A shock outburst, pokies and one bridge too far

At the Monday 17 September general meeting of Noosa Council, the public gallery was crowded with three members of the public, including me. At the media table were Peter Gardiner (Noosa News), who left halfway, and Margaret Maccoll (Noosa Today).

All councillors except Cr Jess Glascow were present: mayor Cr Tony Wellington, deputy mayor Cr Frank Wilkie (who chaired the meeting), Cr Ingrid Jackson, Cr Joe Jurisevic, Cr Frank Pardon and Cr Brian Stockwell. CEO Brett de Chastel also sat at the big table.

The Pinbarren cabins v horses dilemma

A little trouble between adjacent properties on the Kin Kin Road at Pinbarren centred on whether the development of cabins too close to a boundary might cause some upset to the next door neighbour’s horses.

The equine neighbour had complained to the council about this proximity and the new cabins neighbour had their own concern about generator noise.

Cr Ingrid Jackson expressed enthusiasm about the cabin development, said she supported both businesses and wanted them to succeed but didn’t want the matter to turn into a dispute. But, when she moved an amendment suggesting the neighbours seek mediation, Cr Brian Stockwell jumped in and said the amendment was irrelevant.

Claiming to be a “trained mediator”, he stated this was a personal matter not suited to a public forum and that mediation was not required. Again he showed obvious ire towards Cr Jackson: disrespectful at best, hounding at worst.

Cr Wellington said he wouldn’t support the amendment either because it was not a planning matter, disputes happen all the time and council shouldn’t be involved in mediation (which was not what the amendment sought). Cr Wilkie added that he thought the amendment was well intentioned but the dispute was not related to planning issues.

So Cr Jackson’s amendment was lost two (Crs Jackson and Pardon) to four (Crs Jurisevic, Stockwell, Wellington and Wilkie) and the development application for the rural cabins passed unanimously.

Cr Stockwell’s shock outburst about misogyny

Cr Jackson said she had heard a complaint about there being no grants for wildlife conservation in Noosa Shire. The mayor responded that ratepayers’ funds shouldn’t be used for wildlife conservation and the council should concentrate on voluntary conservation agreements because they had better outcomes.

Cr Stockwell said he believed the environment levy was strategically spent and then launched into a prepared speech about Noosa’s land care and conservation history which he alleged began in 1988 when the then council approved a koala corridor.

He said procuring private land was expensive (failing to note the council had just committed a couple of million to doing just that for 2,400ha of land within Yurol and Ringtail state forests) and voluntary agreements were the best policy. He also suggested the council use some conservation funds to buy the languishing TAFE site at Tewantin, the subject of so much local debate at present.

Then Cr Stockwell made a shock outburst demanding an apology from Cr Jackson claiming she had called him “a misogynist”. This flare-up surprised everyone including the chairman who asked for an explanation, saying he did not hear the reference. He even conjectured that, if it had been made, Cr Jackson may have been alluding to him.

In fact, Cr Jackson had taken a point of order (overruled) that Cr Stockwell was speaking off topic. After a bit of banter things settled down but the incident again reflected Cr Stockwell’s seeming antagonism to Cr Jackson. In my opinion, he was out of order and needs sanctioning and counselling.

I suppose “off topic” can sound like “misogynist” on a warm night in a busy room. Or maybe it was just Freudian. Anyway, the land conservation guidelines passed unanimously and the caravan moved on.

Council will move to influence pokie numbers

It is the state not local government that controls the allocation of poker machines around Queensland with a maximum of 45 for hotels and 300 for clubs but Noosa Council is seeking greater ability to influence these decisions at a local level and will seek support for this view at a forthcoming Local Government Association conference.

Cr Wellington said he liked the Victorian situation where councils have some input into poker machine policy. He said his concern was not just about the social costs of gambling but also about issues such as parking. He was especially concerned by the number of machines at Tewantin RSL, which has just increased its allocation from 180 to 195.

The council’s recommendation to pursue this matter at the LGA conference passed unanimously.

Confusion reigns over the Gumtree Drive bridge

In my last column, I mentioned the Gumtree Drive pedestrian bridge saga which is affecting some of the good residents of Cooroy. The bridge there was closed to vehicles in 2005 and shut off completely after floods 10 years later. But locals keep pushing aside a fence-wire barrier and continue to walk across and council staff want to stop them by removing the bridge.

After a long discussion, the showing of slides and the revelation that just three residents had formally applied to keep bridge open, Cr Wilkie said he wanted to test a new motion: that the bridge should be kept open until a separate report to evaluate three designs for a replacement were brought forward.

Former Noosa councillor Ray Kelly was in the thinly populated gallery and – being a bridge-open man – was clearly pleased at the direction the debate was taking. But Cr Wellington wasn’t, saying he was against the amendment. Mr Kelly called out ‘you’re wrong’. Interactivity with the public gallery is always interesting.

The mayor then said the community was not interested in and not annoyed by the closure and removal of the bridge. He said locals don’t use the park, residents don’t use the crossing, there were only two complaining letters (down from three a few minutes earlier) and, anyway, the council couldn’t afford to replace it.

Becoming more animated, Cr Wellington said $75,000 would be spent for little benefit, adding, “This park is useless, it’s not safe.” But it was too little, too late. The idea of a new structure had escaped and was racing enthusiastically around the council chamber. And so the proposition to investigate a preferred design and cost for a new bridge was passed 5-1 with only the mayor against.

Cr Jackson then moved an amendment that the council properly research the use of the bridge. The mayor was against this, saying people would always say ‘yes they’ll use something’ without considering the cost and it was not an appropriate use of ratepayer funds.

Cr Pardon said the amendment was too vague but Cr Jurisevic supported it because it would help determine future planning for network trails and other park activity.

Then another bombshell

With the discussion well advanced, Cr Stockwell said he thought he might have a conflict of interest because he had a contract with planning services at SEQ Water having been commissioned to assist with asset classification and recreational opportunities. SEQ Water, he said, owned land adjoining Gumtree Drive.

Eventually, after a lengthy discussion led by the CEO, Cr Stockwell declared he had a real conflict of interest and left the room.

If I may interpolate my own view here. I think Cr Stockwell should have declared an immediate conflict of interest as soon as the future of the Gumtree Drive bridge was on the table. Though he eventually declared a conflict, he may have influenced the debate before exiting.

Meanwhile, there was still an amendment to be determined and Cr Wilkie, chairing the meeting, admitted to being somewhat confused but said he favoured the amendment to consider options for replacing the bridge after a process of due diligence about likely usage and connectivity to local parkland and bush paths.

The mayor wasn’t at all happy with this – called it “a fiasco” – but when the council voted he was by himself in opposition and the amended motion was passed 4-1 (Cr Stockwell having recused himself). And so, for now anyway, a future Gumtree Drive pedestrian bridge still lives.

Financial performance: many questions; little clarity

Cr Jurisevic had a prepared long list of questions on the financial state of the council, mostly of a minor nature but one zinger concerned the fate of the Sunrise Beach shopping centre, which seems to be languishing. I don’t believe he received a satisfactory answer from staff. In fact, I don’t recall an answer at all. There are clearly significant problems with the centre’s viability but this failure to address the issue is denying important information to ratepayers, especially the ratepayers of Sunrise Beach.

Overall Cr Jurisevic’s questions – and a couple more from Crs Jackson and Wilkie – gave an impression of financial scrutiny by councillors without real substance. Cr Stockwell livened things up by referring to “a member of the community who thinks we have a poor financial situation and questions our liquidity”. This doubter must have been Jeff Nuske who recently published a persuasive letter in the press on this very matter.

The mayor jumped in saying Noosa is “good compared to some other councils” which led to a discussion on council debt which at de-amalgamation was $40 million and, after recent payments of $3.4 million, seems is now around $35 million. There have been further borrowings though and, as an observer, I couldn’t really be sure of the current liquidity situation.

I suggest that Mr Nuske, who as an astute businessman has a good handle on such matters, keeps working on his analysis and asking questions through the media. Perhaps he would also give me a tutorial.

As usual there was no discussion about the capital works program. It’s only two months into the financial year but the trend of underspending and under-delivery seems to be continuing: this council has again over-budgeted and still doesn’t have the resources to complete projects.

As Mr Nuske pointed out, if council rate revenue is below cost increments and budget increases, how can it manage to complete projects and make payments? There are insufficient resources to complete budgeted works.

And he has observed elsewhere: “[The] operating revenue of $95.724 million and operating expenditure of $95.709 million resulting in a small surplus of $14,000 is a result of rate increases over the last three years far less than CPI and capital works expenditure growing from $22 million to $31 million. This type of financial planning is unsustainable. There is no doubt Noosa ratepayers will face large rates increase shortly to offset the bounteousness of the council.”

And on that rather dark note, I end this general meeting report.

My next column isn’t far off. It will be devoted to Thursday’s rather extraordinary ordinary meeting where the main topic was whether Noosa Council should introduce live streaming of its meetings. It was a long, testy exchange on an issue that still has some way to run. Catch up with you again then.