At Council’s October Ordinary Meeting, after significant community outcry, Council resolved to defer the finalisation of the Noosa River Catchment Management Plan to allow for further community consultation. The vote was split 3 to 3, so as Mayor I was required to exercise a casting vote. As with any controversial issue, some will be satisfied and others dissatisfied with the outcome.
To be candid and transparent with our community, I’d like to explain the Council process and decision.
Council staff first publicly tabled the most recent version of Noosa River Catchment Management Plan (aka the Noosa River Plan) at the September General Committee meeting.
The newly revised version recommended a Conservation Park be considered for already defined Fish Habitat Areas, a concept which had not been previously seen by the Noosa River Stakeholder Advisory Committee, other river stakeholders or the community. The standard practice after community feedback is for council staff to amend documents in response, but it is unusual for a whole new concept to be added.
On the basis of significant community objections, after a motion moved by Councillor Amelia Lorentson, Council resolved to defer debate until the October Ordinary Meeting, in order to allow for targeted stakeholder consultation about the Conservation Park concept and briefing of councillors. Throughout this time there was a significant outcry with 100s of emails sent to councillors.
Before the October Ordinary Meeting, staff tabled the public agenda with recommendations about how the River Plan might be further amended to address community concerns, while keeping the concept of a Conservation Park in place. Stakeholder groups requested Cr Amelia Lorentson and myself to table petitions signed respectively by 207 plus people and 2400 people on their behalf and, as is the normal courtesy at Noosa Council, we agreed.
What happened next: Under Local Government legislation, councillors are required to declare any conflicts of interest. Councillors who declare may choose either to voluntarily leave the room or ask the other councillors to vote to allow them to remain. This requires a conscience vote and is something we all, no doubt, take very seriously. In this case, one of the councillors declared several conflicts and asked to remain in the room. The vote was a 3 to 3 tie. As Chairperson, I was obliged under Council Standing Orders to exercise a casting vote. This resulted in the councillor being requested to leave the room for the duration of the debate.
It is important to note that throughout this term of council, councillors with relevant conflicts of interest have either voluntarily excluded themselves from debates or asked their fellow councillors to vote to allow them to stay. At times the vote outcome has been to require the councillor to leave the room. This is a legislatively required process and councillors are obliged to make these tough decisions under the Councillor Code of Conduct.
This left six councillors including myself to debate the Noosa River Catchment Management Plan. Given the significant community angst expressed, Cr Amelia Lorentson moved a motion, which I seconded, to defer consideration of the River Plan to July 2024 to allow for a full consultation process and full costing of proposed River Plan initiatives. This again saw a 3 to 3 tied vote – Councillors Finzel, Lorentson and Stewart in favour and Councillors Jurisivec, Wegner and Wilkie against. Again I was duty bound to make a casting vote. And so that motion won and the Council resolution stands.
I am committed to being responsive to community concerns and feedback. Our job as elected representatives is to listen to the voices of our community. In this instance, we needed to listen to thousands of voices, all crying out for a deferment. We did.
These are my views and not necessarily those of Noosa Council.
