullet point would replace item number two
in the office of recommendation.
>> Can I suggest someone have a copy of the agenda in
word format and put it up so we can look at what we are
voting on?
Thank you.
>> Are there any 's constraints we need to write
mountains of?
In terms of the whole agenda?
>> In terms of funding agreements or applications this
is getting quite messy and I think could be beneficial.
>> That's certainly an option you could foreshadow.
I think we need to go through the process of debating
the motion actually on the table than that will be
something that could be considered if councils thought
it was necessary.
So governance is just revising the recommendation in
the meantime.
Would anyone else like to speak to the motion?
>> I strongly support the initiative of the library of
things.
There is one thing undertaken and I think the findings
from that feasibility study will feed into work that
our council is doing around investigating.
Ultimately both.
However it goes the Council is supported through this
programme of investigating further the library of
things.
I think in my earlier comments around the
recommendation that was put forward.
I think it is important that we view what we are doing
in the context of budget restraints and therefore
community led model is likely to be the most likely
model that can be progressed in the short term.
Not the ultimate option but in the short term.
And I know that may not be favourable for many in the
community.
But given that councils restraints budget many of our
community organisations have restraining budgets.
I think enabling the community led model a feasibility
study for the regional model really would enable us to
move forward in some way it may not be the perfect way
we all would agree to.
I think that is important.
So I think as identified in the questions.
Doing the community model doesn't include us from
having a study.
And I potentially working with original partners if the
stakeholders can come on board.
I just want to reiterate I am dedicated to the concept
of the library of things.
I think is really important and I think it is essential
for executive economy and how we move forward around
addressing our climate emergency.
And the lobby of things has a really dedicated
community team who been working really hard and
tirelessly to really get support with council DRC 221
and others.
And I commend them on the efforts they are doing and it
is just that we are in such an unfortunate financial
environment and our council is moving forward with an
approach of enabling our community to do all in the
restrained budget commissions.
I just wanted without board.
>> You foreshadowed earlier you got to move the
original recommendation.
Is that still?
Would any other councils like to speak?
>> Can I ask a question does not mention what we are
actually talking about right now?
.2 Is we assume the visibility then we assume we want
to propose regional feasibility study.
I think what we are saying is we have affirmed the
local feasibility would that be correct?
>> Yes that's gone through the community programme
development.
>> We don't need original feasibility study.
I think what we are saying is we affirm the feasibility
we allow these proposals at a local level.
Is that correct?
Maybe we should just clarify that.
>> You can affirm feasibility and then say let's say
let's get a feasibility study.
The point.
>> Mayor Libby Stapleton: I think the point is offices
have assessed it internally and it is ready to progress
to that.
It has been supported for a feasibility study gap.
Maybe we will ask general manager of community to
clarify.
We have done an investigation for the terms of a
feasibility I think that in addition to a local level
was something along those lines.
We assigned that if we were able to assess on a larger
scale we would be able to do a feasibility study.
That point of clarification might be useful.
>> It's messy.
I'm sorry for people listening to these really.
It is confusing.
I understand the suggestion to meet desirability would
be then feasibility.
In the motion that we've got here.
Because it is complete because it is confusing to be
talking about feasibility at two different scales and
into different ways.
But for that reason I find it hard to say that is an
acceptable amendment to me or not.
>> It's your motion.
If you want to change it to desirability you can ask
councillor if she would support that and change it to
sit desirability.
>> I will suggest that for a better idea.
>> councillor Alan got a question as well.
>> Cr Gary Allen: That is what I want to say.
I don't believe I am probably entering into debate now
which I shouldn't.
I don't believe the 20,000 spent locally.
I think that's a waste of money.
I'll elaborate on that in the debate.
But what I want to vote on an .2 is a regional
feasibility study.
[Multiply Years] [multiple Speakers]
>> Mayor Libby Stapleton: Thank you.
>> Big government trying to do more and more.
You look at the practical situation it has put us in
now.
And the whole concept of having us trying to track a
whole bunch of things to expedite things that is now
caused more of a mess.
Personally I don't think a lot of these topics are a
good use of our resources just at this time.
Based on Gene's question earlier I will be happy to
support 1.1.
But just checking all of these items together.
Just because a massive problem.
I'm not sure if everyone in this room knows exactly was
going on.
But trying to copy and paste is just getting messy.
In the future if we can have elements like these cut
into individual components.
We will debate that.
Take cross and I think it will be much better for
future meetings.
Both everyone's.
The gallery and understanding.
But for now this is bonkers.
Which speech the motion.
>> Mayor Libby Stapleton: Thank you.
Cr Rose Hodge would you like to speak to the motion?
>> Cr Rose Hodge: I agree.
[Inaudible] I love what they are trying to do.
But there is a time for everything to go through a
process and I don't think what we are doing now is a
very good government process and does it detract away
from any other?
But not what we do tonight and I want to be supporting
it all put together.
>> Cr Heather Wellington: I think you're putting the
motion and if anyone disagrees with any part of it, I
don't believe this council should be voting on motions
which are not put them there in front of us for us in
the community to see.
So that is the purpose of getting at their seat can
actually see we were voting on.
I'm actually not going to support it.
I think a lot of the proposal.
But I don't think we can take on any more than we have
currently got.
It should be done at original level and local
communities might develop their own initiatives and
have been on successfully and other.
And we wouldn't be precluding it.
We are really saying and .2 is give $20,000 if the
other organisations wish to contribute to it.
But I would like to go back to the original notion of
it and thinking precluded anything.
I think it doesn't stop the community from doing that.
Epileptics it's a good idea.
I want to briefly talk about the historical society
building which has been probably forgotten.
I agree that we need to support the historical
societies.
I think they are all tucked away in historical and
often inadequate buildings.
We have lost I think councilling focus on history which
we used to have with the history committee.
That sort of thing.
It is kind of.
I think we really need to support these groups to have
a perfect facility and really cherished the history
that is huge along this coast.
So I support 11.1.
And I think we need to do more for those groups
including and I think the freshwater riding club.
It also is very deserving of some good facilities horse
writing is a really popular and very good sport for
people.
Some of the writing clubs have been behind.
I think what creates one of those.
And it is to sort of think plague for access to other
facilities.
It needs its own facility.
It's got a good membership.
A small strong club and I really like that.
Don't take the first focus off them either.
I would like to go back to the first motion and I will
support that first motion if it gets put back on the
table.
>> Mayor Libby Stapleton: Would any other councillors
like to speak to the motion on the table?
>> I think if Doc .2 started at Ellicott's $20,000.
That is where the confusion would go away.
So I don't know the second are willing to accept as an
amendment.
>> Yes.
Definitely.
>> It allocates $30,000.
>> Mayor Libby Stapleton: If they agree to that that is
that sustained motion on the title.
Okay.
You can continue.
>> To the community.
Well done I honestly support historical societies.
It's great to see your proposal here.
I can reassure council the committees have restarted
again.
We do have the historical committee met recently.
I support the conclusion prioritisation of the
historical society.
I really wanted to say that with the library of things
I truly believe that if we spent $20,000 locally it
would be money wasted.
It would be good money after bad.
And given that that should go to original proposal.
In the feasibility study for original proposal.
FG 21 councils are not on board.
Then we should be taking the initiatives gathering all
the people who support this proposal to put an
application to recycling Victoria for the $80,000 that
would give us a significant amount of money to do this
feasibility study.
And that would be good money.
That would be something worthwhile.
But if we spent something locally.
It won't be sustainable.
It just won't be sustainable.
The only chance of this project being sustainable is to
go regional and support the amended motion.
Thank you.
Speak.
>> Did anyone else want to speak to this motion?
councillor Cr Mike Bodsworth did you want to make any
closing comments?
>> Cr Mike Bodsworth: Sorry about the confusion
everyone.
I'm happy with what we've got to with councillor Cr
Gary Allen suggestion.
We've gotten lost in the way there.
And the last side of what has been tried to achieve.
We all know a cost of living crisis for people.
Sharing expensive items is one way for people to the
cost of living pressures.
We note that there is a crisis of wasteful consumption.
About addressing whistle consumption by reducing a
number of things people feel they need to buy and there
are too many examples for me to even begin to mention
them.
We are also in the budget we talked about 60 movies
from 64 percent to 75 percent West from landfill.
It also addresses most wasteland for landfill.
As does the repair caf? and by the way that is coming
up to its fifth speed Thursday and Joe is spearheaded.
The other thing is the circular.
The principal circular economy name which is to keep
things materials and goods circulating at the highest
possible value for the longest possible time.
That is where the lobby of things proposal absolutely
hits the nail on the head.
It is all about keeping valuable items circulating the
average cordless drill would get 30 minutes of use in
its lifetime.
That is what we want to get away from.
So potentially quite fairly at the scale.
Another one might pop up.
Some other people might say yes we will do it.
I think for us to vote in favour of a motion we are
proposing something different for some other group to
put their hands up into it.
>> Time.
>> That pretty much says it all.
>> Mayor Libby Stapleton: Just for some clarity.
The reason why there is multiple projects on this item
is because it is the community project development
programme quarterly report.
All of the projects that have been assessed over the
last quarter have been presented to council for
consideration.
I would hate the community to think that council is
just trying to put a whole lot of things into one item.
That is not the intention.
The intention is to bring to council teams report for
us to consider at this meeting.
Ellen output the motion to a vote.
All those in favour as per the recommendation on the
screen please raise your hand.
And all of those against.
And the motion is lost.
There was an alternative.
Motion foreshadowed would you like to put that to us?
>> Ultimately as Mike said regardless which motion gets
up I don't think we need to divide it extensively.
>> Am happy to 2nd the original motion.
>> Thank you sorry thank you.
We all support library of things.
It is a great initiative.
Gary this motion still enables feasibility study.
This just enables progression of a community led model
in the short term as well as the regional feasibility
study.
Insurance won't be limited and held out if the G 21
does not come on board.
Ultimately we all want the same thing.
And we want this to move forward as fast as possible.
I really hope all of those involved with the library of
things won't see this as a setback and we can work
together to progress the lively of things.
>> I will revert reserve my right.
Thank you.
>> Would anyone else like to speak to the motion?
>> Thanks Jerry.
I will support the motion.
But I am really disappointed because I do believe we
will have the potential of not using this $20,000 and
the long-term effectiveness for the program.
I will support this motion because it is the lesser of
two evils.
I do want the proposal to be great.
>> I was happy to support where we got with the
previous one.
>> Any other councillors?
Any closing comments councillor Cr Liz Pattison?
>> Cr Liz Pattison: Can still progress if one is being
put forward.
I think it will meet our expectations when we work
through the details and offices of flexibly's progress.
>> Thanks.
All those in favour?
And against?
And the motion is carried.
Thank you councilors.
And thank you community on the item.
I know we did move back and forth.
Given the time.
We saw quite a number of items on the agenda.
I'm going to call for standing order to be suspended.
We can take a short break.
Seconded by councillor Cr Liz Pattison.
All those in favour.
We will return at 8.42.
We will return in 15 minutes.
Thank you.
>> Mayor Libby Stapleton: Welcome back to our Council
meeting this evening.
Thank you to those who have rejoined us.
4.3 and this report is requesting council to adopt
proposal grant programme guidelines as detailed in the
report.
And community in action.
Seven guidelines for council to consider a move of the
recommendation.
councillor Ellen did as per the recommendation thank
you.
councillor Cr Rose Hodge thank you.
>> Since March officers and councillors have considered
several recommendations considering the grants program.
As a result of community feedback seven grant streams
and complementary guidelines have been developed for
adoption this evening.
The seven strands listed in the report have also been
crafted in line with seven frames in the councils for
your plans.
Previously adopted council programmes and from the
advisory from Victorian generals office.
The proposed guidelines in the reports stress that the
streams need to have a process that is clear easy to
understand transparent and effectively evaluated.
These changes are supported by an increase in resources
with additional $30,000 making it a $122,000 program.
Plus the inclusion of grant guru which is a software
programme the community and Council offices will be
able to use to search for all of the local grants
available to the residents and also available federal
and state government grants.
An additional $5000.
Now I am really confident this will be a great resource
and a one stop resource for all concerns.
Now we all embrace this programme as enthusiasm.
And I'm sorry we cannot allocate even more resources to it.
I'm sorry perhaps not...
Because it is community driven,
residents understand the needs and the nature of their communities.
Including the skills and passions that can be harnessed
to address priorities.
If I can be indulged for a moment by using the example
of local historical societies.
Usually features prominently in this program.
The work of the societies helping to achieve several of
our priorities.
Healthy and connected communities.
The protection of township heritage and culture.
Thus enhancing our retraction as a tourist destination.
The work of members enhances our understanding of the
past which in turn helps us make more informed future
decisions.
This is operated with an instructive budget with almost
exquisitely labour funded from donations and six
subscriptions.
Under the small grants programme provides a real
lifeline.
The historical society would have been able to expand
expert exhibitions digitise collections and expand
membership over the past decade without this kind of
source.
I want to go into the seven strands but rather
highlight to grants providing a quick turnaround.
This responding in time to address immediate need is in
great innovation.
But it may concern the funds allocation.
By providing only a narrow window for spontaneity.
Provide a couple of opportunities to apply.
This concern will be informed by the operation of the
grants in the first year.
Secondly I am very pleased to see a stream of the ports
argot artist to develop their skills and to improve
their community profile.
The arts contribute significantly to healthy connected
and innovative communities.
Provide many economic opportunities for example
thoughts and an additional 23,000 people.
And in many ways the last protector of free speech.
However sadly if you vote are one from properly
funding.
Lastly.
I support the review of the changes in two years time.
To ensure the programme has delivered.
That is more accessible.
Easy to apply.
And effectively evaluated.
And also that the streams remained relevant.
Also we should be able to assist whether the changes
have been fully understood by the community.
To support this motion.
>> Cr Rose Hodge: I do agree with everything councillor
Cr Gary Allen said.
In supporting the community at 70 grants.
There's always confusion here and there.
What I like about this really easy guidelines it's easy
to understand the language.
For one of the streams you go to the page of how it
actually goes through the process.
Which is very transparent.
I think every government now we go and do that.
I think this is a really good step forward for local
government.
And coincides with the new local government act.
The applications go through.
Doing it very quickly we have increased some money
towards it.
Contributions to it we might put a few dollars in.
We might go back to the community.
And to community action.
We aren't going to try to do.
All of the charts and terrific and know they have
helped the community.
Thank you.
>> Mayor Libby Stapleton: Other any other speakers for
this item?
>> Cr Heather Wellington: It is important.
It's all very clear.
There is one thing that I cannot support on it.
On one thing.
Which is repeated under each of the different pillars.
Is the prohibition the elected members of Council I
presume that means councilors.
Let's not be involved with the development of
application and not eligible to finally be listed on
any grants.
I can understand why as councillors we should be
assigned or listed in is to be driven by community not
by councilors.
We've got different levels of capability for us between
at the last.
We did the arts grant.
And I thought community community got very large amount
of money mobile grants.
Very skilled community.
In might be a lot of people retired professionals.
People who are very skilled at writing submissions and
have been and obviously put the time in
and good luck to them.
I think that's great.
But I can tell you in the community and some areas.
It is quite a different demographic.
A lot of people have not been in that position before.
They know what they want. And they've got great ideas.
But I spent a lot of time with people helping them
navigate.
What does that mean? How do we do that?
We are not writing a grant application for them.
Helping them express what they want.
I see that very much as my role as a member of the Council.
And I think a standard that has been imported into the
selected members of Council I can understand why
employees should not it.
Elected members of council we are not even determining
these grants.
Performed by the community the office decides
development of the grant.
What does that mean if someone comes across and says I
want to apply for a grant for a workshop or breach of equipment.
We can't direct you.
That might be in involvement and development.
And that makes absolutely no sense to me at all.
Other than that I think it is all terrific.
But I don't know where that came from.
I very much doubt that.
I suspect that is probably not it is enforceable.
I suspect it may not even be lawful.
There is a range of standards for councillors and local
government act.
That kind of conduct.
As far as I know there is no standards.
Talk to communities about grant applications.
I question whether that is appropriate position to put
in something like this.
Unless that is taken out.
But I would like to actually remove that.
That prohibition on Council laws being involved that we
remove it.
We recognise we represent the community to our health
and it's no different with this than anything else.
Maybe see if there is a second that last position to
elected members of Council.
>> I might just actually ask a question on the back of
that before we decide on the amendment.
I do believe they made some recommendations about how
grants are managed.
But I will refer that question to the seer.
My question is what would be the implications of
removing that from the guidelines.
I think this depends on the situation.
I suspect there is potential for conflict of interest
if councillors apply for grant with the community.
I might refer that to the GM of community alive just to
get a bit closer to development guidelines.
I think there was a report about what the role of
councillors should be and getting grants programs.
>> Thank you for that question the reason for the order
of number of Council and recommendations.
I am kind of meeting the type of question that is a
little bit.
I looked through that full report and the development
of a grant with and involvement from a councillors I
can't pick them up as the recordations from that
report.
Probably offices have taken a fairly considerate of
wine and maybe put that in the guidelines.
I will probably need a bit more time to actually sit
through the report to kind of get to the detail.
But I would say my inclination would be given there has
been a lot of scrutiny in government that was conducted
by a number of councils.
Offices are probably taking angles when developing the
guidelines and interest of trying to support and
protect councils.
But maybe steps further into the recommendations and
report.
I really need a bit more time to look at them I'm
afraid.
>> Would you like to move that as an amendment?
>> Cr Heather Wellington: Yes.
I would like to move that as an amendment or
alternatively to move it while it sorted out.
I think it is really important.
We are elected by that community.
I'm not suggesting councillors shouldn't benefit from
grants at all.
We are not members of these clubs.
If you have that club applying for a grant we are not
going to get a benefit what are the kinds of things you
want to apply for?
Does it fit that category, does it not?
>> Sorry I will just double cheque just in the interest
of time.
The amendment will call for a second and then you can
speak to.
>> Cr Heather Wellington: I'm suggesting to delete
selected members not being involved in the development
of an application employees of council.
If you just delay the elected members from the last
point employees of council must be must not be involved
in the development of application and neither employees
nor members of council are eligible to be listed on any
grant.
I think the point is of course we have conflict of
interest rules.
And we certainly should not be benefiting from.
>> I will call for a second and if that amendment
socket you will get a chance to speak to it.
Would anyone like to 2nd that proposed amendment?
Okay and councillor Wellington councillor Cr Heather
Wellington if you would like to speak to it.
>> Cr Heather Wellington: I will probably say as much
as I need to.
I think we should not be saying to councillors you
cannot assist community members to help themselves to
prepare an application.
You cannot assist community members.
You can't assist them to prepare an application for
grant.
It is our job.
We should be a system.
We should not be benefiting there is no question about
that we have alternative contrast conflict of interest
rules that are clear.
I could see that employees certainly should not be
putting forward applications for grants.
I'm happy with that.
In terms of Council members I can't envision a
situation same to people in our local there is a great
round but we can't help you in any way.
That's what this is of the moment.
I just don't agree.
I don't think that is what Vega would have suggested or
quickly found that report.
I suspect our offices had them very conservatively.
I don't know if it's necessary to have that in there.
We could defer it we should delete that it is
unnecessary.
>> Did you want to speak to it?
>> Would anyone else like to speak to the proposed
amendment?
>> Cr Gary Allen: I suspect what councillor is saying
is true and that is that reality of what happens.
From a personal point of view the historical Society
will be applying for a small grant.
A small piece of equipment.
Now the reality is it would be improper for me to
contact any of the Council offices.
To make any inquiries about that.
That would be most improper.
We do assist.
>> A person that supported.
Support the amendment.
I think it is important what made that this is
something this is something the team could clarify.
I don't particularly want to defer this.
I agree with councillor Hodge comments.
I think that is a sensible thing to do.
I think it is a fair point.
I personally think for the team that's worked on this
to be able to sort out the particular issue is the big
way to go.
>> If we did differ what effect does it have?
>> Looking at the recommendations and getting some
advice the level of conflict that provision of the
guidelines might not be entirely necessary.
I think the report is talking more about conflict of
interest and assessment of grants.
Enhanced to the questions.
The differing's item would be a bit of a setback
because we are looking to launch on 1 July.
Getting this advice not and reading through the
recommendations assist community groups to not be in
the assessment place and probably not the submeter.
The person that actually submits the grant application.
As far as I can tell.
That would be my answer to all those questions.
>> If you go to page 162 it's on there.
I think that might be the first.
>> Under the who can apply section for each grant.
Who can apply, who cannot apply.
And in most of them there is an elected.
Elected members an employee of council.
>> It's basically saying you can't be involved in the
development.
>> He can be eligible to sign or be listed on any
grant.
That's how I read and opposed to being bias and
involved in grant applications.
We can raise awareness with the organisation.
>> I think the grant application process needs to come
to council for offices to go through the process of
assessment.
>> Could councillor Cr Heather Wellington clarify the
change you are proposing?
>> Cr Heather Wellington: Is a bit tricky.
You can even just delete elected members.
Is not being involved in the development of application
the question is it is climbing the wrong place in the
guidelines.
It is actually sort of a set.
But anyway the question if you wanted to then say are
not eligible to be signed or listed on any grant.
I think that's appropriate too.
Says councillors must be involved in the development of
application.
>> That cannot apply .2 elected members and adding
additional point that just had elected members or
councils are not eligible to sign a list on any grant.
>> Rules anyway so.
>> Thanks for clarifying.
>> Did any other council want to speak to proposed?
My reading of it is elected members and employees not
be involved in does not include helping to which grant
enhanced to apply.
I think I am actually comfortable with how it reads.
I think probably councillors shouldn't be writing the
grants themselves anyway.
And certainly not signing or being listed.
But of course direct people to which stream and helping
whatever way we can.
I'm actually comfortable with how they read.
>> Mayor Libby Stapleton: Cr Liz Pattison.
>> Cr Liz Pattison: Now that I can see the clear detail
of what we are talking here I would have no problem and
assisting and the context of you should be eligible.
Talk to council to get your advice on that.
This is a stream that may be.
Having a conversation with the community members and
the context of grants.
I don't think this sentence here is precluding that.
To me, in the way, I didn't think it was a problem.
Personally I am happy.
I can see we are coming from.
I don't have a problem with what is put forward now
that I can see it written down.
>> Would any other councillors like to speak to the
proposed amendment?
>> Now put the amendment to the vote.
All those in favour?
It's and against?
>> The amendment is not carried.
So we will go back to the motion and it just to clarify
councillor moved it and spoke would anyone else like to
speak to the original motion?
>> I brought the intended amendment I will do anything
in my power to take money from those who are
financially struggling and decided by government, us.
I'm all for that through the voluntary interaction of
consenting adults.
I'm not convinced these guidelines support voluntary
interaction the intent of every single person who is
funding recipients.
Enabling communities we do that best by using
regulations and reducing what we take from.
>> Mayor Libby Stapleton: Thank you Cr Paul Barker.
Cr Kate Gazzard.
>> Cr Kate Gazzard: And is a grant programme guidelines
excellent with revenue streams hopefully going to be
much more user-friendly.
The artist and creative's and supports the natural
environment and climate emergency grants these will
help impair and enable community who already have a
very dedicated and passionate community if we can
facilitate their projects with funding I hope these
guidelines are user-friendly.
I think it is good that the weighting of the assessment
is there so the applicant's can know what council are
looking for.
Why it might be successful or unsuccessful.
And excitingly have an additional $35,000 from our
budget.
>> Mayor Libby Stapleton: Are there any other
councillors that would like to speak to this motion?
>> Cr Mike Bodsworth: Just to say I've always been a
fan of this program.
I think it has been improved now.
I'm really grateful for the work that has been put into
the reviews and improvements.
It's made a fantastic programme even better.
>> Any other councillors?
>> Did actually speak or move in amendment?
>> I need to cheque with governance.
It went into the read actually councillor Wellington.
You've gone over but I allowed it.
On the role of accounts.
>> I think it is a restriction councillors can agree
to.
I feel like it is improper.
But it is probably that goes beyond the recommendations
which focuses on fraud controls which had a quick
revision of that.
In a way it does give councils extra protection for not
being involved in drafting those obligations but
certainly the comments from councilors.
I think about directing community members to the right
grant strengths and understanding that role you can see
situations where there might be an unfair advantage for
the community member group who has an association with
the councillor or seeks advice from a councillor
because councillors may know how grant process
works and that may create an unfair advantage for
applicants.
Who were supported by councils compared to those who
are not.
I think when you talk about fairness it certainly open
to the councils to agree to abide by the process.
It goes a little bit beyond the fraud controls which is
the focus of the report.
>> Did anyone else want to speak to that motion?
Do you have any closing comments?
>> Under the new guidelines.
We the councillors will no longer be part of the
decision-making process.
Which is good.
It enables decisions to be made and communicated to the
applications entirely.
Entirely made up.
I brought up briefings or was mentioned by the
briefings.
I'm sure this will happen.
It will be great if now that we are not part of a
decision-making process it would be great if so that we
are aware of I rewarded the grants.
So that would be fantastic.
Thank you.
The motion is carried 72 thank you councilors.
We will move on to the structure plan.
This item is reflecting council to note the structure
plan community engagement summary report.
Note that the report will be published on council's
website and shared with those who have registered for
project updates.
The development of a structure plan to be received in
future Council meetings were endorsement prior to
releasing for public exhibition.
We do have a recommendation to a mover councillor is
that right?
Is that per the recommendation?
Do I have a secondary?
Thank you.
Would you like to speak to the motions?
>> Yes I would like to think the Council organisation
for the work they have done and the community when it
came to engaging the Council about the structure plan.
The guarding principles of the structure plan number
one is preserve and enhance the natural environments of
the surrounding world and of land.
Number two is protect rural areas from housing
developments.
Number three stays open space areas will continue to
play an important role in finding the character and
livability of the Township.
Number four is future land use and development
decisions will prioritise productions and cycles to
create a safe and built environment for improved assist
ability and connectivity.
Number five is future growth must consider impacts on
service infrastructure and where required to contribute
to infrastructure improvements number six is land-use
plan and decisions and needs of an age of this
population.
Incremental and scale and incorporate elements of
environmentally sustainable design.
I also would like to mention the importance of having a
20 minute neighbourhood be respective over you live to
try and have as many as possible and actually go to the
local medical center.
There's a pharmacy there as well as which saves me I
noticed the town really is hated between the two
creeks.
Between ravens Creek in the north and Thompson creep
Creek in the south.
My understanding is most people support the fact it is
designated for slow growth mode.
For a lack of a better word.
And philosophy.
There could be a merit in having a small industrial
estate possibly switches on the western side of the
town.
I look forward to hearing more about the structure plan
and involvement of that community.
>> Would any other councillors like to speak to this
item?
>> I think it is produced nothing in a sense remarkable
in the sense I think the community is really clear
about what it wants.
This growth but not excessive growth that sort of
thing.
That has been a really consistent message yeah I think
we endorsed the engagement process it's obvious pulled
out all of the key messages.
I think there has been some concern expressed and a
couple of developments on the main roads in terms of
protecting the royal character of the town.
I think we need to make sure it is integrated without
planning so some of the visual characteristics of the
town that make it a nice rural community are not
damaged but developments on land coming into town so I
think that is one thing that might come out of this process.
Thank you.
>> I was impressed with the levels of community engagement
that all of the Council work that is going was very impressive.
>> I concur what has been expressed by councillor Wellington,
just an observation that over my lifetime I
have witnessed houses being built but very
encouragingly the canopy growth paths been great and I
really notice a difference with this the aesthetics of
the Township as a result of that.
Which is fantastic.
>> I put the motion to a vote.
All those in favour motions you carried unanimously.
Thank you councilors.
4.6.
Is the growing leading libraries and infrastructure
fund applications and there is a recommendation from
officers regarding a range of funding opportunities a
mover for this recommendation.
Thank you and that as per the recommendation.
A secondary.
And councillor Cr Mike Bodsworth would you like to
speak to it?
>> I think we've got a good record of success.
The only thing that I would like to point out is the
relative lack of proposals and the applications but
that will change when we finalise our safer cycling
strategy otherwise I appreciate the work that's going
into what's in front of us and the support.
>> Did you have anything you want to add?
>> I support them as well.
I guess any grant funding will be accepted and just
noting that with increasing construction costs.
>> Any other councillors?
>> These projects are going to cost millions of dollars
and expect tax wives from around the state and country
to foot the bill is not fair on them at all.
If successful already high levels of debt our current
state debt sitting around about $30,000 keep going up
and up.
All of these grants that we give out just contribute to
that.
And it is not a sustainable financial position and
accepting these grants.
>> Thank you councilor.
>> Cr Liz Pattison: I would like to commend the
accommodation in particular around grant applications
and because we do have quite a lot of grant
applications required to reach our goal the obligation
to increase to expand their library to meet the needs
of their growing community and so in one way or another
we do need to expand their libraries.
An asset for our community.
As we talked about on many occasions.
>> Would any other councillors like to speak to this
motion?
Welcome stage one.
I attended informal gathering a flock of locals along
the river the rather of the bridge is councillor
Wellington attended it was a lovely gathering and the
people just seem so happy about having the walkway so
that would be wonderful if they could be funded.
That encourages a healthier environment.
People to walk more.
Instead of driving their car and it helps connectivity
as well.
It's fantastic.
Thank you Mary.
>> councillor Cr Heather Wellington.
>> Cr Heather Wellington: The key thing is it connects
the full quadrant of the town.
But the other point is it is near popular with
visitors.
It is not just local projects.
Increasingly understand.
I do understand what councillor Barker is saying.
Why is the state funding something very local.
It is a broader use.
I don't think we can manage the center.
Am I just ploughing ahead really and on that basis
again I think it is an issue.
>> As we get grants for this.
We are able to fund and also the oppressions of it.
We have no plan for that as far as I can see.
The Council will support this.
I will probably support I guess.
But I'm very concerned about the cultural.
Think for us to be taken to message projects like that
in this economic environment when we have major
problems supporting.
Writing off way more than we can chew.
Just because people want something.
Ethic we have to learn of course I support it.
But we have to learn to be patient.
>> Did you have any closing comments?
I will not put the motion to a vote.
All of those in favor.
And against.
The motion has carried.
Thank you councilors.
Items 4.7.
The future strategy implementation management C133.
And there is a recommendation requesting council to
note the recommendations postpone consideration
adoption of amendment C133 and to receive an update
C133 and future Council meeting.
We do have a recommendation to have a mover.
As per the recommendations councillor Cr Mike Bodsworth
would you like to speak to the motion?
>> Cr Mike Bodsworth: I need to support the way it
makes perfect sense to me.
Just looks.
>> I would just like to say the item refers to not just
the area in which you will see my avid part of
hinterland as well.
I'm just highlighting that.
Wellington.
>> Thanks.
I don't have any problems with recommendation.
I can't quite understand why the support has been
brought.
It's basically saying we are not ready yet to put a
report on amendment C133.
And my knee at nine years and council.
We get them when they come up.
I don't know what their timing.
Is there notified it wasn't ready yet.
Offices are putting a lot of work putting together
pages of background just to tell us the report is not
ready.
I'm not sure if I'm missing something but that is my
reading of it.
We've just been told we have to do more work on a
document and as far as I know.
There is no timing.
He wanted some happy to support it but I put so much
work into it.
So maybe someone can explain that for me.
>> Are you still speaking or do you want me to take
that as a question?
>> Cr Heather Wellington: I just didn't know someone
could quickly say you've got it for a reason.
>> I might refer to my placement environment to
respond.
Council wide acknowledging the conclusion of the
process and it is not yet I would like to be in terms
of finalising essentially brings visibility to that
stage of the process and the fact that it will take a
little bit longer than perhaps people were planning on
it but not a whole lot.
Any closing comments?
We will put the motion to a vote.
All of those in favour of the motion carried unanimously.
Thank you councilors.
Skipping on from 4.8 to 4.9.
Which is the proposed special charge and we do
have a detailed recommendation there.
Do we have a move councillor Bosworth Cr Mike Bodsworth
thank you.
And councillor Cr Kate Gazzard thank you.
And Cr Mike Bodsworth would you like to speak to this motion?
>> Cr Mike Bodsworth: Just to say I support it.
I know a particular part it is a steep unsealed road.
Which is prone to erosion
and rapid degradation.
I'm glad to see the degree of support amongst the
affected people.
I understand there was one person who objected.
I believe there they may have left the property there
but a high level of support for it.
I think if people don't support being included in a special scheme.
In this case if someone appreciated living on such a road
but in the scheme, had to pay $12,000 for the ceiling to
contribute to the sealing a road they really didn't want sealed.
I think there would be really hard to swallow for people.
But I appreciate the process there.
In this case I don't think we are in that position.
It all looks fine and I'm happy to support the
recommendation.
>> I really like the skin.
Four 110 we have upgraded so there is benefits to the
Council as well as the beneficiaries in this case you
have an overwhelming and that resident supporting the
proposal so I think it is great.
>> Did you have any closing comments?
I will put the motion to a vote.
All those in favour and the motion is carried
unanimously.
Thank you councilors.
On 24 point on the project budget adjustments and cash
reserve transfers.
Report contains proposed project budget for Council
approval.
Do have a move of the recommendation as per the report?
councillor Barker for the recommendation thank you.
And would you like to speak to the and look forward to
in this facility.
>> Is returned to usable condition.
>> Mayor Libby Stapleton: councillor?
>> No thank you.
>> Mayor Libby Stapleton: councillor Cr Heather
Wellington?
>> Cr Heather Wellington: I just have a question about
the kindergarten.
The fact were not able to deliver it due to asbestos is
the kindergarten assessable to children with physical
limitations?
Without the ramp?
>> I will have to refer that to the CEO.
>> I'm happy to say the programme it would be
considering to me kindergarten is not accessible to
every child.
That would be great thanks.
Other than that it's all fine.
Thank you.
>> Mayor Libby Stapleton: Thanks Cr Heather Wellington.
>> Assuming very successful bringing lots of people to.
The terrible road.
And I notice we will be finished next year which I'm
pleased about.
I'm also pleased about the interactive improvements as
you know exhibition and the information center.
It is a permanent exhibition the society is also
written on the coattails of the exhibition.
Which is good for us.
But taking that more interactive is great.
It draws and a lot of people.
To the information center.
And has a very high visitation.
So to make that more interactive is terrific.
Thank you.
>> Mayor Libby Stapleton: Think you councillor gently.
Did you have any closing comments?
Will put the motion to a vote.
All of this incident.
The motion is carried unanimously.
Thank you councilors.
Items 4.11 is the instrument of appointment and
authorization under the planning and environment act
1987 and the appointment of authorised officers under
the act cannot be delegated and must be made through
resolution of Council offices authorised to act under
the planning and environment act have authorization to
gather evidence for serve legal notices etc. If
required as appropriate to their level of experience
and qualifications.
Do have a mover for the recommendation?
Seconded by councillor Cr Heather Wellington.
>> Formally move.
>> Mayor Libby Stapleton: councillor Cr Heather Wellington?
Did anyone else need to?
I will put the motion to a vote. All those in favor.
And the motion is carried unanimously. Thank you councilors.
4.12 conflict of interest records.
I need a mover and a seconder the recommendation to note the
conflict of interest records?
Did anyone want to speak to the motion?
All those in favour?
And the motion is carried unanimously.
Thank you councilors.
We are now to the closed section of the agenda.
We have three confidential items to consider tonight.
We will say goodnight to those watching from home.
Thank you for sticking with us.
And also to those still in the gallery.
Thank you for staying with us we thank you for joining
us this evening.
I will ask council to move
and second a motion to move to confidential.
All those in favor.
And the motion's carried unanimously.
I will now ask governors to turn off live streaming.
Thank you.