8 February 2022 - Ordinary

Welcome everybody to tonight's meeting. I'd like to start by acknowledging the Darug and Darkinjung people as the traditional custodians of the land of the Hawkesbury, and pay respect to all Elders past, present and emerging, and acknowledge all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as the first peoples of the country. Just hand over to the General Manager to run through procedural matters.

Thank you, Mr Mayor. I would like to advise, Mayor, in accordance with clause 5.18 of the Code of Meeting Practice, meetings of the Council are recorded. In the terms of the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act, this mainly involves the recording of personal information provided at the time of the meeting. The recordings are made to assist staff in compiling the minutes of the meeting and to enable the podcasting of Council meetings. The provision of any information that is recorded is voluntary. If any person does not wish to be recorded, they should not address or request to address the meeting. The recordings may be made available to other persons where such access is in accordance with the relevant regulations, and the recordings are stored on Council's record management system.

For the benefit of those persons who will be addressing the Council tonight, it is expected that you will refrain from making any insult, allegation or personal reflection against any person present or not at this meeting. This request relates to both your address to Council and any answers given in response to questions from councillors. Thank you, Mr Mayor.

Thank you. Do we, I don't think we have any apologies this evening. No, I think everyone's here. Declarations of interest. Any declarations?

Yes, please, Mr Mayor

Yes, Councillor Richards.

I may have an interest. I need to declare on item 029, but that is only subject to the result of the rescission motion.

Thank you. So I want to confirm, move the minutes of the previous meeting. Moved Councillor Reardon, seconded Councillor Lyons-Buckett. In discussion? All those in favour? Carried.

So we have only one item subject to public address this evening, which is item 29, the Rural Boundary Clearing Code. So we'll just let our speakers into the meeting.

Our first speaker is Vicky Lett. Just see if Vicky's in the meeting at this point.

Hi, Vicky. We're up to you if you're ready to address us. Yes.

Just need you to unmute.

Hi, sorry about that. Thanks for allowing me to speak tonight. It should really have been Morgan Philpott, but Morgan is working, so I'm the fill-in lady. So just a bit of background. So I'm Vicky Lett. I'm a former resident of Hawkesbury, and I went to Richmond High School. I was a wildlife carer in the Hawkesbury from 1988 until 2016 when we retired to the north coast. During the Black Christmas fires in 2001, our house burned down on Comleroy Road, so we're no stranger to the impacts of fire. I just thought I'd give you a bit of background on the incidents of koalas in the Hawkesbury. WIRES received no calls for koalas other than the odd animal in Colo Heights until 1998, when a koala was sighted in a turpentine tree on Comleroy Road across from Viney.

In 2015, we had 12 koalas come to the attention of WIRES in the Hawkesbury. Between 2016 and 2019, the numbers were pretty stable at between 16 and 19 koalas. In 2020, the numbers spiked to 38 koalas. They didn't all come into care, but they certainly came to our attention. The reports had really escalated. We believe we can link it to the years of drought and the impacts of those megafires. In 2021, we had 22 koalas, and in this year, 22, we've had five koalas so far. The main reasons we get koalas is chlamydia and cars and dogs. Loss of habitat, both primary and secondary, places the animals under stress, which then impacts their immune system. Forcing koalas to ground during clearing means they are forced to navigate roads where they are hit by cars.

Bellbird Hill is a hotspot for koalas crossing, and we get a few hit there every year.

It also exposes them to dog attacks. They come to ground because they need to move across the landscape, but they no longer have their aerial highway.

In 2019-20, we had the New South Wales Parliamentary Inquiry into koalas, which found that habitat was the main cause for the declining numbers of this iconic species. They

Committed to the New South Wales government urgently prioritise the protection of koala habitat and corridors in the planning and implementation stages of urban growth areas.

WISES ask that Hawkesbury City Council please support the rescission motion and commit to more research on the impacts of the code on that species, and also to consult with the community. What I can say is koalas are an iconic species, and that was demonstrated during the fires of 2019-20, where we had international attention . We had Obama tweeting and asking people to donate to WIRES. We had Ellen DeGeneres also asking that WIRES be supported. Most of our media inquiries across the world were about koalas and what's happening to them in their landscape and how they're being impacted by climate change. We were fortunate to have Lewis Hamilton visit the Hawkesbury and go to Morgan's property to view koalas. I wish I could have been there. Lewis is a very attractive person, so unfortunately I was too far away.

I think we're privileged to have koalas in the Hawkesbury, and we have a council at Campbelltown who name themselves Koala Town. So perhaps you should think about those lines, along those lines. What I would like you guys to do, and what WISE would like you to do, is to reconsider your commitment from last week. And I should let you know that what we really need is for Council to support us and the community in keeping a sustainable, healthy koala population. WISE has invested in a purpose-built koala facility in UWS to get the best we can for our koalas when they're in care. However, we would prefer that they stay out in the wild, in the habitat that they belong to in the Hawkesbury LGA. What I can assure you is that when koalas come to our attention and when they come into care, it's what we're doing is treating the symptoms.

And WISE members do not want to have to care for animals that are under such distress.

Thank you. I think

That's all I wanted to say today .

Thank you. Happy to take questions if there's any questions from councillors. Councillors?

Thank you, Mr Mayor. Vicky, thank you for presenting to us this evening. The code, the Rural Boundary Clearing Code, tells landowners that they can self-assess about whether they should be allowed to clear their land. But it also then goes on to say that people should seek professional advice about a variety of factors that include koala habitat. Do you agree with the statement that landowners are often ill-equipped to understand what the implications of their land management practices are for koalas, and that there is a need for better landowner education to make their properties koala-friendly?

Yeah, I do, and I can assure you that while I lived in the Hawkesbury, I used to work with council quite closely, and I was involved in bush care groups in the Hawkesbury. One of the main focuses, or my main focuses and others, was education. Basically, what we really need to understand, I think, is that at this point— In time for koalas and other species in the Hawkesbury, every bit of habitat is important, and we need to, while keeping our human community safe, we also need to support them in realising that we have to live with these animals and find a way to do that in a sustainable way. I think you've hit it on the head. Quite often humans don't realise how badly we've done until the impacts become evident, and that can be 20 years down the track.

Thank you. Okay, our next speaker is Martin.

Ready there, Martin?

Sorry. Sorry , are you there, Martin?

I can see Martin. Can you hear us?

Let's try chatting for a second.

If not, Martin, can you hear us? Are you ready to address us?

Yeah. Did you want to talk to me?

No, sorry, Vicky, I'm just looking for our next speaker now. Thank you.

Martin? No, last call. I might otherwise move on to our second speaker and see if we can come back to Martin. Perhaps somebody could give Martin a call and just see if it's a connection issue. Brian Williams, are you there and ready?

Yes, I'm here and ready to go. Okay, thank you. Thanks, Mayor, and hello to all the councillors. I greatly appreciate the opportunity to talk to you. You've already received a submission from me via email. Hopefully you've all had the time to read that

You have my submission, so I'll just expand on that if I may. The Rural Boundary Clearing Code, which I'll refer to just as the code from here on in, was developed after the devastating fires of 1920. And just to refresh our memories, there was 5.3 million hectares burnt. An estimated 489 million animals killed, 2,476 homes destroyed, 26 people died, and six of those were volunteer firefighters. And with the predictions on climate change, the fires are going to become more intense and a lot more frequent. So out of that, that's where this rule code came from. The authorities decided we had to have something better than what we already had. The code was developed with input from all relevant agencies.

And when I say all, I really mean that. If you go to Attachment B, you'll find there was 40 groups or legislation had input to it. So it was one of the most comprehensive reports ever developed.

And it considered all the aspects, whether they be environmental, biodiversity and koala habitat, for Vicki's knowledge, that was—they had a lot of input into it. Indigenous heritage, federal legislation impact on neighbours. There was a whole list of things, but 40 different groups and parts of legislation had input into the development of that.

Now,

There's no way if Council defer this tonight, there's no way in the world that Council would have the resources to be able to investigate the problem further and come up with a more comprehensive result. It's been highly investigated. Everybody's had input into it from all agencies. Council's own website actually encourage people to carry out bushfire hazard reduction by mechanical means to be undertaken along property boundaries. That's on your website, and that's an encouragement you're giving to the community. Recommendation 28 of the Black Summer Fires Inquiry, that the vegetation review should have immediate impact. It shouldn't be procrastinated over, and if we keep procrastinating over it, it'll be another six or 12 months before any possible resolution can come to it.

My view is it should take place immediately. You should go ahead with it straight away. The fires have had an enormous impact on the community, particularly mental health. I've actually spent a lot of time counselling people that were dramatically affected by the fires. Some people are still having lots of problems. Every time they hear a siren, they have a bit of a meltdown. They smell smoke. It's an enormous impact. Now, I don't think we've got the right to stop those people that live in fear of carrying out what they believe is necessary to make themselves safe. That legislation is not compulsory. People don't have to implement it if they don't want to. You don't have to do any work on your property.

Only those people that consider they're at some risk have the possibility, have an opportunity to do that. And everybody that owns a rural block, in my experience, buy it because they have a love and appreciation of the bush and the wildlife, and they certainly don't want to destroy it. And for Vicki's knowledge too there, Joh Heights has one of the healthiest populations of koala, and that's on private property. So private property people have a lot of care, and we've known about it for years. And that koala population is now expanding. It's out into the national park, and it's crossed the highway into other areas. So it's an expanding population which originated on private holdings, and it's growing.

Section 463 of the Rural Fires Act, actually private property owners have to have an obligation under that Act to create fire breaks on their property and stop fire from escaping from their property onto public lands. So that's an obligation. So all this is doing is sort of supporting what Council have on their website, and it's supporting sensible obligation. The restrictions are that great that nobody—and people who talk about there's going to be mass destruction of the environment—that can't happen. If you bother to read the legislation, it is so restrictive that people can't go crazy with it. They never did with the 1050 ruling. I can't see how they could possibly go overboard in clearing.

You only hear what you want to hear.

Thank you. Time has expired. Thank you so much. Any questions? Mr Williams, Councillor Lyons-Buckett.

Thank you, Mr Mayor. Thank you, Mr Williams, for that, and thank you for speaking. I'm just wondering, are you just speaking on behalf of yourself tonight or on behalf of the Rural Fire Service?

Male voice: No, I'm not allowed to speak officially for the Rural Fire Service, but if you bother to read my resume, you'll find I've been a

Member. Female voice: Oh, I know, I know, I know you're a highly respected firefighter. I'm not doubting that. I just was asking about the capacity. Why do you think that the Hawkesbury wasn't included in the code when it first came out? We were exempt from the code.

Male voice: From what I've been able to discover, it was purely a political decision. If the RFS had had their way, it would have been included, I believe. But because we're lumped in with the Sydney Greater Metropolitan Area, and a few of the councils there didn't want to support it, and they used political persuasion to give that right back to councils. But if councils decide not to support this, I think you're putting yourself on a big limb. You know, the amount of work that's gone into preparing this code is unbelievable, and all agencies have agreed to it. So I think if councils try and go against those recommendations, you're leaving yourself wide open. Female voice

Thank you, Mr Williams. Mr Mayor, one other quick question, if I may. You do realise that it doesn't cover everyone on a rural block, it only covers people in a specific zone. So a lot of our most vulnerable fire areas aren't actually covered by it. Are you aware of that? Male voice

I'm aware of the legislation, yes, and that's one of the reasons I'm very supportive of it. It's going to only apply to people that need that protection. It's not a blanket for everybody in the Hawkesbury Council area to go crazy. Female voice: So

The areas of, for example, East Kurrajong and the back of Bilpin and Mountain Lagoon, all those areas, they're not covered by it. Are you aware of

That? Male voice: Well, I am, and that's probably a problem that council has got. Council should, in fact, try to— all those areas are high-risk bushfire-prone zones. Female voice: They

Are. Male voice: I

Mean, council should be working to have those areas included.

Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Sheather.

Thank you, Mayor. Brian, with the clearing, would you like to touch on just what aspects of protection that they're going to give that you see, like compared to like burn-offs or, you know, big fires? Just touch on that for us.

Yeah, look, one of the problems we have as firefighters when we go to a property in a big fire, all we can save is the house, the outbuildings and that. We don't have the resources to protect everything. But if we can run around the boundary of the property, we can stop the fire at that boundary. We can put a burn back in from the boundary and not have that boundary and not have the fire come onto private holdings. So it dramatically reduces the size of the fire, stops it crossing the road to the other side if we stop on the boundaries on properties. It's got lots of advantages. It makes us as firefighters safer. You know, we can do our job in a much more safer direction. And one of the problems I have as a person responsible for large groups of people, we're putting people into places that are extremely dangerous.

If we've got a clear boundary around the back of the properties, we can work fast, we can work safe, we can reduce the size of the fire, and those private properties then become refuge areas for the animals, as my property did in the fires. I had an enormous amount of wildlife that survived on my property because it wasn't overrun by fire.

Thank you. Councillor Kotlash.

Thank you, Mr Mayor. Thank you, Brian, for your presentation and your answers. I'd just like to get your perspective on the Gospers Mountain fire. Would a break of 25 metres around somebody's property, would that have stopped that scale of fire?

It depends. What it does do, it gives us—usually at night time we can put burnbacks in to go back into the main fire and stop it overrunning property. So that's the advantage of it. Like, I spend a lot of my time in that Gospers Mountain fire putting bulldozer lines in which were only a few metres wide for burnback positions. So yeah, it gives you an enormous advantage, and it's got the opportunity to reduce the size and the scale of the fire.

Thanks.

Thank you. Councillor Wheeler.

Thanks, Mr Mayor. Thanks, Mr Williams. Two questions, if I may. One is a quick one. The attachment that you refer to with the agencies that were involved in the development of the code, I assume that's Attachment B of the code? That's correct, yep. Yeah, except to me that looks like the instruments and Acts that are involved. There's no list of agencies there. That's a list of legislation that goes with this code. So I'm not quite sure where this list—it's a list of 40 things—but I'm not sure where this list of 40 other organisations that you say had input into this code actually is, because I can't find it. I did say agencies

And regulations. Right

Okay. Thanks

But if you look at that, everything's covered. If you read out what's been included in it, virtually every possible aspect has been covered. Okay

Just a point

Of order there, sorry. I don't want to encourage debate ,

Mr Williams, just here to give you an opinion, and if you've got questions to draw out some of his expertise, then that's good, but otherwise you'd save the debate for the—

Sure, and then the second question is, in order to be effective, to what extent would you have to clear that 25 metre strip? Could you have grass growing on it ?

Under the regulation, as long as you comply with the guidelines, you're covered. But in my case, I would not go over a single large tree. I would just simply trim the lower branches to allow vehicle access through that, and it depends on the slope. There's a number of things that come into it, but the maximum you can have is 25 metres. A lot of people would only have probably four or five metres. Maybe that would be sufficient in lots of cases. It doesn't have to go to the extent, but you need it to cover. I mean, the Rural Fire Service is the knowledge when it comes to fires, and that's why they've given a 25 metre ruling to look at, in the worst possible scenarios of slope where fires run much faster, to give an adequate zone to work from.

Because the code is—but the code doesn't stipulate that, does it? It just says 25 metres of clearing. It doesn't provide any additional recommendations as to how you would best do that on that site.

Well, I don't know if you've had a look at what you've got to do to apply, but there's a lot of regulations. There's lots of things you can't do. So there's a tremendous—and it's not a mandatory requirement. People don't have to clear 25 metres. They don't have to clear anything. If a landholder objects to it, they don't have to do a single thing. It's not a compulsory code. Okay,

Thank you. Thanks Our next speaker is Martin Tebbutt. Martin, are you ready? Danielle can hear us.

Yes, I can, Mayor. Take it away . Good evening, councillors, and thank you for this opportunity. My wife and I live on our rural zoned property in Bilpin, and we've owned that property for 50 years. By the way, we also like koalas . But I must say, I am aware that they are in Bilpin, but we in our 50 years have not seen one, with all due respect. Now, we support hazard reduction, and we oppose this rescission motion. The Rural Boundary Clearing Code, which we simply refer to now as the Code , basically it says clearing of boundary will not stop fires. Well, that's our view, but will likely help mitigate damage and will provide access for fire trucks and assist in backburning. The Bushfire Inquiry, which the New South Wales Government conducted, declared, quote, that it will reduce the potential for the spread of fires.

There is no claim that it will necessarily stop a megafire, but it will reduce the potential, and megafires start small, I might add. The New South Wales Rural Fire Service Commissioner, Mr Rob Rogers, and the New South Wales Emergency Services Minister have both stated, and this is officially, that the Code is intended, intended to simplify bushfire safety for landowners and the community. It removes some of the onerous, time-consuming approvals obstructing basic hazard reduction in extreme fire risk areas. My wife and I's response in this is intended to address the incorrect claims being made. Which are seeking to complicate and delay the implementation of this code. We do not expect our submission here to be a complete discussion on hazard reduction.

The New South Wales Bushfire Inquiry recommended that a strategic approach to planning for bushfire will take time, and in order to protect, prepare and build resilience into existing communities, government should immediately, quote, review vegetation clearing policies to ensure that the processes are clear and easy to navigate for the community, and that they enable appropriate bushfire risk management by individual landowners without undue cost or complexity. The code has been prepared in accordance with Section 100RA5 of the Rural Fires Act 1997 and allows landowners to clear certain vegetation along the boundary of their landholding to reduce the potential for the spread of bushfires. I emphasise again, to reduce the potential for the spread of bushfires.

There is no magic wand in this, as we've seen in the catastrophic megafires. No magic wand there when it's that bad, man cannot stop it until the fuel burns out. Now, the Hawkesbury is one of the most extreme fire risk areas in Australia, possibly in the world. And two years after that catastrophic fire, whilst there has been climate change discussion, fire risk residents are at even greater risk now because the bush regeneration is thicker than before. It's changed because that fire was so hot at the ground level, it is growing thicker than ever. Now, no hazard reduction of fuel has been allowed. And nothing has changed since the 2019-2025. Any consultation, which has been referred to by councils, any consultation about safety ought to be with the real stakeholders whose homes and lives are in the fire areas, and particularly those next to national parks, which is most of Bilpin.

These people's lives should not be put in danger by others seeking to impose their ideologies and personal views upon them, certainly from people who do not live in the area. The alarmist and speculative claim of clearing 16,000 hectares is inaccurate and fallacious and lacks perspective, in our view. Much of the fire area concerned is mountainous and it's impossible to clear. Apart from that , many areas are already cleared , and one of the code restrictions is on slopes greater than 18% . Also, when the code is enacted, some owners will not want to clear. However, those wanting to clear should not be inhibited by the personal views of others. RFS Commissioner Rob Rogers, who is now in charge, as you would be aware, has stated formally, quote, These measures will empower community members to better protect their homes and property with as little bureaucracy as possible.

You may be assured that the RFS wants to empower community members to better protect their homes and property with as little officialdom as possible. This new section allows rural zone landowners to clear vegetation within 25 metres of their property boundary without owner approvals. Unquote.

Sorry, Martin, times expired, so I'll just get you to wrap up on this thought, if that's okay.

So we're running out of time, are we?

Yeah, we're out of time. We can just wrap up on your final

Oh, right, okay. Well, there are other things, but what I could do is a couple of official statements, because it's been said that the RFS had not been involved. The Emergency Services Minister has stated, quote, ‘The new laws are based on the expert operation of advice of the New South Wales RFS, and the RFS developed the online assessment tool.’ There are other statements here I'm happy to read, but I'm also happy to answer questions.

Thank you . Councillors, then. Mr Mayor, and thank you, Mr Tabrett, for presenting us this evening . Two questions. One brief, one not. The first one brief. Are you suggesting that you wish to clear your land for fire hazard reduction purposes, yes or no ? No

So, all right then, so I'll move on to my next question. Your case has been relatively public. You have spoken in the media about your desire to clear land for fire hazard reduction. You're now denying that.

Yes, I am. Yes, I am. That's incorrect

All right then. I was told that you applied for a hazard reduction certificate under the Bush Fire Environmental Code

Stop you there, Councillor Zamprogno. I don't believe this is appropriate at all. If you wanted to share Councillor Mr Tabrett's personal information, I would suggest you check with him first. Is that okay?

I'm referring to matters that are publicly reported in the media. I'm quoting from matters that are publicly reported. I don't believe

That. I don't believe if someone's applied for an application that's publicly available information, whether it's been reported or not. I think if you want to go and share Mr Tabrett's personal information, you should check with him first. I

Would be happy to answer that, Mayor. I'd be quite happy to answer any question

With Mr. Tabit's kind permission, I'll continue. The hazard reduction certificate that you applied for, Went its way up the chain to the RFS hierarchy and indeed to the minister and then came back down, meaning that was subjected to a great deal more scrutiny than other applications might. If I can quote from the answer that I received, in no way could the land that Mr Tabrett sought to clear be characterised as being for the purpose of hazard reduction. The several reports delivered as the result of his application said that it was not. So it's not the case that the land that you're seeking to clear, even under this code, is for fire mitigation purposes.

This is entirely inappropriate, Councillor Zamprogno. I think you're well and truly, if not probably in breach of the code here. You cannot be saying that to the person who's coming to give their opinion. We're not discussing whether Mr Tabrett can clear his land or whether his motivation here is correct or not. That's completely inappropriate. We're going to stop that line of questioning. With respect,

Mr Tabrett seems welcome to answer the question. No

It is completely inappropriate, Councillor. I'm very surprised you even brought that up and not understood that that is completely inappropriate. We're not going to go there. We're not talking about Mr Tabrett's land. The motion before us as councillors [is] whether we should rescind our decision to opt into the Rural Boundary Clearing Code, not whether you believe Mr Tabrett wants to clear his land for the correct reason. So we'll end that there. Were there any other questions?

No further questions. Thanks, Mr Tabrett. Final speaker. Sorry, Councillor Lyons-Buckett.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr Tabrett. I'm just wondering, are you aware of which ecological communities you have on your property?

On our property? No, I am not . Perhaps you can tell me.

No, I'm just interested if a landowner actually knows which communities are on their property.

Thank you. With respect, when you talk about communities, number one community is my wife, myself and our family. Secondly, we have 100 acres, and I know every inch of that 100 acres. We simply want to have a strip, and we would have been happy with five or ten metres so we can drive along the fence. And in relation to the matter brought up a little bit earlier about a hazard reduction certificate, I applied for a certificate from the RFS. To rebuild a fence and have a line next to it for my tractor. They said, no, you can't clear to rebuild the fence that was burnt out in a previous bushfire, and therefore it's not appropriate. We refuse your permission to do that. So I can't have a strip and I can't have a boundary fence, according to the RFS, who knocked it back. The gentleman who knocked it back actually has since left the RFS in some space.

Thank you, Mr Tabrett. We'll wrap that up there. No further questions. And our final speaker is Lionel Buckett.

Lionel.

You're muted. You are.

Okay. Hello, my name is Lionel Buckett. Thank you all for letting me have an input. I'm speaking to you from my office in Berambing, where we survived an unannounced burnover 15 December 2019. I've preserved the post in the background here and still using my melted computer to remind me of how bad that fire was. The RFS computer predicted 40 dead at Berambing and Tomah and Bilpin, and we all survived. We survived because we are a firewise community with plenty of inherited bush skills. My family have lived in the area for over 100 years. I'm a foundation member of the RFS. I've been there for 40-something years. I grew up in national parks in the Hawkesbury. I've lived through many bushfires.

We survived the hottest fire because we believe in science and followed the science advice. We maintained the asset protection zones stipulated under the building codes. This allowed our building and wildlife that made it into those zones to survive the fire. Yes, the clearing saved people and it saved animals. A result of the Black Summer fires, which killed 26 people and destroyed 2,476 homes, the New South Wales government established the New South Wales Bushfire Inquiry. The inquiry held consultations across the state, took submissions from the RFS, RFS personnel, environmental groups, Indigenous groups, national parks, affected property owners and bushfire management experts. At the conclusion of the inquiry, Recommendation 28 was made, and I quote, in order to prepare and build resilience into existing communities, it should immediately review vegetation clearing policies to ensure that the processes are clear and easy to navigate for the community.

The New South Wales government responded by mustering the resources of five government departments, Police, Emergency Services, Environment, Planning, Agriculture, Western Sydney to develop the Rural Boundary Clearing Code and the Rural Boundary Clearing Tool. The tool allows anyone to input an address and send aerial view of the property, receive information on whether the property is eligible for the 25 metre clearing code, and if eligible, you can print a copy. So today I put in an address at Lithgow, because Lithgow's in the code, and it brings up all the areas that you can't clear. It's pretty sophisticated, the mapping system from the New South Wales Planning Portal, and I'd say that's used in this.

There's a lot of very clever people have put together this tool. And it's really easy to use. If you look at it for Hawkesbury, it's just grey because at the moment Hawkesbury's not opted in. So I'm here to speak in favour of the code because the New South Wales Bushfire Inquiry, which recommended it, and the five government departments used their collected expertise address the concerns set out in the rescind motion.

This is a different issue to the designated fire trails program. That's for backburning. This is for property protection. Fires affect property before any backburning campaign is instigated. It also gives greater distance from radiant heat. Radiant heat is what will kill you in a bushfire, so 25 metres can make a really big difference to protect your life. In the 2019 fires, the RFS was overwhelmed. They did a great job in the circumstances, but they couldn't be everywhere. So this will help people in that situation, which sadly we'll probably see again with rising temperatures. My property has kilometres of boundary. I'll use the code for about 80 metres in the area where the known fire path is.

That will reduce the radiant heat. That will give me more protection, the animals that shelter here more protection in a similar circumstance to the 2019 fire. Koalas seems to be a big issue. On Sunday, I was coming along the road. My neighbours had a koala bear on the road they need to remove. So I showed them how to remove the koala bear because he wouldn't get off the road. We have a community that's lived with koalas for about 20 years. So we took it out. We put it on a big grey gum tree, a light grey gum trees. No, no, no, said the property owner. She came out and said, That's not his tree. Bring him over to this tree here. And he said, Well, we're moving because the dogs in your yard might get onto him.

And she said, No, he and the dogs get on well. He always comes and sits up this tree. So what we've learnt living with koalas is they actually like the ground cleared, so they don't have to struggle through the scrub to get to their next favourite tree. So you can see, and the other side to that is at Mount Lagoon, we found the bodies of two dead koalas from the backburn. They weren't able to get out, but it was an area that this clearing code might have reduced the fuel, and those koalas might have survived. So just that that is time's expired there. So thank you very much. Thank you all for all the other speakers for their contribution.

Thank you. Any questions, Mr Buckett?

All right, thank you. So that was our final speaker. So we'll move on to the motion if one of those councillors wants to move it. Moved Councillor Zamprogno, seconded Councillor Wheeler. Discussion, Councillor Zamprogno.

Thank you, Mr Mayor. So I want us to be very careful because we've been over this territory several times and we all value our time. So let me try and hone in on what's relevant to us tonight. We have heard a number of speakers speaking in favour of the adoption of the code. I am broadly in support of the code, but that's not why this rescission motion is coming here tonight. The rescission motion is before us because I and others are of the belief that it would be very unwise for us to adopt this code without doing some critical work first. Work relating to resourcing Council to provide advice to landowners so that they can be good stewards of their land, resourcing Council so that they can measure the impacts, potentially, of this code through the acquisition of geospatial mapping tools that allow them to know what tree cover looks like on a per-property basis and then map those trends over time.

Compliance and enforcement resources, so that for those small minority of people who may be minded to clear their land with something other than fire mitigation in mind, is that they will be strongly aware of the fact that we have the resources to track the inappropriate application of this code. That is what this is about. So for those of you who are in favour of the adoption of the code, my strong appeal to you is this: the fire danger season is over. We tasked Council in October to go away and to consult with the RFS, to consult with other community stakeholders, to come back to us with a report to tell us what it looks like when other councils adopt a this code and what their

Experience

Looked like, and to get our ducks in a row. That's all we're asking to do. For those of you who are going to oppose this rescission motion, you have questions that you need to answer tonight. Why would you be so hell-bent on the forced adoption of this code without consultation? Why, when many of you profess your respect for the local RFS, have you engaged in ramming this through without any consultation with them? And I can tell you, the members of the RFS locally that I have spoken to are white hot about the disrespect of having this code driven through without any consultation with them. It's not as though they're against the code either, but they're deeply aggrieved that they haven't been asked.

This speaks to the kind of government that we want to run here in the Hawkesbury. Whether we run a properly consultative government, whether when we are looking at a code that has a really substantial change—it represents a really substantial change to our land management practices—is that we're going to do what the code itself suggests that we do, and consult with our community before we adopt it. The question that you need to answer is why we have to adopt it now, without consultation, without resourcing, without compliance or enforcement resources to bring to bear. That is the question. If you can't adequately answer that question, then you should have the courage to admit that perhaps we've been a little too hasty.

Mr Mayor, I know that you yourself have received contact very high up from within the RFS and from other stakeholders who are counselling you to slow down. All we're asking for through this rescission motion and the substantive motion that follows is a couple of months to allow Council to complete the work that began through our resolution last October to conduct public consultation, to ask people what their opinion is. It's manifestly obvious that there is a broad spectrum of opinion here. And that it would be respectful for us to ask these people, we will lose nothing. There will not be a devastating bushfire between now and when this report comes back to Council in two or three months. Then we will be in a position to consider the adoption of this code, and it may well have my support at that point.

But considering that many of us in our public lives profess our respect for the RFS, or indeed profess support for the idea of preserving koala habitats, ramming this through without any compliance or enforcement or other resourcing seems to me to be hypocritical in the extreme. That is the question that's before us. Thank you, Mr Mayor.

Thank you. I was not asking a question based on—I'm just—I'm not sure if I misheard this. I think that I've had contact from, as far as I'm aware, two members of the RFS, both captains of local brigades, one very much in support of adopting the code, one suggesting we don't adopt the code. You just made a statement that I've received contact from very high up in the RFS saying we shouldn't. What was that referring to? Look

I was assured by somebody very, very, very senior within the RFS that you would be called yesterday or today and cautioned very strongly to slow down. If you're saying that you haven't received that call, I can't speak further to that. All I know is that— No,

I think we'll stop there, and yeah, I think that's quite correct, that the statement you made was incorrect and we'll consider it retracted. You don't have any knowledge of anybody having contacted me because I have not been contacted by anyone from high up in the RFS, so— Well,

You and I both know that there are people who would prefer not to be embroiled in what is ultimately a political question, and whose dignity in their post demands that they not be named. What I'm

Suggesting, Councillor Zamprogno, is perhaps you should retract the statement because it was not true, and you obviously didn't—if it was a phone call, you obviously wouldn't have had knowledge, even if it was true. So I'm not sure why you would make the statement that you had knowledge of it.

I'm making the statement on the basis of my conversation with that person and their promise to me that they would contact you. All right. So we've

Got— More secret people that have told Nathan that they agree with him, but we'll move on. Councillor Veigel

Thank you, Mayor, councillors. Just quickly, thanks for all the speakers tonight, making their time available. If I may, I'd like to move an amendment to the recession motion. I have a seconder, please. You've got the motion there? Yeah, I do. That Council calls for a report on the methodology and funding available to map our koala populations, as well as how this information could be used to protect them.

That's the motion before you. Just get that on the screen if we can.

Okay, do you have a seconder for that?

I do.

Councillor Marci . Yes, Councillor Lance Buckett

Mr Mayor, is that possible? Is that an amendment to the substantive, or isn't the recession motion simply to rescind an existing resolution?

Yep, so we've got a notice of motion, and the notice of motion is that this resolution should be rescinded. We've got an amendment here that isn't a direct negative, as far as I can see, and is dealing with the same subject matter, so I think it's valid.

Mr Mayor, I object on point of order. Okay. I agree with Councillor Lyons-Buckett that this—

Is it a new point of order, Councillor Zamprogno? Yes

Yes, yes, yes it is, Mr Mayor. This is manifestly the direct negation of the recession motion, in the sense that if the amendment were sustained, it would not permit the rescission of the motion previously. It is clearly— A complete negation, and I'd seek the adjudication of staff.

Staff don't adjudicate; the chair adjudicates. But I don't believe that calling for a report on mapping and funding for koala populations is a direct negative, consenting the decision to opt into the code. I don't see how that's a direct negative to the decision to opt in would be— Point

Of order again, Mr Mayor.

Yes, Councillor Lyons-Buckett.

Mr Mayor, I believe that a rescission can only relate to the actual resolution that stands. I think we have to rescind or not rescind and then deal with another motion.

No, so a rescission motion is a notice of motion, and a motion can be amended so long as it's not the direct negative and it does deal with the same subject matter. So I've ruled on that point of order, unless there's a different point of order when we move on. Motion of dissent, Mr Mayor. Motion of dissent moved, Councillor Wheeler. If you could just please pull the screen now because I can't see everyone if I go.

So the motion of dissent has been moved in the ruling that this is a valid amendment. Those in favour of the motion of dissent, please raise your hand. In favour: Councillor Lyons-Buckett, Councillor Zamprogno, Councillor Wheeler, Councillor Kotlash, Councillor Calvert , Councillor Djuric. Against : Councillor Conolly, Councillor Bygoll, Councillor Dobramaczi, Councillor Sheather, Councillor Richards, Councillor Reardon. Declared it failed on the casting vote of the Mayor. Moving on. So we've got a valid amendment. Did you want to speak to that, Councillor Bygoll?

Yeah, just briefly if I could.

Based on that, there's no new information for me to revisit this decision anyway. Bushfire protection is paramount, not only the lives of people but also their property, and as I mentioned before, and their memories.

That's not mutually exclusive with the protection of koalas too. I agree we should be looking at koala mapping, unequivocally, and that's probably the reason why I don't support this resolution motion.

Thank you.

Councillor Dogramaci

Thank you, thank you, Mr. Mayor. Please accept my apologies on these matters, not only as a councillor, but I have very little idea about what's happening. But what I would like to say is, to start with, that I'm not a liberal or Labor supporter. I'm for all Hawkesbury residents. If a Labor friend moves a motion that's sensible to me, and if it may benefit the people of Hawkesbury, I will vote with them, regardless of who. If the Greens, communists, and for the argument's sake fascists, or whatever you want, the most extremist, if they move a motion and if I feel that it's going to help to feed the hungry, to look after the single dad, single mums, or whatever, I will vote for them. And for this code, I have doubt.

I have many, many questions, you know, I need to ask. Who came up with the 16,000 hectares? Did they have some kind of a tape measure? Did they have helicopters flying overhead and with lasers that, you know, were finding out, you know, how many thousands of hectares? And once, you know, this motion is passed, all those people involved, are they going to bring their graders, bulldozers and do it overnight and that sort of thing? And this 16,000 hectares, I don't think it's 16,000. Maybe it's 5,000 hectares. And when we heard, and I have received some kind of documents in the last week or so. 480 million animals. Who counted them one by one? And why it's only koalas? How about snakes? How about the widgety grubs?

How about the birds? 480 million. If we accept that figure that died during the fire, it was a lie. It was a deceit from whoever, you know, put that figure, because that's all over Australia, or at least, you know, for New South Wales. And they are trying to give the impression that 480 million animals were only—they were dead in Hawkesbury area. So for that reason that, you know, I am angry. And of course, with respect, both parties do this kind of tricks. And the other thing that, you know, I am very, very hesitant to rescind . One of the reasons is that we have over 25 people dead, six of them volunteers. And on top of it, why bring the koala? Because, you know, they are cuddly, and because people's, you know, heart will melt when they see them.

What's happening with foxes? What's happening with the other animals I mentioned? And what about the 60-plus houses have been burnt in Gosford Mountain? And not a single councillor mentioned about those dead animals and devastated families. It's only koalas and little koalas. They're saying that, you know, I learned in this country, put your money where your mouth is. How about, you know, those opposing this code donate their yearly councillor fees to koala Foundation if they are, you know, so much, you know, they are in love with koalas? I love koalas more than any one of you because I was born outside Australia. You were born with koalas. So as a practical person. And men with their common sense.

And when I'm in doubt, and on top of it, you know, I have to mention this too. For the last couple of weeks, I have written, I have emailed to certain government agencies, including RFS, to enlighten me about this matter, so I could find out, I could read, and I would sit down. And not a single entity replied to me, not even a phone call. And for that reason, I will be standing by with what I did on the last meeting, and I'm all for it. Thank you. Thanks, Councillor Dogramaci. Councillor Wheeler?

You're on mute, Councillor Wheeler.

Sorry, this is a really shoddy piece of practice, Mr Mayor. I'm looking at the Code of Meeting Practice, trying to find the bit where it says that it's fine to amend, and a rescission motion in this fashion, and I can find nothing. I’ll just stop you there . I’m speaking, Mr Mayor.

You're not speaking, Councillor Wheeler. It is completely inappropriate for you to take the floor when I'm speaking. I'm the Chair of the meeting. What I was going to say is I've ruled on the point of order, but I also asked staff this question before the meeting to make sure that I was correct in the procedure. So if it's going to continue to be an issue, I will refer to the Director of Support Services to answer that question for you.

Sorry, Director Support Services, are you there? The question is, is there anything in the Code of Meeting Practice that prohibits the amendment of a rescission motion?

Thanks, Mr Mayor. The code refers to rescission motion as being a motion, and therefore it is possible for Council to move an amendment against that motion, as long as it's not a direct negative and it's the same subject matter.

Thank you. I have ruled on the point of order. We're not going to discuss the point of order anymore. It's also been subject to a council resolution now confirming the position is correct. So we'll move on and then we'll have debate relevant to the amendment.

Given that I wasn't able to speak on the motion of dissent, which I'm entitled to under the code of meeting practice, and given that I am also entitled to speak without it being interrupted under the code of meeting practice, Mr Mayor, I object to your conduct to this point. The code of meeting practice states that a rescission motion, that you must move something that has— Councillor, we'll

Allow— Councillor, you're incorrect on a number of points. The code of meeting practice is quite clear that when the chair is speaking, the chair has the call and you are to stop speaking. It's quite clear. The statement that I can't interrupt you to correct you when you're discussing a relevant matter is completely incorrect. The code of meeting practice is clear it can be amended. That a motion of dissent was then put and it failed. I've then got confirmation from the staff of the procedure. We're not going to spend any more time discussing the point of order that's been ruled on and voted on. We're now going to move to the amendment, and if you've got any discussion of the amendment, you can go ahead now. Otherwise I'll move on to a further speaker. So

We're going to talk about koala habitat. That actually doesn't have anything to do with the rescission motion that's before you. It has to do with a substantive amendment that we now can't debate because you've allowed an amendment that doesn't match the rescission motion that was put to you lawfully by three councillors. That is really, really poor form. What we've had is a series of contentions about a piece of legislation that are incorrect. So we now have on record incorrect statements about a piece of legislation and a commitment from this council to enact that legislation without the resources to do it properly. We have heard that the purpose of that legislation was to make it easy for people to clear land, and yet in the same breath we've heard that it's actually quite complex and people won't be able to clear lots of land.

We heard that from Mr Williams. We've heard that this was developed by the RFS, and in fact it's not. It was developed— By the Minister for Police and Emergency Services. He stated that in Hansard, that he developed the legislation, not the RFS. We've been told that there's a list of agencies involved, 40 agencies. In fact, it's a list of 40 pieces of legislation. And so now we've gone off on this tear about koalas in the hope that that will make it all okay. So what you've done is commit Council to resourcing a code that we didn't have to pick up at this point, that we could have got further information about a variety of issues, not just koalas, in order to conserve Council's, not only Council's financial resources, but the biodiversity that supports the species currently in question.

And yet you chose not to. And so now, as an afterthought, you might do a bit of mapping to make it all okay. Where are you going to get the resources to do that mapping? Where will you find the resources to make sure that that species and all the other species that share its habitat are safe? Where will you find the resources to enable landowners to clear their land in accordance with the code without getting into further trouble? The penalties for misuse of this code are severe, and they don't just relate to koalas. Are you going to get that out of the 50 million that the government's promised everybody they can have for their koalas? Is that where we're going to go with koalas now? We're all going to get a little bit out of that purse.

I notice that everybody's happy to be photographed with a koala, but none of you are happy to actually protect them. That's not how biodiversity conservation works. This is a shameful, shameful piece of politicking. You are committing this council to use resources we won't have, resources we don't have, resources that will have to be plucked from somewhere else. What will we not do while we are supervising this code? Will we not stop people who are building homes illegally along the river? Will we condemn them to drowning because we don't have sufficient resources? Will we not observe land clearing somewhere else? Where will this money come from to do this?

I am absolutely astounded that you have now basically ignored the information that has been sent to you by Science for Wildlife, by active members of the RFS. You have put aside your capacity to talk to people about how this code might actually work and get a good outcome on the ground for everybody, not just the landowners who want to clear, but everybody in the LGA. And you think that you'll fix it with a bit of mapping of koalas.

This is a really sad indictment of what this term of council is going to look like with you people at the helm. I am staggered by how political you have made bushfire safety and how political you have made

Conservation

Of habitat. Sorry

Councillor Wheeler, we're not discussing what you think about other people's motivations and politics. We're talking about the amendment before us, which is that we should, instead of receiving the motion in front of me, but look at defining an options for koala habitat mapping. I'll just bring you back to that point.

And my statement stands, Mr Mayor. This is a very, very poor surrogate for proper consultation about the implementation of the Bush Fire Management Code, sorry, the Rural Boundary Clearing Code and the management of it. And if you think that mapping a few koalas is going to soothe the community on this issue, I hope you are very sadly mistaken. This is a cynical political move.

Thank you. Time's expired. Councillor Lyons-Buckett.

Thank you, Mr Mayor. I've got a question for Councillor Feigl. Could Councillor Feigl please explain how his amendment relates to the rescission motion, please?

Ruling that out of order. We've already very thoroughly addressed this point. No,

I'm sorry, Mr Mayor. I wish to address the amendment, and I don't understand what he meant . I'm asking him about his amendment. He raised the amendment. I want him to just answer how it relates to the rescission motion.

No, the point's been dealt with, and we're not going back there again.

I'm not talking about the process point. I'm talking about the content of it. I can't see the amendment. I don't know what it's about. I don't know how it relates.

Bring the amendment back up on the screen if that's okay, and we'll go to another speaker while Councillor Lyons-Buckett reads it, if you want, or if there's any other speakers. If not, did you want to speak now, Councillor Lyons-Buckett, on the— I

Can't see it, so I don't know what it is. Okay

That's why

I was asking for an explanation, which would have been good.

Okay. That's the amendment there. Okay

Well, I'll speak against the amendment, even though in principle I agree, and we had hoped that we would be working towards a proper koala plan of management in this council, which all councils meant to have done. The methodology and funding. All right, well, we had called in the substantive motion, as Councillor Wheeler raised, for this, and I think that attaching this to a code is a very— a code that we have just heard from the speakers is something that people don't understand. So, in other words, we're going to retain the code, and this, as this motion does apparently relate to the code. So I'll just speak on that for a moment, if I may, Mr Mayor. When we brought a rescission motion, I don't take that lightly, and I also accept majority rules in this council.

But I'm very, very concerned that what has happened with this has been done in the absence of looking at what the ramifications of it will truly be to this council and to this population. We didn't have a clear majority on it. And what's most startling to me is the amount of contradictory opinion and advice we have received from people, which means that we have a duty then to investigate this further. We just heard that we've heard you say in the past that people will know the best thing to do. We heard Mr. Williams say that people will follow the guidelines of the code. When I asked Mr. Tebbit, did he know about the ecological communities on his property? He did not, and he also said that he was not using it for fire mitigation.

These are very problematic statements to have been given in this chamber to then allow us to simply ignore what we should be pursuing, which is that we should be pursuing exactly what is happening with this code and how we can do a better job. We know when we look at the koala population, how long—I mean, this is just a very broad-based thing—how long would that take? How much clearing of their valuable habitat may have occurred before we even get that information? And yet we had a very logical, a very comprehensive set of parameters to look at that would have also allowed us to call on the state government and say, Why do you think one size fits all? Why put it to that zoning and not allow our most vulnerable properties to also be a part of it?

It makes no sense. It was a political decision, and it has sidelined many people. People, and if you look at the mapping tool that the government has for this, if you look, for example, at an area like Wallendilly, it's like a patchwork quilt. You'll have two properties can do it here, the next one can't, the next one can, two more can't, and then the whole thing. How is that going to protect anyone? A fire's not going to move along and think, Oh, hang on, here's a rural property. I won't bounce over there. I'll go over to this E4 zone over here because they couldn't clear. It's an absolute farce, and the way that you have handled it tonight is extremely disappointing. And I'm sorry for our community.

I'm sorry for the people who have asked us to advocate for fairness and for information on this. I think supporting this is just farcical, and it's very, very distressing. And one would actually wonder of the motivations behind it. Thank you.

Thanks, Councillor Lyons-Buckett.

Councillor Cowett. Thank you, Mr Mayor. Can I start with a question, please? If this amendment is lost, do we revert to the rescission motion?

Yes.

Okay. For that reason alone , I'm going to be speaking against and voting against the amendment, and I urge other councillors to do the same. I think what happened tonight was the community expected to have a discussion about whether this matter should be taken to public consultation or not. That's what the rescission motion was about. Do we take this to public consultation or do we just opt in straight away? This amendment takes away that whole discussion, and By doing that, we're letting down the community, and I think the community are listening to this, and I think they might be quite disappointed in the direction that this amendment takes us. The discussion isn't and wasn't about koalas.

It was supposed to be about public consultation. And I think that a number of the public speakers, and perhaps even some of the councillors that have spoken so far, in my opinion, were all out of order anyway. They weren't on the topic. We weren't supposed to be discussing tonight the ins and outs of the code. We were supposed to be discussing, do we take this to public consultation or don't we? And this amendment that's been put up takes away that possibility. So I'm going to be voting against the amendment, and I urge other councillors to do the same, so that we can get back to what we advertised in the business paper that we were going to talk about.

Thank you. Just clarify something on that point, Councillor Calvert, because perhaps something I thought was clear, but maybe not, if been missed, is that we had a motion before us to rescind our decision to opt into the code. Some of, clearly a number of councillors, given that there's no new information at all been presented, we're not going to agree with that. We made a decision only two weeks ago, and there's been no new information that might cause us to change that decision. However, there's been a suggested substantive motion provided in the business paper. Most of those items in the suggested substantive motion could only apply if we did rescind. However, points four and five, which is around the funding and mechanisms for koala mapping of koala populations, could happen either way.

So what we've done here, what is being achieved here by this amendment is we're saying, even if we don't rescind, even if we're going to stay opted in, we could still do this. So rather than just miss the chance to—what I think, I think that the three councillors have supported this. I think that's a good point; we should be doing that. Rather than miss the chance to vote on that, if we move it as an amendment, we can still pick up the parts of the substantive motion that we can agree with, whilst moving ahead and not agreeing to rescind our previous motion. So certainly not in any way an attempt to be exclusive; it was the opposite. It was an attempt to include the good bits that we could agree on and debate only the bits that we disagreed on.

The bit that we disagree on is whether we should rescind this motion or not. The things we have in common is what's put in the amendment. I understand that those councillors who want to rescind the motion are likely to vote against the amendment. The point of this is to make sure that either way, whether that is successful or not, this action gets picked up and taken forward. So certainly this doesn't stop, from my perspective, I can't see how this stops discussion on whether or not the matter should be rescinded. That's still at the core of the matter. We're voting on this amendment; we're voting on whether or not we should rescind the motion. At the next vote will be whether or not we should do this.

So I disagree completely with that. I hope that's not the way that people have interpreted the action. It was trying to make sure that we pick up this action as well either way. Councillor Kotlash.

Thank you, Mr Mayor. I'm speaking against this amendment.

I agree with Councillor Calvert that it stops the debate about the other issue, but I'm going to take a different tack and say that we already have this particular issue already as a council resolution. On the 15th of June 2021, I brought a motion to council to develop a conservation and restoration strategy, and one of the pillars of that strategy, which is now a council resolution and is presumably happening in the— all

Of the , all animals and plants. This is part of a motion that we already, a resolution, beg your pardon, that we already have. So it is not new and it's not relevant. I'll leave it at that. I'm really disappointed in how this is going as well.

Thank you. Any further discussion on the amendment?

If not, we'll put the amendment. Just wait for it to come down on the screen, please.

All those in favour of the amendment, please raise your hand. In favour are Councillor Conolly, Councillor Dobramatsky, Councillor Vygel, Councillor Sheather, Councillor Richards, Councillor Reardon. Against? Councillor Kotlash, Councillor Wheeler, Councillor Calvert, Councillor Lyons-Buckett, Councillor Djuric, declare it carried on the casting vote, and Councillor Zamprogno, and declare it carried on the casting vote of the Mayor. The amendment now becomes the motion. Did you want any further discussion on that before I apply Councillor Zamprogno? Councillor Zamprogno

I only to observe in conclusion, Mr Mayor, that the challenge that I set to my colleagues about why we feel the need to ram this through without consultation, without resourcing, without the respect that the stakeholders are due, has not been answered, and conspicuously so. Thank you.

Thank you. We'll put the motion now, which was now the amendment. All those in favour of the motion, please raise your hand. In favour are Councillor Conolly, Councillor Dobramatsky, Councillor Vygel, Councillor Reardon , Councillor Richards, Councillor Sheather. Against? Councillor Kotlash, Councillor Wheeler, Councillor Calvert, Councillor Lyons-Buckett, Councillor Zamprogno, Councillor Djuric. Declare it carried on the casting vote of the Mayor.

So now we go back to the start of the agenda.

First item is item 26, request for leave from the next meeting, so I want to move that.

Moved, Councillor Zamprogno. Seconder for that? Seconded, Councillor Reardon. Discussion? No. Put to a vote. All those in favour, please raise your hand. Favour are Councillor Conolly, Councillor Kotlash, Councillor Wheeler, Councillor Calvert, Councillor Lyons-Buckett, Councillor Diuric, Councillor Sheather, Councillor Richards, Councillor Reardon. Declared carried.

Next item is item 27, the draft wayfinding signage strategy. Councillor Zamprogno

Thank you, Mr Mayor. I have a form of words that I've communicated to Mr McElroy. If I could get them up on the screen, I'll seek a seconder.

Just waiting for them to come up on the screen, please.

And for the benefit of colleagues, it is— All right then. So, Mr McElroy, it's effectively the recommendation in the business paper with the addition of these as two additional points.

I should have made that—

Seconded, Mr Mayor.

So just for clarity, seconded Councillor [unclear]. For clarity, this would be points 3 and 4 following the recommendations 1 and 2.

That's correct. It's the recommendation in the business paper with these as additional points, and with a second— I'll just address it briefly . This is a good policy. It's been in the pipeline for a long time. These additional dot points seek to address a couple of particular concerns that have been brought to me. One relates to the absence of any mention of the regional gallery in that wayfinding strategy, either in the list of pictograms or proposed signage. So I'm simply suggesting that as we proceed into the detailed design phase, that we give particular recognition or consideration to our regional gallery, which is a significant draw . The next dot point relates to my concern that this signage is not neutral.

Often what we say and put up on a sign is the narrative that we, as a society, tell ourselves about who we are and what our values are and what history actually represents. I was concerned that in the various drafts of this wayfinding and signage strategy that have come to us thus far, there's insufficient attention as to who has editorial agency over what goes up on those signs. If it's something simple like the paddle wheel is one kilometre this way, that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about where there's editorial content that says, hey, this is why this area has significance, European significance, Indigenous heritage or otherwise. I would be much more comfortable if, in this detailed design phase, we had the input of a working group that we would be able to set up through our heritage committee so that they can have input, if not final say, over that editorial content.

I'd like it to be done by our own people. I'd like it to be done locally , in-house. I don't want to farm that out because this is the story that we tell ourselves about the places that have meaning for us, and I'd like us to be telling that story to us. I hope that that has the support of my colleagues. Thank you.

Please, Councillor Zamprogno, I might just ask a question to the General Manager of Director of Planning, if anyone wants it, just about whether staff have any thoughts that are comfortable in the 0.4 in that motion that requires the detail design to work with the Heritage Committee

Thank you, through you, Mr Mayor. Yes, so there's actually two related projects. There's this broader signage strategy that will deal with all kinds of signage and obviously address basic Building Code of Australia and safety issues as well, which we have to meet . And then there'll be, you know, the content of signage. And then we have the heritage trail signage, which, you know, we're looking at innovative ways of capturing information, potentially using QR codes so that information can be updated, you know, or as things occur . In terms of the consultation phase, we'll be looking to engage with a range of people through the detailed design, as outlined in the report . And in terms of the heritage trail, absolutely it would be very useful and, you know, to obviously look to our Heritage Advisory Committee, who have a lot of that knowledge and will be able to help provide input into the content of information around the heritage trail.

Thank you . Councillor Breeden.

Just ask you to unmute. You should get a message there, Councillor Breeden, to unmute.

Yes, thank you, Mr Mayor. I just wanted to make sure that the Hawkesbury Regional Gallery was included in this after receiving an email from the Secretary of the Friends Group.

Yeah, so that's included in this new— sorry, the motion moved by Council. Yes

Yes it is. Yes ,

Thank you . Councillor Lyons-Buckett.

Councillor Wheeler.

Thanks, Mr Mayor. Just a couple of comments and then a couple of questions, if I may. Firstly, I found, looking through the initial part of this document, which are the observations about our existing signage, it's pretty depressing. Those images are really stark. We really need to get a wriggle on with this. We've done a really bad job signposting our LGA. It's ad hoc, it's piecemeal, it's unattractive, it's inconsistent, and in most cases it's really daggy and dated. And if we are to make ourselves a destination, this is something that we really need to be working hard on. And I'm hoping that the money that we spend in these major areas is something that then has great carryover to other areas of the LGA.

I notice that a lot of the signage as you come into our towns currently is really faded and a lot of it's got graffiti on it. I know that it's going to take us a while to roll out this strategy, so if we could get some cleaning up done on the areas that we've got of existing signage, that would go a long way, I think, to tidying things up. A couple of questions. What are the next steps in this and what sort of timeline are we looking at

Through

That to the Director

City Planning

Yeah, thank you. Well , the next stage is the detailed design stage . At this point in time, it's one of those planning items that I need to work with the manager, city design and economic development. At the same time, is rolling out the work for the liveability program, and that is very much— Time critical in terms of, you know, making sure we meet the milestones for the funding from the state and federal government. So this work would continue, I suppose, adjacent to the livability program in terms of the detailed design phase. But I'm, you know, at the moment I can't say exactly how long that will take . And then we would obviously, there would have to be, you know, once we've got to that point, a process then of tender and, you know, detailed specifications and going out to market to roll out the work.

So, but I will have, I'll be able to give councils more information around that once I've met with Amanda, she's returned from leave, and understand where this fits in with the livability program.

So that sort of goes to my next question, which is what are the links with the town centres revitalisation program, and will this occur as a concurrent activity?

I mean, ideally, you know, it is a concurrent activity, but at this point in time they are two separate projects . However, you know, we're obviously conscious that we're going to be disrupting the town centres when we roll out the livability program, so we'll be looking to minimise that disruption as much as possible.

And it seems to me that it would dovetail into the connectivity aims of the livability program as well. We can't get good connectivity without signage and wayfinding. And just a final question, do we have a briefing due on progress with the town centres?

Deliverability program? Yes . No, I don't have a briefing schedule at this point in time. We are out to, essentially the stage we're at is to finalise a tender to get a contractor on board . Once we have the, when we have the contractor on board, we'll have a much more refined outline of, you know, I suppose, rollout of the program, at which point I'll be able to give Councilors more of a detailed briefing. Do

We have a timeline on that?

Getting the contractor on board. We're hoping to resolve that in the next month or two.

Okay. Thank you. And just a final comment. I really like the sculptural signage stuff that was in the report. That more tactile approach, I think, gives people, particularly people who are visually impaired and children and people who are not so big on reading all the words, for whatever reason, a much better form of engagement with what's going on. So I think that that would be something that's not used everywhere else and could be something that was a bit of a drawcard. Thanks. Okay .

Thank you . Councillor Dogramaci? Yes,

Thank you very much. Once again, please accept my apologies on this kind of matters. I am new. I agree with Councillor Wheeler 100% that the signage all over is disastrous. Of course, the graffiti or whatever. As a matter of fact, this morning, while coming back from Oberon, the sign that, 'Welcome to Hawkesbury,' which I will make another comment, I have spoken about that kind of signages, like, 'Welcome to Hawkesbury' or 'Thank you for visiting Hawkesbury.' To me... They are unnecessary to be replaced. I mean, what do we mean, welcome to Hawkesbury? I mean, who reads them? I mean, when they come into Hawkesbury, are we going to give them a box of chocolate or throw them a bouquet of flowers or whatever?

So, but the other signages, like for heritage areas, I'm 100%. The question I would like to ask to Director, which I'm sure that in my short time as a councillor, I have spoken and I have asked many, many questions, and one of my number one priorities is the waste. Who is going to get the contract? How do we contract, you know, these signages out? What kind of signs are we going to have, the size of them, whether they are just ordinary ones or they are effective, or are they going to reflect to the past of history in Hawkesbury? And how much money are we expecting to receive from other entities, donations from state government or from federal government? And how much do we have in our kitty for that kind of things?

And if you don't have the answer, could I have some kind of an approximate figure? Thanks. Refer

That to the Director City Planning.

Okay, sorry, I didn't write down all the questions, so if I forget some of the questions, please forgive me . Okay, so in terms of any process for getting a contractor on board, depending on amount of money, but in this process it would require a tender, which we would then, you know, draft the tender documents and put it out to the... put out to market and people would reply. There would be a panel to assess the responses, and a determination would be made as to the winning tenderer. In terms of the money— no, we're not getting— okay, so technically this is, we've benefited from money that Council got from the bushfires , where we— anyway, I won't go into the background, but ultimately the funding is Council money going towards this, and we're looking at just over a million dollars to be spent over the next, well, I suppose next couple of years to roll out the signage project , and

What else are we asking? Something about waste? No

I think that was the crux of it, Director.

Okay, all right, thank you. Is there

Anything further, Councillor? Yes, just one— the $1 million, did I get that right? $1 million for the signage? Yeah

I can— I'll send an email to the councillors about this outside of the session, but to give you some more information about the funding and the amount.

And where is that money coming from?

It's Council money.

So that's $1 million for the signage

Yes

And that for how many years? Are we going to have another million dollars spent on signage?

No, no, this is, this is a, I would say, a one-off activity. We're able— Council received money as a result of bushfires , and we freed up— and that money we spent on some roads, or we'll be spending on some roads. The dollars that were allocated to those roads have been freed up to put towards signage. That's been resolved by Council, and ultimately this is more of a one-off activity. Any ongoing work around signage would actually have to be considered as part of an ongoing capital works program.

One last question, if you may. Are we going to have any kind of staying on this one? Are we going to have some kind of notes or notices that, you know, where these signage are going to be placed on the—

Yeah. So essentially, the next stage of the detailed design is it will be about the, you know, I suppose more the locations, the intent, you know, what are the issues. I mean, as I said, there's basic Building Code of Australia and, you know, standards that we have to meet in terms of signage, and then there's just, you know, signage which is around the look and feel and, you know, wayfinding. So we're addressing both of those issues . Once we've gone through the detailed design phase, we'll be able to brief Council around the outcomes of that phase.

Thank you. Councillor Richards.

Thank you, Mr Mayor. My remarks tonight will be brief. I just really wanted to put on the record that I think that this report is absolutely outstanding. I think the quality of the possibilities of signage in this area that are contained within that report should bring an element of excitement to most people, because anyone who's lived here most of their lives have realised our signage, not just wayfinding, but also our arrival signage, our destinational signage, is quite shocking and is in a state of disrepair. I believe that this area is so significant and so special and important that not only should locals who live here be able to drive around and be proud of their area, but people who come and visit, especially tourists, they should be able to feel exceptionally impressed when they come to the Hawkesbury, not just for our natural beauty or our buildings or anything like that that they're here to see, but as they go around, it looks like we take a good sense of pride in the place that we live, and as a Council, we prioritise that we want our towns and our villages to look their absolute best.

So I look forward to this being implemented. I just did have one last question for the Director of Planning, and based on everything you've said so far, when would you—and everything taking place—when would you expect to start to see this signage actually up and visual to our community?

Director City Planning

All being well, I would hope that what we're anticipating is we'll start seeing some of the signage go out in the next financial year. Next what, sorry? In the next financial year, but I can't see exactly when in the financial year. No

That's lovely. That's great. It's something that we can look forward to in this term. Thank you very much. Yeah, definitely. Thanks

All right. I'll just ask for that motion to be taken down from the screen. A right of reply required, Councillor. None needed

Mr Mayor. Put

The motion then. All those in favour, please raise your hand. Favour: Councillor Conolly, Councillor Calvert, Councillor Sheather, Councillor Wheeler, Councillor Djuric, Councillor Banks-Buckett, Councillor Richards, Councillor Veigel, Councillor Probyn, Councillor Dr Marchi, Councillor Kotlash. Declare it carried. Councillor Reardon, declare it carried.

Next item is item 28, draft Woodbury Reserve master plan and plan of management. Councillor Sheather.

Thanks, Mr Mayor. This report, the recommendations as written. Thanks

A seconder for that

Seconded, Councillor Zamprogno.

Yeah, just briefly, Mr Mayor, I spoke to you about some concerns that I had. I've since spoken to the staff. Their concerns were the same as mine . I'm quite satisfied with the answers that I got . The only thing that I'd ask is, as this does progress, we just spoke about signage, that we'd have appropriate information on the front and back gates of that facility . They haven't got much out at Glossodia, and this will go down really well in the community.

But one of the things we do have is vandalism to a fair degree, and

I think to inform the younger people that this is designed and what they want , they might appreciate some ownership of it. And I think appropriate information to them when this is happening and the like, it'd be appropriate . I commend the recommendation.

Thank you . Nothing further, we'll put the motion. All those in favour, please raise your hand. In favour: Councillor Sheather, Councillor Conolly, Councillor Calvert, Councillor Wheeler, Councillor Djuric, Councillor Lyons-Buckett, Councillor Richards, Councillor Reardon, Councillor Veigel, Councillor Zamprogno, Councillor Dobrogowski . Against? Declare it carried. Director, Support Services, did I call out everyone's name? You screamed moved a couple of times

I'm not sure whether you called out Councillor Kotlash.

Councillor Kotlash, you're in support? In favour : Councillor Kotlash.

It is Notice of Motion 1, Councillors Zamprogno.

Thank you, Mr Mayor. Move the motion standing in my name. Is

There a seconder?

Seconded, Councillor Djuric

Thank you . I regard this as a simple and virtuous idea. Council already collects much of the information that I am proposing here. It routinely has for many years collected our attendance information for formal council meetings, if we're members of committees. The minutes of those individual committee meetings record our attendance. And from time to time, perhaps at the end of the reporting year, perhaps even tabulates the members of those committees across the year. What we don't collect at the moment is councillor attendance at briefings, workshops , community consultation sessions. We do collect attendance information for things like conferences, things that incur some kind of cost for council.

So most of the information I'm looking for is already collected. There is no onerous administrative overhead here. But what I do believe would be appreciated by the community is being presented a report card at the end of the council term that tabulates that information on a per-councillor basis and provides some information to voters about how diligent their councillors has been. Now , we're all very diligent councillors. We all go to every meeting. We never miss any, at least not without a very good reason. And when we do, we accord grace to one another about the reasons for our absence. But I think the community expects this kind of accountability. Our community strategic plan , our code of conduct all make mention of the need for us to be present.

Engaged and diligent. This is simply something that we can do in service of those values that we've already put forward to the community as things that we support. So I'm hopeful that this has your support. Thank you. Thank you.

Councillor Kotlash.

Thank you, Mr Mayor. I'll start by saying this . There's campaigning and then there's gratuitous self-promotion at the expense of others. I'm worried that this sort of information might lead to the latter, and I want nothing to do with it. I'm not supporting this notice of motion. There is a lot wrong with it, but I'll just mention some of the reasons why I disagree with it, since I only have five minutes. First up, when a councillor is sick for any length of time or is involved in an accident or has a family crisis or whatever, and this takes them away from their duties for a while, this does not mean that they are less representative, responsive, accountable or effective overall. Even if our staff did collect these data, they would not address the questions being sought by the mover of this notice of motion.

That is, that voters would have information about the diligence and effectiveness of their councillors. A councillor could turn up for everything, listen to everybody and do absolutely nothing. For our staff to gather such information is not appropriate. It is clearly for political ends. Our staff should be only working on things for the public good. One of my favourite quotes by Robert McNamara is pertinent here. He says, Measure what is important. Don't make something important just because it can be measured. The mover of the motion has mistakenly made a causal link between the sorts of data asked for and the questions he thinks voters want answers to. We all have different styles of fulfilling our civic duties.

Some of us prefer to get out and about, while others do more research by themselves in isolation. A diversity of styles and approaches is important . This notice of motion just assumes that if you show up , and if you show up to everything, you'll be effective and diligent. I can't support this, and I hope my fellow councillors won't either. If the mover of this motion would like this information, I think he should collect it himself. Thank you.

Councillor Wheeler

Thanks, Mr. Mayor. While I agree with Councillor Kotlash that it's only worthwhile measuring that which is useful, I disagree that the superficial results of this will necessarily be used against councillors at election time. I think what the community is concerned about is when there are deep anomalies. I don't think that people are concerned if you've had a couple of weeks, a couple of meetings leave for a family event, or that you've been ill, or something like that. I don't think that that's necessarily Something the public worries about. I think what they might worry about is a councillor who attends one meeting out of three in order not to be removed from his or her position , or a councillor who didn't attend any briefings for three and a half years, for example , or a councillor who never attended a community engagement session in the five years that they were elected to council.

That, I think, is the sort of information that the public has a right to know, given that they are paying us an allowance to do this job. Now, the fact that it's not a huge allowance, that it's not the equivalent of a salary, doesn't mean that we signed up for this gig knowing what the allowance was. And I think we need to reflect. Our actions need to reflect the fact that the ratepayers pay us to do our best in this job. I would actually like to see this go further. I don't think that it's useful to—I accept that under point two, where this is only reported on a council term basis, that is perhaps not the best use of this resource. I would rather see this published annually with council's annual report, and I would hope that Councillor Zamprogno would consider amending this to include that, that this information was published annually.

It could also go in the end of term report. It would be collated already. I don't think it would be a great deal of extra work, but it looks less like electioneering and more like an accountability measure if it's published more regularly. Similarly, I would like us to be publishing our expenses, our phone and conference expenses. Now, City of Sydney does this on a three-monthly basis. An annual basis is probably sufficient for us. I don't think our expenses are so high. Certainly our budget is nothing like City of Sydney, and our staffing is nothing like City of Sydney. So annually would be fine, and I would ask Councillor Zamprogno if he would consider including that as an additional point to point one.

Otherwise I'll move an amendment to do both of those things. Councillors

And promoter, can I just chime in really briefly? Because I was going to ask for those same two changes, actually. Firstly , the change to point two, that it is including the annual report, and also that cost. I was going to say the cost number, cost of conferences is included, but we could also put a point in there about the cost of IT and other reimbursements . The other point I would make is that most of the—and to be honest, I'm a little bit undecided because I came in with the intention to vote for it, but hearing Councillor Collins's point that this is, you know, we really shouldn't be getting public servants to be spending time and resource doing electioneering. I am concerned about that.

Point 1F clearly has nothing to do with accountability and electioneering. I would be inclined to support the motion if you were to make those two changes and remove point F, but I'll leave it to your comment on that and Councillor Wheeler's suggestion. Okay then, would you like me to address that now?

Yes. All right then. Well, if it garners your support, Mr Mayor, I'm highly disposed to be obliging. I can address those several points in the following way. Happy to include a dot point relating to expenses. Concerning whether this is reported at the end of term or annually would depend on whether the end-of-term report is the annual report in the last year of council. And the reason I phrase that this way is I sought the advice of council staff before formulating these words, and I was informed that the end-of-term report— Only comes out after the election, which means that if it were to appear in an end of term report , it would actually miss the election. And I'm not suggesting that this is used for overt politicking.

I'm just saying that people are most mindful of these issues in the lead up to an election. That's perfectly understandable and perfectly legitimate, I might put it that way. So would an annual reporting result in some disjointment in terms of the way that the final year of a council term appearing in a report before the election? If I could defer that to staff.

The general manager, what is the timing for the report?

Certainly the annual, I think that the point that Councillor Zamprogno is making is the fact that the next, at the end of this term of the council, the end of term report will become published after the council election. In terms of the annual reports, Director City Planning might be able to indicate to me what the timing of those would be, normally around September, October

Yeah, we report the annual report to Council in November of each year.

So my concern, therefore, is that if we were to have this reported in the annual report, effectively the last year of a council term would not appear before the election. So, I mean, we could always do both. We could always have something appearing in the annual report whenever it falls, and then also have a term report tabulated and presented before an election. I have no objection to that. As far as to your last point, Mr Mayor, in terms of point F . I think it's relevant, but if it's the barrier between you supporting this or not, I'd happy to, I'll amend it. Okay

So just for clarity here , point E is changing to the number and cost of professional development sessions . Point F is deleted . Point G, we might need some help from staff with the words, but to the effect of reporting on the cost of IT expenses and other allowances paid to councillors. And then point 2 becomes councillor tabulates the data and reports this with the annual report, as well as prior to an election.

I have no problems with that, Mr Mayor. I think that's a neat summation.

Is the seconder happy with that, Councillor Djuric, if we change that motion? Yes. Okay . I'm just going to Councillor Carbone to speak on that while we hopefully staff can just type that up and we can make sure we've got what we mean. Councillor Carbone

Thank you, Mr Mayor. I find this notice of motion ridiculous and insulting . I believe each of us as councillors are responsible for our own actions, and what this notice of motion is saying is that, well, it implies strongly that we can't be trusted to manage things, that we have to be supervised, we have to be watched , and things have to be done to make sure that we turn up to events. Now , why would someone run for council and then not turn up to an event? Because that would be reflected in the polling, on the ballot box. Now, that would be a ridiculous thing to do. And the other thing is council was Being a councillor is not a full-time job. It's not like a member of parliament who may get, you know, $200,000 a year to do their full-time job as a member of parliament.

For us, it's actually a part-time thing, and for some councillors, they also go to work in a full-time job . Not everyone has the luxury of being retired and have time to do everything. And some councillors have to choose. They have to select which things they can get to and which things they can't get to because they have to also work to support their family. Because the amount of money we get paid couldn't support a family. It probably only barely pays for our expenses. So it's not as though we're all equal in this. And if one person can get to 10 events and the other person can only get to two or three, that doesn't necessarily mean the one who goes to 10 events is a better councillor. Also, it depends on what happens when the councillor goes to that event.

What do they do there? We can all go to events and sit in the back row, and when the event is over, we leave. And in this notice of motion, that is a tick. We get a tick for that. We went. We didn't do anything. We just sat down the back row and watched. This ticking of boxes demeans councillors, and it implies that we must keep going to a number of events, but not necessarily do anything when we get there. All events are not the same, and if I go to a two-hour event, Councillor Sam Progner, is that more important than if I go to a one-hour event? How do you measure these things? It's all ridiculous. And if I go to an outside agency, and you would know this, Councillor Sam Progner, you as chairperson of Hawkesbury River County Council, going there is not a one-off thing.

There's a lot of work associated with that, and how much is that equal in terms of other meetings? If you go only to one HRCC meeting, is that the same as five other meetings? You see, once you start measuring these things like that, it doesn't work. You can't put numbers on this. It's about our attitude. It's about us getting involved and doing what we can do. The other thing is, by measuring this, it pits us against each other. It makes us competitors. I don't believe the public want us to be competitors. What the public want is for us as 12 councillors to work together, and they want to measure the council's effectiveness, not the individual councillors who go to things or don't go to things.

And this doesn't go any way towards answering what the public wants. They want to know, is this council effective and accountable? This doesn't do that. And I would think that the community has asked. But that process, when I was at the polling booth, many people told me they're sick of all the squabbling between councillors. What they want to see is 12 councillors working together, and they want to see that, and that will be measured at the ballot box. That's where we are accountable. And I'm actually quite insulted by this whole process, and I'm surprised that other councillors aren't insulted by it as well. I believe most of, or maybe all of our councillors do a great job. They do what they can do.

And measuring one against the other like this, I think takes us down a road that will not be good. It'll cause us a lot of problems and won't make the council look good. It'll make us look very divided, very ineffective. And I'm going to vote against this notice of motion.

Thanks, Councillor Carver. I'll just speak very briefly to say that I understand the concerns of where you're coming from, and I do take your point that this is not a perfect measure of any of those things that we're trying to achieve with diligence or anything else. But it's a small part of the story, and I think it just brings us into line with, you know, public company reports on attendance, board meetings, Parliament's report on attendance to members to sessions. I agree with you. It's not—this number won't be the measure of your value as a councillor. But I think it is expected by the public that for a board or a council that you would be able to go and see which board members or councillors attended which meeting. I think that's probably fair enough, so I think we can .

Mr Mayor, can I just say that I find it interesting that when I speak, you take the opportunity to answer me and give your opinion, when— I would have thought you only get one chance to speak like the rest of us . Was that your speech then, or are you going to speak again?

So I'll dismiss the point of order, Councillor Garbett. This is the first time I'm speaking. I did jump in when there was an amendment on the table to try and get that done in one go, but I only have time to speak like you are, like anybody else is, and that was the time I chose to speak. So there is no point of order . Councillor Wheeler, have you already spoken?

I have, but I've got a quick question, or possibly an addition to the motion. Yep . I'm wondering if, when we attend conferences, there's a requirement as part of a council resolution that we provide a report on that conference. And one of the problems with that resolution is that there's nowhere that that report ends up. I'm wondering if it's possible that we add that conference report to that section about the number and cost of conferences. So I guess how this would work, if you look at, say, the City of Sydney's page, they have a page on each councillor that details the committees and things that they're on. I know some of the Victorian councils, like Moreland, for example, you can click through and you can see the expenses of each councillor, the conferences that they've attended, and perhaps we could upload the councillors' reports to that section.

That way they're stored somewhere. Currently, when we submit a report, it goes to the general manager, and I'm not really sure where it ends up after that. I think it would also have the function of making people who are tardy with their reports, and I certainly have been in the past, a bit more accountable. And it appears that this is the aim of this motion. So I may provide a bit of a repository of that information, but also an additional accountability mechanism for those reporting requirements.

So I guess could that be added perhaps to point E

Slightly more succinct. Yep . Yep. What should be added to point E

The number and cost of conferences the conference report prepared by the councillor

Okay. Councillor Zamprogno, Djuric, are you okay with that

I have no objection in principle, but I'd like to ask a question of the general manager what her opinion is of the purpose of those reports, considering when we write them, they do go to the general manager and I'm equally mystified as to what purpose they serve or whether they are designed for broader circulation, the general manager? General manager?

Through you, Mr Mayor, I would expect that the purpose of them is twofold. One of them is there's an accountability mechanism for councillors who attend conferences, but also then a general knowledge sharing element to those as well . I must admit, councillors in my seven or eight months with council, I'm yet to see a report of that nature. Okay

Thank you . Councillor Zamprogno. All right then. Well, that answers my question. I have no objection. I think it would be, in the interest of clarity, we wouldn't tack it onto point E. It would become a new point G, and that is that the reports of councillors attending conferences be published. They don't even have to be published in the tabulated annualised form that we're suggesting, merely that they are reported in some way publicly. Okay

Happy with that, Councillor Djuric ? Yes, I'm happy with that. General manager, is there a resolution to that effect giving enough direction as to what we expect to happen?

I think it's sufficiently broad, Mr Mayor, that that will give us licence to either take an option to either publish them through the website, as perhaps Councillor Wheeler has suggested, or through some other means. So I think we'd be comfortable with that.

Councillor Lyons-Buckett.

Thank you, Mr Mayor . I think that this is an example around accountability and transparency, which are words that we heard very prominently during the lead-up to the election. Everybody was promoting accountability, and I think that this is correct. I think that, in contrast to what Councillor Calvert said, the point says that it's recording events where such attendance incurs a cost to Council. So, in other words, it's about events where the Council has paid for the ticket or they've paid for a councillor to attend an event. It doesn't mean just every run-of-the-mill event that's on. So it's either Council-run events or Council events, I'm assuming that Council has paid for. So I think this is a really good start, and I thank Councillor Wheeler for bringing that around the conference papers, which of course I believe I did complete all my reports from conferences last year, and in the past when we had various committees, I also used to present the report to the committees, but that doesn't seem a thing.

So publishing them on the website would be a really good idea because there are often little bits in there that are really of relevance to the Council, and particularly from conferences such as the flood conference and so on. There's often some really updated information around that, and it shows to our ratepayers that we have actually attended that conference. And I have been to conferences that are three-day conferences and people leave after the first day, and I think that that's a deceptive thing in terms of, you know, not being accountable to the public for public funds. But I think that this is a good idea. I don't think it's a measure of how effective a councillor is because I do appreciate that different councillors can put in different times and have all sorts of life events that may make you not.

not be as devoted to council as some other people can be, but I think that it's just good to have that data in a format where people can see. If you are open and honest with the public, if you have an issue and you don't like attending events, or if you have an illness, or you don't even have to say, but if you have a reason, then there's nothing wrong with imparting that to the public as well if you're missing for some time. And I think that's generally recorded in the minutes if people have to take an extended leave of absence from the council. So I think this is a good way forward. I'm particularly keen to include point F, but I just want a clarity, Mr Mayor, is information technology expenses around the equipment or around the actual usage of phone bills, and what does that actually mean?

I

Think the way we've now got the allowances set up, that it captures all of that.

Okay, so and the monthly expenditure and all that sort of— okay. Thank you, Mr Mayor

Councillor Dogramaci.

Thank you very much, Mr Mayor. Again, every time I start, I ask my— I say I apologise, being new. Everything I look at it is from a different perspective. Many people told me that the council is different than running a business, which I have been for 40 years. Now, I agree 100% with Councillor Zamprogno and Councillor Calvert. Yes, you could take it as an insult and you could take and you could applaud for it. Now, what happens that once, you know, this COVID matter eases down and I start doing my interstate and overseas trips and won't be able to attend to committee meetings or workshops or whatever community engagement, does that mean that, you know, I'm not serving the people which I am supposed to be?

And what happens if there are two or three different community engagement sessions, one in Bilpin at 10 o'clock, and then, you know, I have to stay for 10 minutes and then drive all the way to the other side of Hawkesbury and won't be able to attend to that one, or go to Sydney, I don't know where these events should take place. Are they going to measure how many hours we were there, how many times we went to toilet, or how much did we eat, how many coffees, you know, we consumed? So is that going to come to that one? And at the end of the year, when they print all these details, are they going to print in bold letters and 15 points, 20 points? I don't know. It's I'm 50% this way and 50% the other one.

We really don't know. I mean, are they going to, like, you know, is it something like Big Daddy is watching? Is that the right term? I don't know if that's the case. And how many committees are we going to be a member of? As far as I know that, you know, I'm only doing one. So does that mean that, you know, I'm going to get a minus, or can I apply for another five or six so, you know, my name will go right to the top of the list? I don't know. But in general, yes, we have accountability and we have to follow the rules. I don't know. You have to convince me for that. Thank you. Thank you . Councillor Sheather.

Thanks, Mr. Mayor . I don't know whether it would be as harsh as Councillor Kotlach in the comments, but I agree with them. And I know that Councillor Zamprogno would not have intended that within his motion . But in saying that, the public will . We've got an obligation to fulfil what we put our hand up for and, you know, committees and the commitments. And

There wouldn't be a councillor amongst us who wouldn't want to attend everything and be involved. But we can't all do that . As Eddie just said, that, you know, he's likely to be away for meetings and the likes.

That,

Whether you want to call it an excuse or whether it's reality, that information won't be provided. It just will be that he's not there, and that's unfair. And I think the public, while they've got a right and we've got an obligation to let them know what we're doing . Someone mentioned about conferences. When I was on council before, I went to every conference I could. That's where you learn. You get to find out about your neighbours and how they do things and the like . And some councillors only go for a short time . It's up to us as fellow councils to try and discourage that . We're there to set an example in the community, and that sort of thing is not a good example. But getting across alongside your name, the community won't read it like that .

So, Mr Mayor, I'm not going to support this, as well as intended, as Councillor Zamprogno had in mind. I just think that we've got an obligation as councillors to fulfil our role. What we put our hand up for, we should try our hardest to fulfil, but from time to time that may not happen, and it won't be clearly indicated as this motion indicates. And I think the public may judge some of the councillors unfairly.

Thanks. Thank you. Councillor Kotlash. Thank you, Mr Mayor. I just have a question. I just need to, I know Councillor Lyons-Buckett just asked this, but I wasn't quite sure of the answer. In number one, part F, the cost of information technology expenses, does that mean that when we fill out our telephone things about how many calls we made , that that will get recorded? Is that what that means? That's

My understanding. I'll just refer that to the General Manager, to be crystal clear

Through you, Mr Mayor, I would probably prefer to take that on notice, but my assumption is that we would simply not provide details of the number of calls, for example, but simply the overall expense . As it happens, I have a feeling that we're about to shift our mobile phone plan where we may not even be able to itemise that, so I think we'll be on a broader bucket anyway. But if you like, I'd be happy to circulate further notice to councillors about what that would look like during the week.

Right. The reason I ask is that I never use my mobile phone because I don't have good telecommunications here, so it either will look like, when this report comes, if this is what it's for , that report will come to Council with nothing in my mobile phone record, which either can be misconstrued as that I don't talk to anybody in the whole of the Hawkesbury, or that I'm terribly frugal. I use my home phone, so will that be recorded? This, you know, I just don't understand what this is, what that... I don't understand the whole lot, but that particular one , what does that mean? What does the expenses mean? Anyway, that was, I'm delving into commenting. Sorry, Mr Mayor

Councillor Daramachi, you have spoken. Did you want to have a question or clarify something?

Yeah, just very quickly, Mr Mayor, thank you very much. In general, I agree with Councillor Zamproni and Councillor Calvert. Now, some of us working full-time, some of the councillors are working part, or some of them are retired doing this, I don't know, for whatever the reason. Some of the points which are going to work against me, how about if I make a suggestion? How about we also put how many residents, how many people that, you know, we have seen and consulted and met them at their own places? For example, so far I met maybe 50 people. Am I going to put those things down so, you know, I could get their votes for the next election? And let's be clear, people most of the time, correct me if I'm wrong, I don't want to sound like cynical, but most of the people, they attend to these meetings or engagements or whatever it is just to make sure that, you know, their face will be seen there and their photos will be taken and videos will be played so, you know, they could secure more votes for the next election.

Correct me if I'm wrong. So in my case—

Councillor Daramachi, you have already spoken, so each councillor does get to speak. Okay. All right . To clarify, any further speakers haven't spoken? If not, we'll go right up to the Councils. Thank you

Mr Mayor. What a storm in a teacup. Look, unlike some of my colleagues, I am not afraid of, nor am I insulted by the prospect of accountability. That's what this is about: accountability. And rather than wringing their hands about the way that the public will interpret this, let me re-emphasise the point that I started with. Most of the information that I'm asking for here is simply a re-presentation of information that is already collected and already public. I'm simply, in the most part, asking for it to be tabulated, collated and presented in a way that is digestible, accessible to people annually or at the end of the term. That's it. No more. There are significant issues of public interest here: our accountability with public funds; that we do the very minimum that's required of us in our roles, which is that we turn up and that we do the job.

All of this sophistry about whether we go to a meeting for two hours or ten minutes, whether we sit in the back row, or whether we do a song and dance act on the stage, that's not what this is about. There are many other things that people will use to judge at the end of the term whether a person is worthy of re-election. The degree of engagement that we have with our broader community, the community groups that we're members of, the residents that we sit down with, our perception of Issues, the research that we do behind this. They're not captured by this, but they're not meant to. This is simply a tabulation of information relating to which committees or conferences or workshops or council meetings we attend.

So, you know, in the interest of public accountability, I think this is simple, obvious and worthy. Thank you

If we get the motion down on the screen, please

We put the motion. All those in favour, please raise your hand. In favour of the motion are Councillor Conolly, Councillor Djuric, Councillor Lyons-Buckett, Councillor Wheeler, Councillor Reardon, Councillor Bibel, Councillor Daprocchio, Councillor Dr Marchi, Councillor Richards. Against? Councillor Calvert, Councillor Polish, Councillor Sheather. Declare it carried.

Our next item is item 31, Mulgrave Railway Station car park. Councillor Veigel, move that. Is there a seconder? Seconded, Councillor Kotlash. Discussion, Councillor Veigel. Yeah,

Thank you. Listen, just before I start, I'd just like to acknowledge Peter Ryan, the president of the Pitt Town Progress Association, because during pre-poll back in, when was it, December, I think it was, or just prior to that, you know, you get to talk to people standing out there and just, you know, before we do this, it was down at Windsor, and he raised a couple of concerns just in conversation. And one was Mulgrave Railway Station. And he said, as an association, they were going down and cleaning up the rubbish, shopping trolleys. Car parking was a safety hazard and security lighting was basically a dog, to quote. Now, I spoke to him, I was raising this motion the other week, so he's aware that I'm raising it.

And I, again, just want to acknowledge him. But after he spoke to me just before the election, I went and had a look at that station, ticked on the box, everything he said was wrong with it was wrong with it. And I went down last week and had a look at it on a Sunday, and most people were parking in the overflow and not the sealed section, which is south of the railway station. So based on that, right, I've got real concerns. So if I can just read the motion, please, if you just give me that minute, that we write to the Minister for Transport, the Hon. David Elliott, MP, and the Member for Hawkesbury, Robyn Preston, MP , advising that the commuter car park at Mulgrave Station is unsafe in areas.

It's inadequate for the number of people who now park at the station. And just to clarify that, there's a lot of people going down to Mulgrave because there's more car parks down there. I know when my kids were going to university, they were going to other stations other than Windsor where they could get parking, and that would have been either Clarendon or Mulgrave. As they're own to say, and as you know, with the number of people who now park and ride at the railway station, and especially with the development pit and other areas, as I say, they're moving there and the new station more and more often, more often than whatnot. Requesting New South Wales Government install floodlighting for the three overflow unsealed parking areas and request that Transport New South Wales inspect the railway station surrounds.

The rubbish that has been dumped illegally or removed if needed. If you go and do a Google search on that station too, all four car parks are full, and there's mostly, most of the car parks are parked to the north of the station and they cross over the railway line.

I've put a couple of photographs in it, and it doesn't do it justice, but then again it may with tires and a few other things there. If you go and have a look at Google, you'll find it's a few shopping trolleys in the wrong space. Security lighting is absolutely paramount. We're going into the winter months, and that's one thing that I don't want to see a great deal of inertia, but I know there's a process. So that's where I stand with it, so I leave it up to your good selves. So thanks . Thank you.

Councillor Wheeler.

Thanks, Mr Mayor. I'm wondering if Councillor Veigel would add a request to seal the car park, at very least what really functions as the main car park, which is the, on the, I guess on the McGraths Hill side, that large car parking space on the McGraths Hill side of the station, which is where people sort of start to park and then they overflow into the other areas.

Yeah, thanks, Councillor. Yeah, I don't know how long it'll take to seal. I don't know what the, you know, transport is, but yeah , if you walk the ground, it's on level and it's a safety issue, most definitely. Trip hazard. And it's, if you know the area, which you probably know, Swansea to the north, and there's a dividing fence, I think, and there's a smaller one, and there's one across the road, I think the community's a parking there. But to have 50 sealed spots under lights, not adequate, and there's a drop area too, and that's just not enough for a growing area.

Looking mainly for a yes or a no, so— Yes, thank you. Yes, it should be sealed. Seconded, Councillor. Yep. Okay. Thanks. Staff understand that change, hopefully, that — so I guess point two becomes request NSW Government store funding for three overflow unsealed car park areas and investigate and seal these car park areas, basically, is that what we're saying?

Yes, please. Could I continue, Mr Mayor?

Yes.

I've used that car park since I moved here 20 years ago. Councillor Veigel is right in that it actually is a— one of the reasons that it's a heavily used car park is that it's much easier to get to than Windsor if you're coming from, say, Wilberforce, because you don't have to navigate as much traffic in order to get to the train station. So if you're running late, pushing through to Mulgrave is actually faster than turning right after Thompson Square and going through and parking at Windsor. But with the increase in population, particularly around Pitt Town, it's become really, really difficult to park there, and that car park has really deteriorated. It's not just lights and rubbish. You know, there's massive potholes in that area, and in fact, when you go to that car park, and I used to frequently when I was working, you know, before COVID, when I was working in the city.

There's one section of the car park that actually only four-wheel drives use, because if you put a sedan into it, it would vanish, and probably not be seen again. The holes are so deep. And it's a real issue at night. I used to finish work quite late often, and be coming into that car park on the last train. And it's a bit of a scary place, actually. I wouldn't like my teenager coming into that car park after hours. And there's no one there. It's attended in the morning for that morning peak, I think for a couple of hours, and the rest of the time that car park is shut. And that's the level of service that we've got here now. This car park is catering to a growth precinct. It's simply not good enough.

And I think when we write to the minister, we really need to make that point, that we are now in part of a growth area for Sydney. We've just seen the trees being cleared for Vineyard 1, and the community up in arms about that. Some of those people will be coming to Mulgrave and Vineyard in order to leave their cars. The fact that there's no attendance, that there's inadequate lighting, there's inadequate parking, that there's weeds everywhere, it's really unkempt. There's broken glass through the car park. There's no supervision. People have had their cars vandalised because of the lack of lighting and supervision. You can't use the toilet. The toilets are open for two hours a day. I've been there when someone has defecated on the doorstep of the toilet, as what I assume is a note to CityRail that they would like to be able to use the facilities.

I mean, it's fairly extreme, but still this is what people are doing. It's not good enough that in an area that is being progressively sucked into Sydney. Whether we like it or not, we are still being treated as less than a regional railway. My mother has better service than this at Mittagong. That is the country. Why is Mulgrave being treated in this fashion? There's still vehicles in that car park at 11 and 12 o'clock at night, and there's a local high school that uses that for transport. We really do deserve better. And I think it's time that the local member and the transport minister came to the party. People were promised a lot for Mulgrave Station. None of it's eventuated. Those developer funds were handed back, and we're stuck with this either a quagmire or a cesspit.

And it really is about time something was done.

Thank you. Councillor Lyons-Buckett.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Just a question first. Are you still engaging in regular meetings with the state member?

Yes.

Would you perhaps raise something like this in that forum, as well as just the sending of a letter? Because I think that that brings it more to the fore. I'm not sure of the status or the accuracy of this, but I believe there was some discussion around upgrading the Mulgrave railway station prior to the last state election, and I know it is something that the Pitt Town Progress Association have raised many times directly with the state member on occasion as well. So I think that if your advocacy could be put to that in a direct manner, because clearly there are issues of safety, particularly the lighting is a really valid reasoning around that. And quite possibly, I don't even know whose responsibility all this is.

Is it State Rail or is it Transport for NSW? Are they separate? I don't really understand a lot about it, but I trust those writing the letter or whatever to address those concerns. I think that when we come to advocating for these things, I would like to see more than a simple statement about them and a letter. I think that if you can take it one on one, that is really good. I think that if we use strong language to really speak on behalf of our citizens in saying that this is a priority in our area in terms of safety and access to the train line, that would be really good. I welcome this notice of motion, and I hope it gets some impacts. And I would just ask that you personally represent us on that front in your meetings.

I don't think that needs to be written into this, but I would ask that you do that and trust that you will. Thank you.

Councillor Zamprogno.

Thank you, Mr Mayor. And I do thank Councillor Veigel for bringing this notice of motion. Of course I support it, and I hope everybody does. It may interest him to know that, I mean, you know, advocacy has been occurring in this space for some time. On the 1st of September 2020, I accompanied our local member, Robyn Preston, and we actually brought Andrew Constance, the then Minister for Transport, out to Mulgrave, and we stood in the middle of that cratered wasteland with Peter Ryan from the Pitt Town Progress Association and showed him firsthand the appalling condition of that car park. And he nodded very sagely and tut-tutted along with us and said, My goodness, I didn't know it was this bad.

Let's see what we can do. Robyn had high hopes that there would be an allocation in the budget. There was not. But I would say on her behalf that there is no person more keenly aware of both the state of that car park and the need to see it upgraded than Robyn. And I know that she's continuing to advocate as best she can, and I think it's very timely through a motion like this, since there is now a new minister responsible, is that we bring it to his attention and that we bring him out and that we show it to him and what's happening nearby, all of the growth, and that we put our case and hope that either there'll be an allocation in this year's budget or else that we'll get a share of that five billion dollars that was promised to Western Sydney through the sale of WestConnex.

It's part of a list. So I support it and hope you do too. Thank you.

All speakers in favour? Anyone speaking against? Councillor Kotlash.

I've just got a quick question, Mr Mayor. Is all of the— there seems to be a few car parks around Mulgrave, and whenever I've been there, I've just wondered whether they're all actually owned by the state government. So just a question, which could be on notice: is where people, where they're parking, is it all on

RTA, Transport for New South Wales, or Infrastructure New South Wales, or whatever they're called, land? Or is some of it council property? It's just a thing I've often wondered.

That to the Director Infrastructure Services .

Thank you through you, Mr Mayor. I've actually tried to dial into our mapping while the discussion's been occurring and have failed, but I'll take that on notice and circulate, and we'll certainly take that into consideration when we write the letter.

Thanks. Councillor Dogramaci.

Thank you very much. It will be a very short one. Some of the councillors will remember during the last state election, at the Pitt Town Progress Association I raised this very question because it was too important to me. And when I asked a question to our state member, I was given an answer. I'm sure that, you know, some of the councillors will remember the planned construction of that car park would be year 2056. I don't know if any one of the councillors will remember then, but I tell you this. They do not have the money. They do not have … to spend on maybe more important things, and I guarantee you that when state election is upon us, there will be a few smiling faces and a few photo sessions around that area, and people will just forget.

So, in honesty, I have no hope that we will never see, you know, that car park properly built with the toilet facilities, whatever previous councils have commented. So it will be just part of the history. Thank you very much. Thank you.

I'll just speak very briefly, and just to Councillor Lyons-Buckett's point that, yes, this is not the totality of our advocacy. Obviously this is just to get an agreed council position, so that I'm able to go and speak on behalf of council on this matter. I do meet with Robyn Preston regularly, and the first part of our agenda always is to go back to what council resolved and make sure I'm following up and advocating to council position on a range of issues that have interaction with the state government. So we'll continue to push that. You know, I'll take Councillor Zamprogno's point. I think, you know , if I was invited out with the minister, you know, I think that would be great, and I'll suggest that to the member, that we do get the minister out again and see if we can show Mr Elliott what Mr Constance couldn't see and try and get some action there.

But thank Councillor Veigel for bringing this motion, which is quite simple, and just saying this is not good enough and that we need to make sure it's still on everybody's to-do list. Right of reply, Councillor Veigel.

No, just to thank everybody supporting the motion, so appreciate it. But it's a laydown, isn't it really? Okay. So thanks.

All those in favour of the motion, please raise your hand. In favour, Councillor Conolly, Councillor Sheather, Councillor Wheeler, Councillor Durick, Councillor Buckett, Councillor Reardon, Councillor Fagan, Councillor Reardon, Councillor Fargal, Councillor Zamprogno, Councillor Kotlash, Councillor Richards, Councillor Drummond, Councillor Calvert. Declare it carried.

This item is no. 3,

Councillor Lyons-Buckett.

Thank you, Mr Mayor. Seconder Sorry?

You're moving— sorry. Oh yes,

I move

The recommendation. Seconder, Councillor Wheeler. Sorry, go ahead.

Thank you, Mr Mayor. Look, this motion is really just translating from a question into a notice of motion, simply to ask for something to be investigated. It's just to understand whether it's feasible to go down a path of authorising some contractors who can be utilised in those times when we have an emergency situation. I know it's an operational matter, so it's outside our role really to be determining it. This is merely a request to investigate and look at it. What our role would be, of course, would be to allocate the funding that may be required for the system setup to do that. I think that we need to be creative in how and when we utilise local resources, especially if it can be used to assist people when it's needed.

And I note that the note by management said that this could be considered in ongoing discussions around road maintenance. So this motion then seeks essentially to ensure that this aspect of road maintenance is costed and discussed as part of the overall road maintenance. So this doesn't mean like dealing with issues like Greens Road or these big things that have occurred. It's about minor works that are sometimes needed in our more remote areas. It's been brought up many times over the past few years, and I believe that we should at least investigate it. I don't know if it's the right solution. I have no idea. It's way outside what I know about, and of course it would be a complex system given the various legal, financial, civil liability and WHS aspects of utilising private contractors in this space.

However, because we know that we have people out there who are earth movers or they work in this space, and these are the same communities that are impacted by natural disasters. So I think it's worthy of at least getting a cost of what it would be like, and then perhaps we can debate whether it's a good idea or not. This is merely to just have a discussion. It may be cost prohibitive. It may be too much in terms of insurance or in terms of the complexity of it, and if that's the case, then that's the case. But we know, and I know, that we've had people who have been frustrated that they have been isolated when somebody could have cleared a road or done something like that. We can rely on volunteers from the RFS and so on, but generally when there's a disaster occurring, they're dealing with other issues.

So this is about looking at what other arrangements we could have simply for these times of emergency when we have isolated communities, and to look into that and see if we can come up with a solution. My concern is that people will do it anyway, and that's not good. It would be better if we had a formalised response, and we know that the delay and the isolation is frustrating for people if they have someone sitting there with a machine who could deal with it. Or who could grade a road or something like that, and that would let them come out. I can understand that staff would be concerned perhaps around it, and that's the sort of information that I seek, whether the staff are going to have a problem with it, whether it's too much in terms of risk in our liability.

But I do believe that it's something that we should look into, and I stress that this is only in emergency times. It's not to be just utilised at a whim. It's for when we have our resources stretched to a limit and we have somebody who can do a job. How do we authorise them to do the job to restore access in isolated areas? Thank you.

Thank you, Councillor. I'll speak in support of the motion. This is something that I've been working on informally, but I think it is far enough on to it now. We should bring this as a conversation to Council and try and come up with an approach. It's a very difficult issue. I was doing, during the floods last year, I was making phone calls to people in isolated communities, trying to do some outreach, making sure they knew that we knew they were alive. And one of the things that came up straight away was, especially at Upper Colo, Colo Heights, straight away was— I better not say the name—but this guy is going to come and clear our road, and you're not going to pay him because you're not going to be able to see our road until he clears it so you can get in there.

Or we could clear the road, but we're going to have to sit there and wait, and then you probably engage us anyway once you come and look and put the work out. I can understand why that's incredibly frustrating. I can also understand the huge challenge from a procurement perspective that you can't go and authorise work easily for things you haven't seen and you don't know the extent of. So I think it is very complex, but I also think it has to be thought about because it's a huge frustration for these people that, you know, could have access to the road, or in many cases do have access to the road, and just do it all for free, even though the contract we would have engaged to do that work, if we'd been there, to have engaged somebody.

So I support the motion. I don't know what it's going to look like, but I think we're not the only—we can't be the only ones in this situation. There must be some models out there that we can look at. to do successfully, hopefully. So I think it's, yeah, I think it's a good motion and time to bring it to the forefront. Councillor Kotlash

Thank you, Mr Mayor. Yeah, I too will support this motion. I want to flip it on its head a bit. I probably would have sort of started it with, because we have these natural disasters, how will we go about supporting the communities that are impacted by such things as road closures and being cut off? Could we think about it in terms of how other councils might come to help us? Because I think in the last, look , I'm not clear on the details of this, but I think Blacktown might have come to our rescue with some equipment. Liverpool did as well. So, I mean, I don't know whether this is already in place, but it would be good to have a sort of a protocol that we could, that includes people that have earthmoving equipment or big, you know, big plant equipment, and they're members of the public or they have those sorts of businesses.

So sort of split it between how we might get help from neighbouring councils or other councils that haven't had that sort of impact and might be able to spare us some resources. And then we also have what Councillor Lyons-Buckett's getting to here, that we might be able to get some sort of protocols that satisfy all of the myriad of risk and, you know, procurement and whatnot. So I guess that doesn't, I won't ask for an amendment. I was just, you know, that's the problem, isn't it, that we need help. Does it matter that it comes from the public or other councils? I guess , I'll just ask a question in wrapping up. Am I right in saying that councils, other councils, neighbouring councils or other councils come to our rescue and help us out at times like this?

Yeah, during the March flooding, we had help from several other councils, both on the ground and also just logistically. Yeah

Yeah. Yep

Thank you. That's it.

Councillor Wheeler.

Thanks, Mr Mayor. Just a quick question. Councillor Lyons-Buckett has gone some way to answering it. There's a, the management note refers to the processes and practices and the work that's being done leading up to the 2022-23 budget. I'm just wondering if the timeline that's referred in that management note will allow this work to be included in that. Is there sufficient time to do that, or will this be sort of a separate thing, I suppose?

Back to the director, Infrastructure Services.

Through you, Mr Mayor, I'm looking at, we're looking at preparing something for consideration for the 22-23, if not starting beforehand if we can find the funds under the relevant operational budget. So I'm fairly comfortable with the timelines that we'd be able to get something back for the consideration of the council prior to the matter of the budget for next year. Great,

Thank you. I'd really, I'd really like to see us study, even if this is, you know, this is a bit of a beginning about how we went , because there's, I mean, budgeting is one issue, the indemnifying of the people who do the work and how we organise and control that and follow up on that work, I suppose, is another part of it. I'd like to see us have some discussions about how we do this with other services as well. And I've raised this in the past around using local people for parks management, rubbish collection, toilet cleaning, that sort of thing, because in an LGA of this size, we certainly saw when we were discussing the rubbish collection and toilets last year at Upper Colo that the tyranny of distance seems to be one of the reasons for our low servicing

Patterns for those spaces. So I think we need to have a broader discussion about how we really localise our workforce, not just to the LGA but to these areas in our LGA as a means of dealing with the vast space that we look after. We, and in part I think there's constant amalgamation of councils that we've seen over the last forty-odd years has meant that we have centralised these services more and more where, you know, when Colo Council was in play, for example, then it wouldn't have been sending road crews such enormous distances, and yet today we do. We've got communities doing this now. We need to have formal arrangements. What we end up with is people doing this out of the goodness of their heart, in their own time, with their own equipment, without reimbursement and without oversight, because it needs to be done.

Or we are constantly relying on volunteers. We've got an increasing need. We need to get on top of that, and we need to better plan how we do this, because otherwise we are either leaving people to their own devices or we're just telling them that they have to wait until we get around to it, and that's not good enough when it affects people's capacity to get to work, to get to their children, to get to school, to just carry out the normal aspects of their daily life, which for many people who are on this side of the river. Happen on this side of the river. You know, we don't necessarily have to go into Windsor in order to carry out the various bits and pieces of our lives, but we do need to travel somewhere.

And so I think, yeah, we need to— this hopefully will make us a more resilient community, and keep some of our resources in-house and within the community, and our financial resources within hard-hit communities as well. And I think that is a worthy goal for spending the public funds that we've got too.

Councillor Sheather.

Yeah, thanks, Mr Mayor. Yeah , I commend the motion. And just to carry on from Councillor Wheeler , the Sports Council had nearly 20 grounds closed for eight months because we couldn't deal with the issues. What we're talking about tonight is about roads and, you know, opportunities there.

We contract

The workforce in our community . They do it every day. They can do it every day.

We would have been in real trouble if it wasn't for COVID. Nearly 20 grounds closed for eight months, and some of the work still hasn't been finished, I might add. And I was going to bring it up with the staff to discuss how we might look at that. And so I hope they, when they're discussing this, that they look at opportunities to engage contractors in the community that they can get at a phone call. It's not impossible. They've got to follow the same protocols on that that's been talked about today in relation to safety and how they operate and all the rest of it. They do it every day. We don't need to tell them. There's a process that they've got to go through, and if we offer that process to them, I guarantee they can do it. And we just need to work through that to make it happen, because the community expects more. The comments that you heard and just spoke of, I heard them a lot.

And we've had 154 floods in our city. This is the first one where we've had a community as frustrated as what it's been. And they didn't expect it, and they do expect more of us to get things operational again. Not months, but days. Now, I know some of it, like Greens Road and the likes, we've got problems there. I understand that. But there's other things that are more easily attended that we can make work. So , yeah, I hope the staff take on board, and I will discuss with them about some of the concerns that I have. But I'd be really interested to see the report come back to see how they might be looking into the future. And I commend the motion. Thanks, Mr Mayor.

Thank you. Councillor Reardon.

You're muted at the moment.

Yes, thank you, Mr Mayor. As members of the Disaster Committee, this is the sort of information we need to get together for our forward planning for the next thing that's going to happen, that will happen, next natural disaster that will happen in the Hawkesbury. I think it's very valuable to have this all together.

Thank you. Being no further discussion, do any right of reply, Councillor Lyons-Buckett?

Thank you, Mr Mayor, and thank you everyone for those contributions. I think that, yes, this is just a small start. There's, as everybody has identified, there's many ways we could expand on this. Certainly what Councillor Wheeler and Councillor Sheather raised about moving it into other areas, I deliberately kept it small to just simply get some idea around the complexities and the legalities and so on with it to begin with, so that we can look at then maybe, I guess, expanding it. And Councillor Reardon is correct, it would go into a disaster management plan. And of course, the things that Councillor Kotlash raised around having the assistance of other councils would be part of an overall resilience plan, I would think.

And something we really need to look at is, of course, the interface with other councils and how we share resources. We have a number of borders that are also very vulnerable to natural disaster. So our border with Blue Mountains up at Mount Tomah, out on the putty where we border with Cessnock Council or where we border with Hornsby and so on. Anywhere that we have a border, we need to work out how those resources, particularly if we have a road closure on either side, how we would get the various equipment to those sort of places. So I think that this is a good start, that we can see if we can get something in place. And I hope that this can be something that we can all work with to expand it and to include the very valuable resources we have out in our community who are more than willing to help, but we don't want their eagerness to be too much when there needs to be some sort of controls around it.

So I look forward to hearing, I'm not seeing the staff looking, jumping up and down about it, but I look forward to hearing what they come up with in this regard. Thank you.

Thanks . The motion. All those in favour, please. Mover , Councillor Connelly, Councillor Sheather, Councillor Wheeler, Councillor Durick, Councillor Bucker, Councillor Reardon, Councillor Bale, Councillor Zamprogno, Councillor Kotlash, Councillor Richards, Councillor Dogramaci, Councillor Cartwright. Declare it carried. That was our final matter for discussion. So thank you, everybody. I declare the meeting closed at 9.17.