9 April 2024 - Ordinary

Good evening everybody. Welcome to Hawkesbury City Council's meeting for the 9th of April 2024. Hawkesbury City Council acknowledges— sorry , we're doing our acknowledgement of Country, please. Hawkesbury City Council acknowledges the Darug and Darkinjung people as the traditional custodians of the land of the Hawkesbury. We 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. I'll now hand over to the Acting General Manager.

Thanks, Madam Mayor. Members of the public attending the meeting are advised that in the event of an emergency, you'll be asked to proceed in an orderly manner to the nearest exit following the guidance of our warden. I would also like to advise that in accordance with clause 5.33 of the Code of Meeting Practice, meeting of the Council are recorded. In the terms of the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act, this may involve 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 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. The recordings are stored in Council's records management system. Meetings of the Council may be separately recorded with the prior authority of Council. For the benefit of those persons who will be addressing the Council tonight, it is expected that you'll 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.

Finally, it is also requested that if any person participating in or attending the meeting has a mobile phone, they either turn it off or turn it to silent.

Thank you very much. I can see we have all councillors present, so no need for apologies or leave of absences. Any declarations of interest, councillors? Councillor Lyons-Buckett.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. Item 4.3.2, less than significant non-pecuniary.

Thank you. Anybody else? I have one in item 4.2.6, significant non-pecuniary.

Confirmation of minutes please. Can I have someone move that way? Councillor Reardon, seconding Councillor Conolly. All those in favour, please raise your hand. Declare that unanimous. Thank you, Councillors.

There are no agenda items subject to public address, so we move straight into the Mayoral Minute. Now you would have received that as a late supplementary report. I hope you've all had time to read that and digest its contents. I will just speak a little bit on that, and then we can have some debate if anyone else wishes to contribute. As you're well aware, our Hawkesbury community has been devastated yet again by the seventh flood in around four years. It has been traumatic for our community. They have suffered anxiety. As the rain came down on Friday, there was immense concern. Multiple residents and farmers contacting me concerned about their homes and of course their properties. Here we are again for a seventh time.

I know many of you councillors are out on the ground helping our community in these tough times, and it is devastating to see the emotional toll that it takes on everybody in the Hawkesbury. Unfortunately, after a year's worth of advocacy to the New South Wales Premier, he is still yet to acknowledge our invitation with his personal presence here in the Hawkesbury. It is just not good enough. The State Member for Hawkesbury and I, just a week before the rain came down last Friday, put out another media release asking the Premier to please come and talk to us regarding flood mitigation. That was ignored. The rain then came down on the weekend, and I have made multiple requests through many different avenues to try and have a conversation with the Premier.

He has refused to do so. This Mayoral Minute is not to be political and is not to be inflammatory. As you can see from its contents, it is again simply asking the Premier for a meeting. It also recognises that the State and Commonwealth governments have declared the Hawkesbury a natural disaster area, allowing that financial assistance to flow. And I thank them for doing so so quickly, so that we're able to see money on the ground, credit where credit is due. The New South Wales Environmental Protection Agency has also waived the waste levy for 90 days, and the speed with which this decision was made was also welcome. As you can see in point four, I also wish to write to the Minister for Transport about the rails on Richmond Bridge, and we all know the damage and destruction it caused by not lowering those rails.

I think it is vital in point five to extend our gratitude to the relevant agencies for their assistance during this crisis, and I list those relevant agencies there. I also, in point six, think it is timely to continue our advocacy as a council in expediting the construction of the Grose River crossing and the Richmond Bridge duplication, which may give residents options during floods to be able to get across to the other side of the river. Point seven is something that I would like councillors to obviously consider as well, and they are measures that we can do to assist the community in their recovery from this natural disaster. They are by, A, the waiving of interest on overdue rates and annual charges on flood-impacted properties for a period of six months; B, the cessation of debt recovery activity on flood-impacted properties for a period of six months; and C, the waiving of tipping fees for 90 days in relation to green waste generated by flood activity from residential and urban properties.

And I think that's a good way for our council, who of course will have the burden of the recovery efforts on the ground in terms of the damaged roads, parks and sporting infrastructure, to also show our residents who've been affected by floods that we can at least do this for them as well. So as you can see, my mayoral minute is quite comprehensive. I think all of these points are exceptionally vital to make, and I do, of course, stress again to the New South Wales Premier to please have a discussion with us regarding flood mitigation. I have asked—it's not just me he won't speak to. I have asked the state member for Hawkesbury, Robyn Preston, if he has picked up the phone to her, his very own state colleague, and she has said no.

I have heard from a resident today who asked the federal member for Macquarie if he has contacted her, and she also said no. I do not know why the Premier will not talk to anybody in the Hawkesbury about flood mitigation. All we're asking for is a conversation. Thank you, councillors. Any comments to be made?

Councillor Kotlash. Thank you, Madam Mayor, and thank you for this Mayoral Minute. All of those things you've mentioned are essential, so thank you for putting this forward. In part seven, the only thing I was wondering, have we costed, is this the cost of these reductions, has that been done by staff already?

I'll just ask the General Manager to respond, Acting General Manager, sorry.

Thank you.

Or do we want the CFO? Yeah, thank you.

Through you, Madam Mayor, no, but the last time we did it, it was in the order of about $20,000.

Councillor Veigel. Yeah, thank you, Madam Mayor, and thank you for the motion. It's a bit of a no-brainer for me. I'll be supporting it, hands down. I think in lieu of the damage, I think waiving the fees has to be done anyway, so that's a great initiative. And the other sentiments about having the conversations about flood mitigation, which we all know is probably the most dangerous river valley probably in the whole of our nation, needs to be had. I noticed today there's some discussion about knocking the volume of the dam down by 20% to 80, and then going with another upgrade of the desal, which has only been turned on once, I think, since the dam thing was built under the Cartwright—Graham started it.

But even he said it was bottled electricity, and they did put some wind farms down the south, and I guess they've all gone to the tip and they've replenished those anyway with new wind farms to go and power that. I can remember Councillor Conolly, and I think it was Councillor—said that the last floods, I think, would have filled 80%, if not 40%, of the dam within a number of days of the last rain event and it would have been spilling over the spillways anyway. They might want to add that, so. Les is starting to think about what may be done. So again, thank you, and I'll be supporting the motion.

Deputy Mayor.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. Thanks for this mayoral minute. I wanted to mention point 7C about the waiving of the tip fees. The fact that the government has done this is great for the people of Hawkesbury and for many other local government areas as well. But by doing this, I think it demonstrates that the New South Wales government is very aware of the impost of this tax, and that's what it exactly is. It's a tax, straight-out tax on our rubbish. It doesn't serve any other purpose except to raise revenue, as far as I can see. Originally the tax was put there because the money was supposed to be collected and then redistributed to local government to be used to reduce the amount of rubbish and waste in the LGA.

But the money goes to the state government and it just doesn't come back. So it's a straight tax. There are some people in our area that don't go to the tip because of the cost. The fees of putting rubbish there means that they don't go, and so what happens is some of that rubbish ends up being dumped in our streets and particularly our back streets. If those fees weren't as high, then you might get less rubbish on the streets. WesROC has been advocating for many years for the New South Wales government to either abolish this fee or reimburse the funds to local government. And now that state government has sort of admitted by doing this that it is a straight tax, I think we need to raise our voices and join WesROC and say, look, it's about time you rethought this tax and got rid of this waste levy because it's not— It's not helping us.

It's not stopping rubbish from coming to the tip. It's making rubbish go elsewhere, and that's not what we want. Look, I'm glad that they have done this, and I think it's great news for the people of Hawkesbury in this context . But in the long run, this tax shouldn't have been there in the first place.

Thank you, Deputy Mayor. Just confirming, based on what you said, 7C is actually a council-related fee, and the state-related fee is in point 2. Sorry.

Both council and state working together. There you go. Except on mitigation. Councillor Sheather.

Yeah, thanks, Madam Mayor. First, I'd like to thank the different organisations in the preparation, I guess, for what was coming. To predict the storm three or four days out from when it hit us is something that hadn't been done before. And even though that we didn't get the probably predicted height that we would have done if we'd got all the rain—they got it further up than what we got it down here in the catchment—and it's still coming through. It's dropping very slow, actually. But the information that was put out certainly helped our community. I only know of one incident where somebody drove through two barricades to get to wade to stall their car, and I don't know of any other incidents, and I've been out and about. That said, in your third-last paragraph on page 6, you're indicating that you're proposing to write to the Minister, excuse me, in relation to the railing.

It's just not the railing. If the government is going to predict three days out that we're going to get this, and the community take notice, and they did, that we're in for a bit of a wet time, there was an opportunity to lower those rails on the bridge. That didn't happen. And the other opportunity, and I know there has to be a change of policy to allow it to happen, and it's not something that I've advocated in the past, but if we've got a bureau that's indicating a weather pattern is coming through and we've got a dam that's 97% full, there's an opportunity to ease that. And I'm not suggesting they do it the day before the rain; that wouldn't be a good option for us down here. But weather is, it's certainly something that should be looked at.

The last metre of the flood that we had down here was from the dam. So we would have had an eight metre flood if they'd been able to hold that water back, or a little bit over eight metres.

And again, in relation to that paragraph, if you're writing to the Minister in relation to the handrail, there's five ferries. They're responsible at this time for four of them. And it's frightening to go down and see the way that they're being managed during a flood. And if we have a flood that's greater than the second one we had a couple of years ago, there's a chance that we can lose the ferries. There's no tugs or boats or vessels at all that can handle them if they break. And they're not in a situation where, if the water goes higher than what it did, they can be managed where they are without support of some sort. Through the Floodplain Management Committee, we've asked, with the revision that's been done on the floodplain now, that that be investigated and a one-in-a-hundred-year at least plan be put forward and make the community aware of that.

But I would ask, if you're writing to the minister, that you could include or ask for that plan to be expedited on the basis that we have had seven floods in a couple of years. And I suggest that we're going into a wet period, we're likely to have more, and with things as, I guess, as easy as a handrail to fix and the inconvenience to the people there, if we take four ferries, even one of them, but if we take four ferries off the river, we've got a situation much worse than a North Richmond Bridge. So, Madam Mayor, I know a lot of us don't use the ferries, but there's a great deal of our community that do. And if they were to be taken out, it would be disastrous.

Thank you, Councillor. I'm very happy to add that to point four. So my letter to the Minister for Transport, Jo Haylen, would be to request an urgent response as to why the safety rails on Richmond Bridge were once again not lowered and also ask for their plan for the ferries in our area when it floods. So just to have that understanding, councillors. Thank you. Councillor Conolly.

Thank you. I support the mayoral minute. I just want to make one observation or point, I guess, about a communication while people are listening over these times. I think it's good to be really clear that what mitigation means. Obviously, we've spent the last two or three years talking about Warragamba Dam while we had a government that was interested in doing that. Whether we all agree or not, we now have a government that's ideologically opposed to considering raising Warragamba Dam, and it's just not going to happen. But we can't just let them off the hook by saying they're opposed to just that option. The Resilient Valleys, Resilient Communities report, I think it was, one of the reports looked at nine options and said this option of raising Warragamba Dam wall by 14 metres has by far the best cost-benefit analysis and disregarded all the other options and proceeded on that basis.

So whenever we say mitigation and they argue back that raising Warragamba Dam is a bad idea, they're ignoring the fact that there was eight other options, including evacuation routes, other levees, reducing the level of the dam. Obviously, the studies found none of those options are as good, and we think that. But if that option's off the table, then they need to be held to account that there's other options that could be explored. The Premier even came here before the election, stood at Pitt Town and spoke about all these options he's interested in, and got elected and has said not a word, and we have no idea what the plan is. So I think in our media we should start being clear that there's other options other than the dam, and it's not all about the dam.

It's about actually doing something.

Great points, Councillor. Thank you so much. Councillor Lyons-Buckett.

Thank you, Madam Mayor, and I couldn't agree stronger with what Councillor Connelly has just said. In fact, one of the main things I've advocated in over 10 years around flooding is to look at those localised solutions around mitigation, and that hasn't been supported in here. In fact, there was no support for the lowering of the water in the dam in October of 2022. A letter was sent to the minister saying that the majority in here did not support that. So I'm pleased to have seen there's been some changes of heart to look at localised solutions. I think that that is really important. And one problem with the resilient valleys strategy was that it was a regional strategy. So what they did was they picked out the major things within the region that could be done, and that failed to look at the local solutions that could be done.

And we could have been working for years on moving towards those, but we've missed that opportunity. I think I only saw this when I got here today, so I've had a quick look through. Of course I support doing whatever we can. I'm very frustrated, as Councillor Sheather also was, around the railing situation. And I'm wondering if instead of actually just asking for why they did it or why they don't do it, they clearly seem incapable of doing it. Can we ask for the delegation to do it ourselves, to have the council do it? Because it frustrates me as someone who crosses it, that river, that we will now have months of having people sitting on the edge of the bridge while we have some slow going over.

They rebuild a thing. The community finds it laughable, and I think that we should be able to be the people in charge of that. We're in charge of opening other things up, so maybe that could be the request, because I don't think anything is to be gained by just simply asking why they didn't do it, because they've already given some absurd response, which was that the dam spill was earlier than they thought, that the bridge was closed before the dam even spilt. So. They also. We asked this question in March of 2022, and the excuse then was that they had a new maintenance contractor who was involved, and the time before that, their crews were busy somewhere else. So I really think that it is insulting to this council and our people that that's the response that we get for transport for New South Wales.

I think that they can do better, and I think that, quite frankly, we would do better. Madam Mayor, I just wanted to ask regarding, it does seem that you are very connected to having to meet with the Premier. The last Premier didn't come out here, and I'm just wondering, your meeting with the Minister for Water this week, I believe, could these matters on the agenda to be raised?

Thank you, Councillor. No, they weren't, because the meeting with the Minister was booked about a month or six weeks ago, and that was purely to do with rising Main Creek and the sewer. But I'm happy to raise them with her, but that was not the point of the meeting.

Okay. Well, I think it would be an opportune moment to obviously raise these various issues that we have around there. It is clear that people are becoming more prepared around flooding as individuals, but also as communities. There's some great community initiatives that kick in as soon as that happens, and I didn't see it pointed out anywhere, but I was very pleased to see that this time, even though both bridges didn't close, but in preparation there were ambulances stationed at the Baptist Church in Kurrajong, ready for if ambulances were to be needed west of the river. So that's one big change that I think people were concerned about before, and that was really good to see.

Sorry, I'm just reading my quickly written notes that— oh, the other thing is regarding the writing of letters to ministers, which of course appear to go into some big void a lot of the time. I'm just wondering if you could request a time frame for a response on those so that we can get that back. And I do see today, or I see Councillor Wheeler's got the article, but I saw the headline, but I hadn't read the whole article of a plan around drinking water, which for Sydney that's come out from the Premier today. And of course that is all interlinked. When we have a dam, when people are speaking about anything to do with flood mitigation, it all connects with where we get our water supply for.

And of course what we have seen with this heavy rain event just recently is what we have known and has been predicted for a number of years, connected to climate change, the intensification of the water cycle, which is going to see a lot more events like this coming through. So that's the angle we need to be preparing for. And I'm happy to support this Mayoral minute. I hope it brings forward some actions, and I think there's also— I'm hoping that we will have a disaster and emergency management meeting post this event so that we can also raise some other issues that have been brought forward during this

Thank you, Councillor. Yes, Councillor Conolly.

Sorry, I just want— just, I know I've already spoken. Just to correct the record though, and be fair to everyone, we did actually have visits from both Premier Perrottet and Premier Berejiklian, where when I was there, I had the opportunity to put forward our points of view and have a chance to have a say and a conversation.

Thank you, Councillor. I appreciate that. Councillors and progno.

Thank you, Madam Mayor . I could repeat almost verbatim what I've said in the past about this. The numbers say, and I repeat this today because this has come out of the Premier's mouth today, we're looking at all the options, including running the dam at 80% capacity. Dropping the dam by five metres represents about 18% of its capacity. So the plan that was looked at years ago of dropping the dam by five metres would have meant that at the end of the previous drought. So by February 2020, when we were coming to the end of a drought, the dam was at 42%. If the dam had started from 80% full prior to that drought kicking in, rather than starting at 80%— sorry, if it had started at full, it got down to 42%.

If it had started at 80%, it would have gotten down to 26%, which is the lowest the dam has ever been since its construction, lower even than the millennium drought, where the dam got down to about 32%. Sydney would effectively run out of water. And I know that tempers are high, emotions are high, when we're just going through yet another drought. I'm looking further ahead to the next drought, and just as surely there will be another drought, just like there's going to be another flood, and possibly an even worse flood. And I'm really concerned that if we drop the level of the dam, we're setting ourselves up for a real pinch in Sydney's water supply, and I don't believe that a desalination plant will replace that water supply.

So it's a vexed issue. I agree with the resolved position of this chamber. The best solution is to raise Warragamba Dam. The best solution is to raise Warragamba Dam. The best solution will always be to raise Warragamba Dam.

Thank you, Councillor. Councillor Dogramaci.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. I have to be different, of course, and I'm looking from a salesperson's point of view. Raising the Warragamba Dam is not going to happen, number one. We don't have the money. It's about $3 billion, while as a country we are in $ 1.4 trillion. That's 12 zeros in debt, and it's going up and up. And as per your minute, which I support fully, but I'm wondering if, when you mention that credit where it is due, don't you think that we should add a few things in there when you say, you suggest that inviting the Premier means, is it also possible that, you know, we could also invite Dominic, who was the Premier, and if I remember, we have invited him on several occasions and he refused to come in, as well as his Transport Minister at the time.

Maybe they should come in as well to give us the reason of not doing what you are suggesting, means, and his Transport Minister. We were expecting to do so. Could you do that?

Councillor, they aren't in the positions of that anymore. The Opposition Leader is currently Mark Speakman, and I spent about three hours with him here today in the Hawkesbury, which I'm sure he'll make an announcement about in due course.

Perhaps they should come in and give us the reason of not doing what we are expecting Chris Minns and his Transport Minister. Those individuals

That you have discussed, I believe, don't hold relevant portfolios.

Okay. Thank you .

Any other councillors wishing to speak? Councillor Wheeler. Thanks, Madam Mayor.

This feels very much like Groundhog Day, really. I mean, here we go again. I think while I welcome the Minns government's announcement today, what he's said is that there's going to be a rethink of the water security policy. He's not made any promises. In 2018, he floated the idea of lowering Warragamba's maximum limit. Obviously, not the greatest of times, given that we were in a record drought.

I think what we are at least seeing from the Labor government is a discussion that has moved on from Warragamba. And the problems with the Warragamba Dam plan appear to have been that we've put all our eggs in one basket and now we've thrown out the basket. So while there were eight other options on the table, there's not been a lot of activity on those. And to be fair, there wasn't a lot of activity on those because everyone was focused on the most expensive silver bullet solution in that plan. What I think we should be really concerned about is that all the peripheral things that could and should have been done while we were focusing on that haven't. Management of the bridges hasn't improved.

Evacuation routes haven't been fixed. We still haven't— while we've done, we've been getting our stuff, our plans in order. It would appear that the agencies that we rely on around us, particularly the state government agencies, aren't there. So the RFS is well practised, the SES is well practised, God knows council is now really well practised. Where are the state agencies in this picture? And that's what I think is most disappointing around this. I heard Sydney Water talking on the ABC radio on Friday about the potential for releasing water from the dam, and the spokesperson from Sydney Water said, Well, we can't do that now because we don't want it to hit the Hawkesbury basin at the same time as the Colo and the Grose.

And if I wasn't driving, I may have hit something because the fact that it's the Friday before the event that they're considering it is frankly gobsmacking to me as I've sat and watched this mess unfold repeatedly over two to three years. And I despair that someone in his position appears to be working on such a very short time frame, and that's the problem. I think we have to be realistic. If the Liberal Party was still in power, nothing would have changed either, because we'd still be talking about raising the dam wall and we wouldn't have done it yet. Much of this flood came from the Grose and South Creek. So to talk about Warragamba Dam being the best option, I think is quite myopic and blinkered.

The best solution actually is to stop putting people in harm's way, and that's what's missing from all of this discussion. So we're talking about mitigation, but we're not talking about planning, and we're not talking about where we go post these events. We know now what the future holds for us here. We know that squeezing more and more people into the areas surrounding the floodplain, stripping councils of their planning powers and packing more people under the guise of affordable housing, or whatever we're going to call it, into those areas that are effectively the South Creek catchment, that lands in the lounge rooms of and the kitchens of Hawkesbury residents is a really, really poor move.

We are the unfortunate beneficiaries of some very poor planning. Policies. So all those people living on the evacuation routes, all the lack of permeable surfaces for absorption, and then our increasing developments both on the floodplain and west of the river, where people can't get out across that floodplain unless they go all the way around the mountain if the road is open, and it wasn't for a good 12 hours on Saturday, opened a muster ad by volunteers who worked from four o'clock in the morning to get that road back open. These are really short-sighted things. The hubris involved in thinking that we can just twiddle around the edges and make this work is really staggering. We need a further debrief on this.

There's a whole lot of things that we still haven't mastered: the ferries, the evacuation centres still in gambling and alcohol-fuelled venues, how we support people who can't afford to stock up on a week's worth of food to isolate, what we do about Google Maps and their poor changeover of information. All of these things are things that we need to consider. Yes, we need to get the state government out here looking at it. I mean, they did come out on the weekend. I think, you know, the Premier didn't, but the ministers did. And I think there's no substitute for having people stand there beside the swollen river and really understand the magnitude of that flood. But there is so much work to be done here, and I find it so enormously frustrating that we are just going around and around on this and not talking about the real issue, which is that we have to stop putting housing into this floodplain.

Thank you, Councillor. Any other councillors wishing to speak? Councillor Reardon.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. I'd just like to say I'm very supportive of your Mayoral Minute. I think all the points are very relevant, and I think the evacuation routes are very important too. Great.

Thank you,

Councillor.

Thank you, councillors, for that debate. You will note that I did not once mention the raising of the Warragamba Dam wall deliberately in my Mayoral Minute. We're very aware of this State Government's position and, of course, our contrasting position here in Hawkesbury City Council, but that ship may have sailed right now. So what I want to do is discuss what they are going to do to protect us and lower that risk here in the floodplain. So thank you for your contribution, councillors. I'll now put forward the Mayoral Minute. All those in favour, please raise your hand. In favour, Councillor Reardon, Councillor Bygott, Councillor Sheather, Councillor Conolly, Councillor Kotlash, Councillor Calvert, Councillor Dogramaci, Councillor Djuric, Councillor Lyons-Buckett, Councillor Wheeler, Councillors Improgno and Councillor McMahon.

I declare the item carried, and I thank everybody here for their unanimous support.

We now move to the items on block.

Those items are 4.2.1, 4.2.2, 4.4.1, 4.4.2 and 5.1.2. The item in confidential 8.3.1 is also on block, but we will go into confidential for that. Can I please ask that someone move the items on block? Councillor Kotlash, seconded by Councillor Calvert. All those in favour, please raise your hand. Favour: Councillor Reardon, Councillor Vargo, Councillor Sheather, Councillor Conolly, Councillor Kotlash, Councillor Calvert, Councillor Dogramaci, Councillor Djuric, Councillor Lyons-Buckett, Councillor Wheeler, Councillors Improgno and Councillor McMahon. I declare those items carried.

The next item is 4.2.3, 2024 Floodplain Management Australia National Conference. Do I have someone willing to move that way, please? Councillor Lyons-Buckett. Seconder, Councillor Wheeler. Thank you, Councillor Lyons-Buckett.

Thank you, Madam Mayor, and I'm pleased this has been brought forward. I was worrying that there was maybe not a flood conference this year and it couldn't be more timely. I think that—I was thinking about that. I assume some councillors here will be keen to go. I've read through the program. From my personal perspective, I'd be keen to do just one day in an online forum because a lot of this conference this year is very highly technical, and I think the more relevant things are more just in a single day. So, just putting that forward. I don't think that we have, in the past couple of years, we've had someone from the planning department do a presentation, which has put us out there, and I see that this year there is one relating to the Hawkesbury-Nepean from Stephen Yeo.

But I was thinking, and maybe we could work towards this as a council, and especially in light of the last item that was just on, that it would be really great at some point to put forward some sort of perspective from us here in this council of what it's like to be confronted with these floods over and over. Because there's a gap when you go to these things of anyone actually—there's a lot of the technical, which is great, but there's not a lot around the whole what it's like to be either an elected body or just a small council grappling with what it's like to face these cumulative disasters occurring. And I would hope that at some point through our conversations or something, we can consider maybe somebody or somehow doing it, I don't know what the logistics would be.

But I think it would be really good to translate what we've learned and what challenges we face so that other people may have solutions or they may benefit from what we've learned. And I think that would be a really good opportunity because it is a wonderful conference, and I think that we could contribute more than we have, and I think that would be a really good thing that we could do.

Thank you, Councillor. Any other councillors wishing to speak?

Councillor Kotlash. Thank you, Madam Mayor. I agree with Councillor Lyons-Buckett on this one. I think that it's important

That we possibly send more staff as well. I mean, it's good for councillors to be involved, but maybe in a more reduced setting, as has been indicated by the flexibility within the conference to go for different sessions. But I'd be keen to have more staff than we generally send to conferences go to this particular one. It is technical, and I think that that is the most appropriate thing to do. And also because we'll have a new council in September, it'd be good to start to build our staff knowledge as well as, I mean, it's perfectly fine for councillors to go, but to have that more technical knowledge, give our staff that opportunity to have more technical knowledge, I think is important. So I'd be happy to have that $16,000 or whatever it was from the training budget to go to more staff going. Thank you.

Thank you, Councillor. Councillor Wheeler. Thanks

Madam Mayor. I agree with Councillor Lyons-Buckett that this is a really important conference. I've been a couple of times, the first time as a very new councillor and before I'd seen a decent flood in the Hawkesbury, and it's actually a really sobering conference to attend as a Hawkesbury councillor. Because when you introduce yourself from the Hawkesbury, people laugh, and they don't laugh in a gosh, that was a funny joke way. And that's before we've had, you know, seven floods over two and a half years. And for me, that was a bit of a wake-up call, I think, that we are responsible for an incredibly dangerous and difficult complex floodplain. I learnt a lot at that conference, in part from attending a number of sessions with Council's then drainage engineer, who had a very different approach to the way he thought about floodplain management.

And it was the discussions, I think, that we had around some of those sessions that we attended. And there were three councillors at that conference, and it allowed us to spread ourselves across the concurrent sessions, which was also really valuable. If you haven't been to a conference and you can afford the time to do it, I'd really encourage you to do so as a councillor. I think it's really important. I would also like to attend virtually for a day. There's one day in particular that probably has the bulk of the useful sessions in it. But I think this is a conference that we really need to prioritise our attendance to. It's not really an advocacy. This is a real learning conference, and back when we had planning responsibilities, it was more planning responsibilities.

It was incredibly important, I think, for councillors to attend, but still remains. So given that we still have planning proposals come to us, a really important conference for councilors to understand the magnitude of the problems with the Hawkesbury Nepean. Floodplain, but also a whole lot of technical information and lessons learnt by other floodplains. Just listening to the information that came out of the Brisbane floods I found really helpful, and it allows us, I think, to better plan and to better take into account the issues that we face as a council. It also keeps us in the game in front of people who are working really actively across other floodplains. It's not one of those conferences that you go to where there's a whole lot of fluff or a whole lot of commercial entities talking at you.

It's one of those conferences where you walk away thinking, Gosh, I've just got to sit down and digest all this information, because it really has been, you know, it's quite heavy and it's, as I said earlier, quite sobering. So I think certainly good use of the training budget. Just a side question that I'm happy to have taken on notice. We were supposed to meet with a member of council staff to look at the allocation of the training budget for each councillor a couple of years ago, and that hasn't happened, and none of us have received any of the promised training. I know we've had several natural disasters and COVID, and that has thrown everything out of whack, but councillors are better able to do their job if we take advantage of that training budget, and none of us have been able to.

Thanks.

Thanks, Councillor. I've just asked if we can get the cost of the online attendance so that we do know what we are looking at. Do you

Know that? I think it was around 780 or something

Like that. Just so councillors know what they're voting on. Yeah. Thank you, Councillor Sheather.

Yeah, thanks, Madam Mayor. Of all the conferences the council has got the opportunity to attend, this is probably the most relevant. Some of the comments that Councillor Lyons-Buckett made in relation to standout communities in disaster, I guess. Lismore and Parks were the ones that got hit probably worse than all of us. They had a big presence, and the outcome was that the support they got from the government was massive in both places. And I know the Mayor of Parks and one of the councillors at Lismore, and the support that they got,

I don't know whether you could say it was generated through this conference, but anybody that was there, it was in your face. And there's members of Parliament there and their representatives, and people like Stephen Gow, who knows the Hawkesbury flood situation better than anyone that I know. And he's in a position where he is given a paper. But one of the things, I guess that—excuse me—

We get discussed, when I say we, the Hawkesbury gets discussed at every floodplain conference, I can tell you that. Because we're the one that's way above the disaster zone, I guess, that any other council in Australia's got. So when they talk about places like Lismore, and they've got PMF heights of six or seven metres, and then they talk about the Hawkesbury of 26, the only downside to it, I guess, that it's that bad

That some people think it won't happen.

And I guess that's what they thought about Lismore until a couple of years ago. Statistically, you know, we've got one in 20-year floods. We've had 126 of them, or around that height, with one big flood in European settlement. So I'm guessing the next one's a lot closer than what it was yesterday. To have the support of the national conference is essential.

The amount of councils that go there, and again, they would reflect the situation that we're in, and we would be talked about because we've had seven floods in a couple of years. So while it's not high floods, it's frequency. So it's really, really important that we attended. Last year we did give a paper There was probably, I don't know, 500 people in the room, and the question that was asked of the staff, and it was what can be done to mitigate. And it was discussed on the basis that Warragamba was off the list. And Stephen Yeo was sitting in the gallery. He didn't say it, but there's a couple of other people in there did. From the gallery, he said nothing. Now, these are engineers that do papers and stuff, like Stephen and the like, and it really had people sitting back.

So when we ask for things to be looked at, the conference, and there can be motions put at the conference and the like, but we have got people looking after us in that regard as well. And I know that our staff has a lot to do with those requests and the likes, but it's really important that we back that up. We back that up as a council and have representation there. We're certainly looked upon as being the worst situation in relation to flooding. And I guess it's with respect in the sense that what we've had so far we've dealt with appropriately. But any council that goes there would not be dissatisfied with the outcome at the end of such a conference, Madam Mayor. If any Councillor , you know, has the time to attend a conference, I'd suggest that this is one of the better ones.

Thank you, Councillor. Just before I ask if anyone else is willing to speak, I asked the staff to have a look at the online costs, and they can't find that there is any. There's no participation online. There

Doesn't seem to be. I apologise for that. I did see it says online registration, but that's talking about registering online, and then it has the day figure against that, which is $245. So,

Yeah, it looks like it's in person only. So just letting Councillors know when you're considering going, or how many we send, that that would be the cost. And I think if you're looking at the cost per delegate plus accommodation and travel, you're probably, I'd say, roughly two and a half per person, because you've got flights and accommodation for all of those nights. Any other Councillors wishing to speak?

No. So, Councillors, I'll put the recommendation, and then we will have a Councillors nominate who's interested in going. All those in favour of the recommendation, please raise your hand. In favour, Councillor Reardon, Councillor Veigel, Councillor Sheather, Councillor Conolly, Councillor Kotlash, Councillor Calvert, Councillor Dogramaci, Councillor Djuric, Councillor Lyons-Buckett, Councillor Wheeler, Councillor Zamprogno, and Councillor McMahon. I declare that carried. Who is interested in attending the conference now realising it's in person and you'll need to fly there? Councillor Sheather?

Anyone else interested? It's a long time to go to Queensland. I think it's five days, five days in Queensland. Okay, so just Councillor Sheather. Yep. Thank you, Councillor.

2024 National General Assembly of Local Government submission of motions. Do I have someone wishing to move? Councillor Conolly, seconded by Councillor Veigel. Councillor Conolly. I just realised, Councillor Lonezbucker, I didn't give you right of reply, sorry, last item. I didn't think it was necessary. It was not necessary. No, no, thank you. No debate needed. Thank you, Councillor Conolly. Anyone else wishing to speak? Councillor Lonezbucker. Just

Briefly, Madam Mayor, and just that this was the motion that Councillor Wheeler and I had foreshadowed that was coming, which is around the community transport. There was, we did have a member of the public speak earlier on, and we sort of said we'd, I don't know, nobody translated what was said into a motion, but I think that the issue that was raised, which was around asking the government for the Productivity Commission to look at the feasibility of reducing government to two levels, I'm not sure there'd be any politicians keen about that in any level of government, although I wouldn't have an objection to it. But that is perhaps something that we can just raise in the conversation when we're there or in the local government council, because we didn't get a motion in around that.

But if anybody had any issues around what's presented here, I don't think anybody must have because nobody's asked, but that's the motion that we'll be submitting .

Thank you, Councillor. Anyone else wishing to speak? Right of reply, Councillor Conolly. Not necessary. All those in favour, please raise your hand. In favour: Councillor Reardon, Councillor Veigel, Councillor Sheather, Councillor Conolly, Councillor Kotlash, Councillor Calvert, Councillor Dogramaci, Councillor Djuric, Councillor Lyons-Buckett, Councillor Wheeler, Councillor Zamprogno, Councillor McMahon. I declare the item carried.

The next item is 4.2.5, event sponsorship policy. Do I have anyone wishing to move that way? Councillor Sheather, seconded Councillor Reardon. Councillor Sheather.

No need for debate, thank you. Any other councillors wishing to speak? Councillor Wheeler. Thanks, Madam Mayor

A question on the criteria. I see we've certainly made some adjustments to it. Could I suggest an additional one, which is that we shift disability access out of that section on buildings and put it as a separate criteria. We've got separate criteria for First Nations, cultural events, heritage, and cultural events. Could we pull disability access out on its own to emphasise the importance of it? And then one other comment. I'm not entirely sure that the question,

If only I could read my own writing, the question on supporting, that's right, it's the question about supporting businesses , sorry, commercial events repeatedly , and it goes from one to three. So if it's not been done at all, it gets a three, and if it's been done for several times already, it gets a one. I would suggest that it would be better to go from zero to two rather than from one to three in that section. I think when we discussed this previously, the idea was that we didn't add additional weight to events that we had been supporting for a long time if they still weren't able to be standalone. And I think by giving them a one just for having got lots of money before, we are in fact doing exactly that. So that's just two things. Thanks.

Thanks, Councillor. We'll just have to add a point three to make sure that we're voting on those changes. I think we're just coming up with some words, were we, or would you like to repeat again? Sorry , I need to then see if you're happy with that. Yeah

The first bit you were talking about, what page was that on?

Councillor, can you just give me some concise words for those two points?

Look at this cross chamber debate. So you've got that bit? Yes, thank you. And the second part?

That the word venue on your objectives be changed to event. Yep

We're getting that. And that

Under Council support, that the score be from zero to two rather than from one to three.

Councillor Sheather, are you happy with that? Count it as a point three. Councillor Reardon, you're okay to second that? Thank you very much. Any other Councillor wishing to speak?

No, we'll just get that point three up on the board.

We just added in point one, say that it'd be adopted.

Oh, okay. Just a confirmation, we're adding it into point one, so it's part of point one. You're okay, Councillor Sheather, Councillor Reardon? Yes, thank you very much.

We'll just wait for that to go up before I put it to the vote.

Councillor Sheather, did I ask you for a right of reply? Well

I'm asking now.

Thank you . You're good.

Okay, here we go.

So there you go, Councillors, everything as discussed. Those in favour, please raise your hand. In favour are Councillor Reardon, Councillor Veigel, Councillor Sheather, Councillor Conolly, Councillor Kotlash, Councillor Calvert, Councillor Dogramaci, Councillor Djuric, Councillor Lyons-Buckett, Councillor Wheeler, Councillors Improgno and Councillor McMahon. I declare the item carried.

Next item is 4.2.6, Sister City Program 2022/2023. I will be declaring a significant non-pecuniary interest as someone associated with my family is attending this year's Sister City Program. I will ask the Deputy Mayor to chair this item. Thank you.

Thank you

Councillors. Item 4 .2.6, there's a recommendation on page 36. Does anyone wish to move anything? Councillor Lyons-Buckett.

Councillor Lyons-Buckett. Thank you.

Thank you, Deputy Mayor. Thank you, Councillor Reardon. I've just got a question first. I can't see anything—this all relates to the current budget, the figures that are in there. Is there something allocated in the upcoming operational plan? I couldn't find it as an individual item. Do you know the figure offhand?

Through you, Deputy Mayor, it's the same allocation as it was for this financial year. Okay.

Thank you very much. I'm pleased to move this. Councillor Sheather and I attend these meetings. Can I have a

Seconder, please?

Councillor Reardon. I've got it as Councillor Reardon. Okay,

Thank you. It's great to see the Sister City getting back on track. There's a wonderful group of people who work really hard to get this program up and going, who coordinate it, and it's really clear through the involvement of the previous participants how intergenerational it is. So you've got several generations of people there all working together to organise and liaise with the people in Japan and in Temple City in the U.S. And there's been a really large amount of interest from students this year for the applications. So they've been going through the process of selecting who will be going and organising with the schools for when people are coming. And I think that this program, you can see it benefits so much wider than for the students who actually just get the opportunity to go and those who come, because there's so many other people involved.

And even for the other students in the school where these visiting students go, they get to learn a little bit about the culture and have some firsthand information, so interaction with people from another place. I think that it's very good, and I'm glad that we're continuing to support it. They're also doing quite a bit of fundraising and it's, of course, not cheap anymore to be sending students overseas, and that's not what we're doing. Obviously they do that themselves, but we're giving a little bit of support in the running of this very valuable program.

Any further speakers? Councillor Sheather.

Yeah, thanks, Mr Deputy Mayor. I'd just like to voice similar to what Councillor Lyons-Buckett said. Very few groups I've seen that are dedicated to a cause, as the sister city. The participation that Councillor Lyons-Buckett was talking about, there was 42 applicants, and they take a bit of culling. They all want to go. The group of people, the majority of them are ladies. There's a couple that feel out of place there a bit sometimes. But it's the work that they do is, well, I guess, you know, as a council, we should be very proud of a group of people that work as hard as they do for the purpose they do, sending young students to other parts of the world. It's a great thing, and considering the amount of years that dropped off because of COVID and other things, and to be revitalised like it is today is a fantastic job.

The council and staff will get to meet the students before they go. They will come and speak at a future council meeting, which I don't think is too far away. But you'll have the opportunity to see those that have been picked and meet some of the committee.

Further speakers? Councillor Reardon.

Yes , Mr Deputy Mayor, I'd just like to say, as a former travel consultant, I think we can't overemphasise the educational content of travelling for young people.

Thank you. Anybody else?

Can I just say I'd like to thank this committee for the work they do, and I'd like to thank Councillor Sheather and Councillor Lyons-Buckett for the work they do on the committee. I was formerly a member of this committee, and it's a very hardworking committee which has a lot to do, but it's a very rewarding committee too when you see those students come back from overseas and discover what they found when they went over there. It really is good. So I'm very happy to support this recommendation as well. No further speakers. Councillor Lyons-Buckett, do you wish right of reply? No, I'll put the motion. All those in favour, please raise your hand. In favour, Councillor Reardon, Councillor Veigel, Councillor Sheather, Councillor Conolly, Councillor Kotlash, Councillor Dogramaci, Councillor Djuric, Councillor Lyons-Buckett, Councillor Wheeler, Councillor Samprogno, and Councillor Calvert.

Absent is Councillor McMahon. Declare it carried.

The next item is 4.3.1, Disability Inclusion Action Plan 2023 to 2026. Do I have someone? Councillor Lyons-Buckett, seconded Councillor Reardon. Councillor Lyons-Buckett.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. Just briefly, I just had a question. I'm pleased to see that this plan is going to be adopted. It's a very important plan. And what I wanted to just ask a question about was from the submission from the member of the public that had come in. The answers are there on page 45. But I just wondered with point two, where somebody has drawn attention to how heavy the doors are, that, I mean, surely the response is that there's nothing planned in the capital works program. Surely we can go out and, I don't know, lubricate the hinges or do something to make a door easier to open for people. I know there's nothing worse watching people trying to battle to get into a building. I just think we can do better than that. And I would just ask if can somebody please come up with a solution. I'm sure there's many ways you can lessen how heavy those doors are. Thank you.

Thank you, Councillor. Councillor Wheeler.

Thanks, Madam Mayor. Look, I'll echo Councillor Lyons-Buckett's concern. There's no point asking people what they want in an inclusion action plan if the response is, Look, we haven't budgeted for that, thanks very much. If someone with a physical disability is struggling to open this door and is willing to take the time and effort to fill in or to put in a submission to this and have no doubt waited until they've had an opportunity to do that, there are no doubt many more people Frail,

Elderly people without a great deal of physical strength, smaller people of quite small stature, children, mothers with prams, parents trying to hold a kid and open a door at the same time, who can't open this door. It's ludicrous that we are told that people can't get in, and our response is, Sorry, we haven't got any money for that. We have, if you cast your eyes over the operational plan, we have money for lots of things. I think enabling someone to access a public building, a community centre, in fact, probably could be bumped up the list a tiny bit. I'd be very pleased to see this plan enacted.

Disability inclusion is one of those things where if you've not had to live with someone with a disability, you don't get it. You know, one of the classic examples is getting someone in and out of a vehicle. I lived for six months with my father, severely incapacitated from a stroke. Getting him in and out of a car in a shopping centre was such a battle that still 30 years after his death, it fills me with fury when I see someone parking in a disabled space because they can't be bothered going for a walk. And I know that not all disabilities are clearly visible, but some people clearly are abusing those spaces, and it infuriates me that we make it so hard for people to just go about their daily lives because of a lack of, just a lack of knowledge, I think.

Very rarely are these things done with ill intent. What we know, though, when we include people through action plans like this, is that when we make it better for people living with disabilities, we make it better for everybody. And that should be something that we are keen to focus on. And they're not just physical disabilities. They are, you know... Sensory disabilities , visual loss of vision, loss of hearing, all sorts of difficulties that make people's lives more difficult, and that we can, in some respects, make easier through our own actions. Thanks.

Thank you, Councillor. Councillor Veigel.

Yeah, thanks, Madam Mayor. Just to the point with the doors there, it is a safety mitigation issue, and if they are too difficult to use, can somebody go and have a look and have them assessed? Is that possible? I've got no problem with the motion here, but the point is that somebody says the doors are there. I'd hate to think if I was in a wheelchair and got help, or anybody in a wheelchair in this place, and I pray and hope that never happens, you try and get access to a hinged door like that. That's not too good. It could just be just the door closes on it, for all I know. But I think for the point of going and have a look at it, for a few hundred dollars might fix the problem. Can I strongly suggest that council go and assess it, please?

Thank you, Councillor. Councillor Sheather.

Yeah, Madam Mayor, my comments are probably similar. First, the question: it's got time frame year one, two and three. That just means that it's rolling on; we're doing a bit each year. Is that what that is? Yep. I see in the budget that it was adopted earlier, Winston Mall upgrade and renewal works at $368,000. That's aside from the livability program. And we mentioned it, I don't know whether it was in a meeting, but— If it's not a centre meeting now, we've got yellow signs in the mall that say trip hazard or the like, not overly encouraging for visitors. And the liveability projects not going to happen for some time. There's quite a process to go through. I know this is next year's budget, but I suspect there's probably something.

I didn't go back into last year's to have a look. But the trip hazards and stuff that's around the town, where there is money to fix them, we should be looking at them. I don't care if we put a pot plant on it, put a seat over it, I don't really care. We don't necessarily have to rip up the whole paddock to fix it necessarily. But there's some things we can do to minimise that with minimal costs. And as Councillor Wheeler said, if we're going to ask for people, and this disability action plan is something that we should be taking really serious, people with disabilities, and I'm heading that way myself actually, but we should be helping, in all sincerity, people that have disabilities. We've got a plan, and we should be working to it.

And so if there's areas where we haven't got finance to do it, then perhaps it should come to Council if it's an issue. We've got things like bus, bus train stations, access into shop and centres and the like. They should be priority. People need to go there all the time. If you're walking your dog down the street, well, you're taking the dog for a walk. That might be a different story. But where we're, like around car parks and bus stops, shelters and things like that, we should be doing our very best to rectify any issues there. And the mall's one of them. You know, like we get a lot of people in there for weekend, and it's embarrassing to see those signs there. And I know that we need to warn people.

That's fair enough. But if we're going to put yellow signs up to warn people about tripping, we need to start at Putty and finish up at Bran Bre. You know, some of our pathways and walkways are pretty ordinary. They've been there a long time, and that's part of the character of the area. I'm not suggesting that we fix all of them, but there's areas where people with disabilities don't go that aren't perhaps a priority, but where they do go, and frequent, is a priority. So, in supporting the plan, I just hope we can move up

To it.

Thank you, Councillor. Deputy Mayor.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. I want to firstly congratulate the staff and any community members that were involved in putting this together. I think it's a great document. I was involved in previous issues of this a while back, and I've always thought it's something that we really need to focus on in our community. And this document addresses most of the issues very well. It's not always easy when you're in heritage towns like Richmond and Windsor because much of the infrastructure there was built, you know, over 100 years ago, and People didn't think about access and inclusion back in those days, and you've got things like the sandstone gutters in Richmond, for example, which are quite a hurdle if you're in a wheelchair.

So I think this document goes a long way towards addressing some of those as well. So the other thing is that, as I've learnt from previous issues of this, that it's not a once and for all document. It's not an inflexible document that will never change. It is an ongoing process, and in a couple of years' time, in 2026, I think it is, 26, yeah, we'll be looking at the next one. And I urge people, if they see things in here that need to be fixed or corrected, please let us know. And you don't need to sort of hit us over the head with it. Just let us know what those issues are, and we'll include them on an ongoing basis. But I can't see any big issues that that'll happen with, but if there are, let us know.

So basically I just want to say there's been a lot of work in this, and well done. Thank you.

Thank you, Deputy Mayor. Anyone else wishing to speak? Right of reply. Oh, do you have a microphone? No, I can't see the light. No, okay,

Thank you. Right of reply. Councillor Lyons-Buckett. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Not much to say except to say I forgot to say before that it's really good that the working group will continue and be involved, as will other stakeholders with the implementation, because it's one thing to make a plan; it's an entirely different thing to ensure that the content of the plan is actually translated into the physical structures and the actions that the plan says that it will have. So I'm really pleased to see that. Thank you.

Thank you. All those in favour, please raise your hand. In favour, Councillor Reardon, Councillor Veigel, Councillor Sheather, Councillor Conolly, Councillor Collash, Councillor Calvert, Councillor Dogramaci, Councillor Djuric, Councillor Lyons-Buckett, Councillor Wheeler, Councillors Amprogno and Councillor McMahon. I declare the item carried.

The next item is 4.3.2, fire safety complaint. Councillor Lyons-Buckett, could you read your declaration? Thank you, Madam Mayor. I have a less than significant non-pecuniary interest in item 4.3.2. We own a property in the vicinity of the property which is mentioned in this item. I will remain in the chamber because I have no knowledge of or connection with the property or the property owner, and the report is a receive and note of a report. Thank you

Thank you, Councillor. Someone wishing to move that way? Councillor Conolly, seconded Councillor Kotlash. Councillor Conolly.

Not much to say. I think the report's self-explanatory, and we should receive and note that.

Councillor Kotlash? No, no, thank you. Councillor Wheeler.

Thanks, Madam Mayor. Could I just get some— I guess I've just got a few questions around Council's activity in this space, and they probably relate really to the point of how proactive Council is in this process. So I know we've had a similar issue come to us in the past.

How do we —do we wait for complaints? Are we actively— I don't understand the process, I guess, behind this and how this complaint fits into the actions being taken by Council, if I could have a response to that first. Thanks. Director of City Planning. Yeah,

Thank you. Through you, Madam Mayor. Look, Council's process in relation to fire safety of external providers has been a process that's been developed for some time, and it has also been subject to an internal audit that was reported to the ARIC, I think it was late last year. So Council does have a regulatory role. We are required to have fire safety, annual fire safety statements issued from building owners to Council that indicate that they have the appropriate fire safety measures in place appropriate to their building class. In response to the audit that was undertaken, there's been significant work that the organisation has undertaken. That's included a data cleanse of all of the properties that are on file, the status of their annual fire safety statements, and a large-scale mail-out to all registered property owners in the Hawkesbury requesting them to provide Council with an annual fire safety statement.

Because there has been recent changes in legislation in the last couple of years, there's a large number of property owners that have subsequently come back to Council to either indicate that they didn't have the required documentation or that they required more time to produce the fire safety statement and appropriate documentation in support of that. And Council is working with those businesses on a case-by-case basis, which may include providing an extension of time frame for that documentation, referring to specialist consultants where the buildings are of high risk and it's deemed that they need a further inspection straight away , or in some exceptional instances, because we are a regulator, we're not a provider as such, but we do actually have a specialist contractor on staff who will go out and provide advice where the buildings are high risk.

The program that's underway by New South Wales Fire and Rescue, they're obliged to take, in response where a member of the public issues a complaint in relation to concerns around fire safety, they are the authorised agency to undertake that inspection. And there's ministerial direction that in such instances where they do so, they then report it to Council as the regulator, and we're mandated to take an inspection and then actually regulate what is found on premises as a result.

Thank you, that's really helpful. Could I also ask if all of Council's buildings are up to date, and whether we now have—and you mentioned a specialist consultant on staff—so does that mean that we have a fire safety officer in place? Director of Infrastructure.

Through you, Madam Mayor, that's a task that's still underway with our buildings team, is to work through the backlog following the legislative changes last year. So it is proving challenging, particularly with some of our records of our buildings, to make sure that we're on top of it and we have the necessary fire schedules in place. And that's a task that's in progress, I should say. To the question of the fire officer, I might refer that to Director City Planning. Yeah,

Thank you. Through you, Madam Mayor. Again, there may be circumstances where advice is provided, but we won't actually provide certificates and then regulate our own buildings. So there is an inherent conflict there, if you like. However, it's fair to say that all of the industry is challenged. There's a real shortfall in specialist consultants at the moment. So again, we're providing that support on a risk priority basis, particularly where there are buildings with complex fire safety needs

So that didn't quite answer the question of whether we had a fire safety officer. So it sounds like we've got a contractor on staff that can do some of the work. Could I get, and I'm happy to take this on notice, an idea of when we think our buildings, where we would have caught up with that backlog, and what percentage we understand of buildings in the LGA are now compliant with that change in legislation.

Thanks, Councillor. Anyone else wishing to speak? Councillor Veigel.

Thanks. Through you, Madam Mayor. Just if you've got a problem with a building and they're not compliant to their annual fire compliance certificates, how much leeway and timeline are you going to give them to rectify? That's one question, if I may, please.

Director of City Planning. Sure. Yeah,

Thank you. Through you, Madam Mayor. The request that goes out in the first instance actually allows for 60 days for them to provide the requested information back to Council. As I said, we have had a number of properties respond to request more time or request information about where they may actually source this specialist advice. And action that we take in regards to that is really determined upon a case-by-case basis and the associated risk with the building.

And just a final question, if I may too, through you, Madam Mayor. Is Council, if we know about the faults with these buildings and they're non-compliant for the fire safety guidelines,

Are we liable if we don't follow up as a Council?

Thank you. Through you, Madam Mayor. Look, our general counsel has sought advice with regards to this, and again, provided it's very similar to any other regulatory process, provided that we're working with the owner and they are progressing and taking reasonable, demonstrable efforts to work towards full compliance, the liability as such is not something—it's, you know, it is of a fair and reasonable nature. But there does need to be documented correspondence and evidence of the organisation working with those building owners to actually progress towards compliance.

Councillor Sheather.

Yeah, thanks, Madam Mayor. I've got a document. It's Bells Line of Road Business Council, and they had a bit about the fire safety issues. And apparently the general manager attended a meeting, and there was some questions put to her about having a fire safety officer at this council.

And at that stage she said it wasn't warranted. It's indicated in this that quite a few councils have. If we know if quite a few is three-quarters or two or the like. And also that the information that the general manager provided said it was likely to cost between $500 and $800. Now that we've dealt with some, is that price accurate? Because the price in this document they're talking about between $3,000 and $10,000.

Can we take that on notice, Councillor, seeing as the general manager is not here? I think we've taken note of those questions and we'll get them back to you.

Okay. And the question's leading: should we be looking at a fire safety officer? And again, take into account the comments that was made by our staff a while ago that we're dealing with people outside of council to make these things happen and the likes.

And, you know, it all relates to cost, but I guess it depends how many and how hard it is to achieve those practices. Some of the businesses, if it's in the magnitude of the general manager's comments, $500 to $800, not so much a big deal. But if we're talking about small business, between $3,000 and $10,000, it is a big deal. And, yeah, so if— and could that information, when it's provided, just go out?

It will be on the next business paper, Councillor.

Okay. Alrighty. And does every report that come to Council from the fire authority get reported to Council?

Sorry, sorry.

I know they need to be.

Sorry, just one moment.

You're right.

Apologies

It never rains but it pours, eh?

Sorry, can you repeat your question? Yeah

There was some information provided to Council, I think late last year, and this one, I think that's only amounts to four. Is that all the reports that have come to us? It seems if we've written one to every business in the city. And am I right in saying businesses?

Director of City Planning.

Through you, Madam Mayor, where there's been an inspection undertaken by New South Wales Fire and Rescue, they're the reports that will come to Council, not when Council has actually reached out to businesses themselves.

Thank you. And if that information could be, I guess just trying to head off waves if there's some comment about it, that's all.

Thank you, Councillor. Anyone else wishing to speak? Right of reply, Councillor Conolly? No, thank you. All those in favour, please raise your hand. In favour are Councillor Reardon, Councillor Veigel, Councillor Sheather, Councillor Conolly, Councillor Kotlash, Councillor Calvert, Councillor Dogramaci, Councillor Djuric, Councillor Lyons-Buckett, Councillor Wheeler, Councillor Zamprogno and Councillor McMahon. I declare the item carried.

The next item is 4.4.3, Investment Report February 2024. Can I have someone move that way? Councillor Conolly. Seconded, Councillor Vigle. Councillor Conolly.

Councillor Wheeler? Yes, thank you.

Thank you.

Sorry, I can't find my questions on that. It was—my questions related to the comments around the, I think it's the disaster funding, where we have to do the work and then claim the funding back.

Does that mean that Council has to have that money sitting in a usable reserve to pay up before the work can be completed, and then we ask the relevant level of government to repay that money?

Chief Financial Officer.

Through you, Madam Mayor, not a reserve per se, but what it's showing is that we have to use our unrestricted cash to fund upfront, so we're using general funds, and then we seek reimbursement. So since we've done this, we've got approval for another $5 million worth of reimbursement for completed projects under disaster recovery funding arrangements. But as you can appreciate, it's, yeah, we've got to complete the projects and then claim, so there's a lot in progress, as you would appreciate from the disaster committee meeting held recently. And how long does that funding take to be reimbursed? So once we've completed, and we're very fortunate with the contacts we have at Transport for New South Wales, we usually get it back within a week of us submitting it.

So he'll come back with questions, he'll give us approval to raise the invoice, and it's usually within a couple of weeks after that we get payment. So the turnaround once it is at that stage is, yeah. Quite good. So we pay the contractor first, and

Then

We seek

Reimbursement.

Yeah, it's just those large projects where they can take 18 months to get to. So Thomas James Bridge is one of them. We do have some arrangements for progress payments, but there's obviously milestones where we're a fair way in, in terms of financially, before we can get reimbursement back.

So are we reimbursed for those progress payments as we make them

We have for two of the projects so far, and we're going to address and ask for Thomas Jones as well because it's the size of the project.

Is it ever likely that council won't be able to make those payments to the contractor while we wait for the state government

To reimburse? Not at this stage, but you will remember that we drew down a loan of $17 million end of last—well, sorry, December 2022. So, and that was a cash flow associated with the floods as well as rising main C. So, yeah. Thanks

So, yeah, I mean, this is, I think this is one of those continued impacts on a disaster-affected council like us, and particularly cumulative disaster-affected council, where I would really appreciate some documentation around this and some better understanding of, firstly, the juggling act that we have to perform to do that, but also the ongoing costs in terms of staff, loss of interest on reserves, inability to put that money into better-yielding term deposits, for example, because it has to be there at our fingertips in order to do this, and just the continued impacts and inconvenience that, as a one-off, probably aren't a big deal or something that we can just suck up, but as part of a small organisation, really have a continued impact on the council and our capacity to do nice things rather than just these catch-up jobs all the time.

That's the sort of information that I think would be really helpful for us to be able to present to ministers when we go, say, down to Canberra. to present to the state government when we meet with the Premier or other ministers. And these are recovery tales to tell, I think, at floodplain management conferences as well. You know, it's fine for big councils to say, Yeah, well, look, we can cover all that, but that's much harder for organisations like ours. And I think they're things that we need the numbers behind so that we can articulate them properly. Thanks.

Thank you, Councillor. Anyone else wishing to speak? Councillor Sheather. Yeah

Just a question, Madam Mayor, and I apologise to the acting GM. I spent some time with him this afternoon. It's in relation to the restricted funds. What was the big variation between January and February?

So, in table 10, page 67. Yeah.

Through you, Madam Mayor, $5 million is a typical monthly reduction. So it's just that we have a peak at the beginning of the year, and as we go through month to month, so we typically, yeah, as we spend money throughout the year, so it's not an unusual decline overall.

Thank you.

Oh, sorry.

Yeah, we're not. I'm a month behind myself, so that's the rates instalment. My apologies.

Thank you, CFO. Anyone else wishing to speak? Right of reply not needed. Thank you. Those in favour, please raise your hand. In favour, Councillor Reardon, Councillor Veigel, Councillor Sheather, Councillor Conolly, Councillor Collash, Councillor Calvert, Councillor Dogramaci, Councillor Djuric, Councillor Lyons-Buckett, Councillor Wheeler, Councillors Impragno, Councillor McManus. Declare the item carried.

The next item is 5.1.1, Enhancing the Arts in the Hawkesbury Working Group reports of committees from the meeting on the 19th of March. Councillor Lyons-Buckett, seconded Councillor Veigel. I'll move that. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Councillor Lyons-Buckett.

Well, we had a very productive first meeting for this working group, and we identified first thing up that it was a huge area to address, the sort of things we wanted to address, and that our first goals, of course, would be around understanding what Council can do and what we want to do into the future. So we're beginning by gathering some more information around the existing venues and comparing to other venues in neighbouring LGAs in particular to which performers from the Hawkesbury have to go outside the area to perform, so Springwood, Penrith, etc. So we're just getting some more— we're doing some more research about what we've got and what our people are using out of the area, and then identifying the needs and our capacities first.

So in the next meeting, to understand those needs, we're beginning to meet with some arts-based groups, which we're doing in separate categories. So we're meeting with the sort of music-based people next time to enable the magnitude of what their needs are around local performance. We acknowledge, of course, we've got short- and long-term goals and also recognise that there's quite a few limitations on what we can actually do in Council ourselves. But it's a positive step towards getting the dialogue going around this, and there's been a huge amount of interest from the cultural sector, from people out there who are really pleased to see that we're having these conversations. And I think that it will develop into something ongoing.

I hope that more projects and things can be introduced into the working group to keep it going because it's an area where we've got a really wide depth of talent throughout our community, and because we don't have that focal point, we don't have a focal performance space, that we really should be working towards that as our ultimate long-term goal. But in the short term, we can assist these groups with trying to source funding or trying to find venues that are suitable for their cultural pursuits. In the minutes, you will see that one of the The items which was from the original notice of motion was that the local members are to be advised of the working group, which we will be doing because we'll also be hitting them up for funds.

So it's best that they're aware of this group's existence and that we will be pursuing performance spaces for our various local groups.

Thank you. Councillor Wheeler.

Thanks, Madam Mayor. It was a really nice collegiate meeting with some good first actions. I think we probably all would like to be starting it much earlier in the council term, rather than we were all very aware that we had a very short run left. As a related activity, or an activity, I guess, that we will be able to feed into what we're planning Cultural Services is putting out a survey in the next week or so, asking people about what they like about the cultural facilities that we have in place already and what they would like and how they like to engage in that space. And I'm not quite sure when that's coming out. It's a five to ten minute online survey, and I think there's a voucher of about a hundred dollars as a sweetener for people who get all the way to the end.

So when that comes out, which I'm sure that will come to us from Cultural Services, if you could share that through your networks, I think that would be really helpful as a source of information that we can feed back through the working group and back into council. Thanks.

Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak? Councillor Sheather.

Just a comment, Madam Mayor. In relation to the recommendations, so council adopt the recommendations, and not all committees get that opportunity, I suppose, or the like. I think in this case it's good. It allows the committee to move on with the things they're discussing and keep things flowing. If it's got to come back to council or motions have got to be put. It becomes cluttered and you're trying to take the community with you. The last thing you want to do is say, I'm going to get back to you next month or the month after. If you've got activity in the community that's positive, it needs to move. And by adopting the recommendations, and councillors need to redress these issues there that they need to address.

I don't see any at all with this. I see a lot of action that's positive and good on the committee. It's a great opportunity and I just wanted to bring it to the attention that very seldom do council adopt the recommendations of a committee.

Thank you, Councillor. Anyone else wishing to speak? Right of reply, Councillor Lyons-Buckett not necessary. All those in favour, please raise your hand. In favour, Councillor Reardon, Councillor Veigel, Councillor Sheather, Councillor Conolly, Councillor Kotlash, Councillor Calvert, Councillor Djuric, Councillor Lyons-Buckett, Councillor Wheeler, Councillors Improgno, Councillor McMahon. I declare the item carried.

Item 6.1.1, Floodplain Management Subcommittee. Councillor Conolly.

Thank

You, Madam Mayor. I'll just get a seconder. Councillor Kotlash, thank you. Councillor Conolly.

Thank you. This motion was developed hopefully in consensus with the whole council in a recent discussion. Recently we had a meeting of the Floodplain Management Subcommittee, and to that meeting was reported the minutes of a number of meetings of the— sorry, it was a meeting of the Disaster and Emergency Management Committee, and to that meeting was reported the minutes of several meetings of the Floodplain Management Subcommittee, where the rest of council was informed that the Floodplain Management Subcommittee had been having meetings on a variety of topics and providing direction to consultants and effectively shaping the course of our policy, while none of us other than those on the committee were aware of what was happening.

So it sort of drew our attention to the fact that the current structure is not providing the transparency that was intended. The Disaster and Emergency Management Committee, we've had lots of pushing from some councillors for that to meet, and yet every time it's met, there's been no business to transact other than to receive reports and minutes from other committees. So it doesn't seem like that is the forum in which we're going to progress these issues. Despite the intention when it was set up was to be so that everyone knew what was going on, it was open, transparent. We found that now we've still just got a subcommittee that's getting to see all the information and council's still not getting it, even though all councillors are on that committee.

So in another attempt to get around that ongoing problem, I'm suggesting here that that Floodplain Management Subcommittee just be a committee of council. It report its minutes back to council, but most importantly that all the briefings that the committee is receiving should be received by the whole of council as well. It's good to have a committee structure to allow people to discuss things in detail and work on things and get input from external stakeholders. But this is too important for us to delegate it to a couple of councillors to go and shape the policy of the council. The committee is receiving briefings from external bodies, thinking they're providing information to Hawkesbury City Council, and none of us are seeing it.

And so that needs to be addressed. And I think this is, well, this is another attempt at trying to address it. I hope it sticks.

Thank you, Councillor. Just clarifying something, one moment.

Councillor, would it be possible to add a point six to your notice of motion? As you can see, the note by management, Councillor Kotlash has resigned from the subcommittee. So a point six nominating another councillor. Would

That be possible, just to fill that gap?

Yep. Yeah, absolutely. Thank you. I guess I'd be sort of open to, if there was a councillor that was interested, we could just put their name in that motion. Perhaps we could let the debate continue for a moment.

Thank you, Councillor. Would there be any councillors wishing to fill that vacancy? Councillor Reardon, that would be the name at the moment. Anyone else? Councillor

Lyons-Buckett. Madam Mayor, I was going to make a suggestion when I spoke that because it's so close to the end of the council term, I've got no problem with Councillor Reardon going on it. But because it's an advisory committee and we're close to the end of council term, rather than even appointing anyone, I was going to see if it could just be open for any councillors that wish to attend to go along. If we were advised in time of when the meetings were on and we had access to the business paper, then anybody who was interested could go along, given how it's sort of unrolled and there's only a few months left. But I'm also happy, in the alternate, to appoint somebody. But I would also ask that it was open to everybody.

Thanks. I'll ask the mover of the motion, or Councillor Conolly, what he would like to do.

Yeah, I think that's a sensible way forward. So point six would be that council does not fill the vacancy on the subcommittee, but resolves that the agenda of the subcommittee meetings going forward be circulated to all councillors so they can attend.

Are you happy with that, Councillor Kotlash? Yes, Madam Mayor, and I'd just like to comment that there's always an online option in that meeting because there's people that need to attend from St Albans and from a long way away. So it's convenient for councillors who might be, you know, on the hop to be able to at

Least observe Thank you. Great point. Thank you, Councillor Kotlash. Any other councillors wish to speak?

Councillor Wheeler. A question, if I may. Is the intention to make the terms of reference of this committee similar to that of the Heritage Committee in that it be both broadcast online and recorded for public access?

I'll allow the mover to respond.

I want the advice of staff before we do that. I guess the intention of the Disaster Emergency Management Committee was certainly to be an open and transparent public meeting, but the result of that was that everyone was super, super careful what was being said, and they've gone and formed another subcommittee where they can say what they really think. And I think in this space, that's probably a little bit— that there is some importance in balancing transparency and also giving agencies the ability to speak openly and frankly with decision makers. So I wouldn't want to do that right now. I'm not saying I was opposed to that either, but I want to get some advice on that.

Would you like a response now, Councillor?

Sure, if there is one.

Acting General Manager.

Thanks, Madam Mayor. I guess it's really up to Council how they want that committee to operate, whether they would like that to be in confidence or whether they would like that to be open to the public. It's really up to Council what they would like that to occur.

Does that help you, Councillor Conolly?

I'm sort of comfortable to leave the motion as it is, which is that we're not changing the terms of reference, we're just changing the reporting pathway , but open to other ideas as well.

Thank you, Councillor. Councillor Sheather.

Yeah, thanks, Madam Mayor. Were there any of the committees or organisations that Council has, it's really hard to get that information in a forum like this. There's simply not the time or the like. But Councillor Kotlash, when she indicated then about it being online and the relevance that Councillor Conolly spoke about all councillors having the ability to hear what's being said, and with some of the consultants and stuff that the information is provided, it's essential that all councillors are aware of it. To make or offer the availability for councillors to be online at that time, I would like to see it go into a public forum. We've got professional people there that speak openly amongst the group that's there, and that wouldn't be the case if it was going to the public.

And not that, and I guess because if a question's asked, you want to know the answer, and sometimes the answer is perhaps not what you want to hear. But if you're going to make a decision, you want to know what the facts of the matter are . And if that was to go to a public forum right from that outset, you might not. You might not get the answer you want, so you're fumbling in trying to make an informed decision. The matters when they come to this forum, if they want to be discussed by an individual in a particular way, that's up to them. But the format and presentation would be presented to everyone equally. And so, Madam Mayor, the comments that have been made, I think, have great merit.

I think councillors should have the opportunity to sit in a meeting or be online if they wish to. But I must say, sometimes it might be a little bit boring for someone who may not have a particular interest in the matter, because the format of that committee is that if there's an issue, that we want people to be comfortable with their decisions, and sometimes the questions get expanded. So they're not restricted to a format where if you don't get the answer you want, you can't elaborate on it. That doesn't happen. The people who are there can give you the information. Sometimes just maybe the right question is not asked or the like. So that format and what comes out of it, and aside from that, the issues that we are dealing with, there's opportunities for the relevant community participants to go back to their organisations or the like to expand to those people those things.

And the studies that we're doing on the McDonald Valley, the Colo, Redbank Creek, that they're pretty close to some of the people there who do keep informed about it. I think what's been proposed at this time is fine, and in relation to the management of the meetings, I'm sure the staff could advise the GM on how we might massage that into a more appropriate position that Council of Connelly is trying to achieve.

Thank you, Councillor. Anyone else wishing to speak?

Councillor Wheeler

Thank you. Look, the reason I asked about recording and online is because, as the chair of the only committee that survived the great committee purge of the last term of Council, I can tell you that the effect that that's had on discussion within the Heritage Committee, it's stifled, it has stifled discussion. It has left people really concerned that what they say on the public record will come back to bite them in either a personal or a professional capacity, and that is a really unreasonable thing to do to members of the public and to professionals who attend those committees. I just don't have any words for the fact that we have found ourselves at this point . I am staggered that we will finally have a floodplain management committee that might actually be able to meet and get on with some business and report back to Council, as it should.

But I am equally staggered that we have wasted four years, and I'd love to know when all that information that came to the floodplain subcommittee, eight meetings' worth of information, I will add, is actually going to come to Council apart from little digested bits in the minutes. To sit here having sat through yet another flood and to be having this discussion again is just extraordinary. My frustration is, I simply don't have any words for the fiasco that this has become.

Any other councillors wishing to speak? Councillor Lyons-Buckett.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. I've just got a new gel pen and I can't— it's reflecting in the light . I can't see as well to read it, I'm sorry. I had a couple of questions to start with. If this motion passes tonight, will that immediately trigger having another meeting of the Disaster and Emergency Management Committee? Because I would imagine it does, which would save us specifying having one. So I'm assuming that through point four that would mean that. Is that the case?

Acting General Manager

Thanks, Madam Mayor. Yes, if this resolution gets up, there would be a meeting of the Disaster and Emergency Committee. Thank you

Which would allow us to get some feedback from the agencies and the public in that particular forum. The other point is, I'm not sure if this can be answered now, but is it likely post-flood now that we could secure further grant funding for the continuation of a dedicated flood officer?

Director of City Planning. Yeah,

Thank you. Through you, Madam Mayor, we'll certainly take that on notice. Okay,

Thank you. That would be wonderful if that could happen. I do, you know, I am a bit flabbergasted about this motion, although I'm very happy to see it proceed. It is a bit hard to comprehend. We've gone a full 360-degree cycle around this committee from when it was disbanded in 2020. It did leave us with a void not having a functioning flood committee, and yet it is, as we know, such a vital area of concern. And even getting the subcommittee going has got some of the flood studies moving them forward. And I think it was lucky that last week we had a disaster and emergency management meeting, which we hadn't had for a long time, and I brought a motion to have one, that we could then at least arrive at this point to progress us forward.

I think that, you know, that the other idea that the disaster and emergency management meeting has a purpose really around that post-disaster discussion and when important things come up, such as I would imagine when we have changes to legislation or to warning systems and so on, that would be really good. I think point three is particularly good, and I've always thought that that whole of council should be briefed on any committee material that is of relevance to everybody . After what we've just gone through, of course, we have to focus on a council what we can do to support our agencies and those who do the operational recovery work in the post-disaster period. And I think that this is something that, even though the committee has quite — defined things to look at, it does at least give us an opportunity to raise issues when we're speaking about the minutes in here that are really important, and even more so important that we know having an advisory role , we should also allow for discussions to be had around other flood-related matters, because we've got this big gap that goes on.

So, for example, where do we ever deal with , you know, somebody who rang me who said, I don't have a car. How do I get sandbags? So do we just fob that off to the RFS, or do we, every time we have something going on like this, do we have these things that are quite minor for a major combat agency that's out there dealing with the big issues? How can we slot in and better equip our community to be more prepared in those things that may seem minor overall, but they can seem—they're really big for that person who's impacted in that way. So I think that further down the track, this could be developed into something, which I bought—I have brought about multiple, multiple motions around this issue, but I have brought one some time ago that wasn't supported, which was around a working group for resilience and disaster adaptation.

And I think that we really have to look at that again going into the future because it's a really important area. We do claim repeatedly that we're the most vulnerable. We claim that governments don't listen to us, but we need to be well versed about what we want. It's not just asking what are others going to do. We have to be out there saying, This is what we need. This is what we really want. This is our vulnerability. And I think because we represent the people who are so impacted by this, that we have to have a part in getting that dialogue going, that we have to have things ready to tell people what we want. So a floodplain committee enables us to have a voice around some of these issues.

And we get some input from the community members on there, but we also then bring the minutes to Council, and people from the public can come and address us here on that item that is before Council. So it's a bit overdue, or it's a bit of a re-emergence of what we had, but it's a really crucial committee. And I think that between now and the end of the Council term, you know, we can see what we can maybe put in place to pass on to the next Council, which may well want to review it when they get in, how they operate the committees. Thank you.

Thank you, Councillor—Deputy Mayor, sorry.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Although I support this motion, I'm rather saddened by what it represents . The change we had in—we tried to make to committees a number of years ago was all about trying to get more community involvement. That was the model. The model was that we would have working groups or subcommittees who would consist of experts, and they would report to a larger committee, and at the larger committee, the public would be invited, all the public, the general public could come, listen to those recommendations and have input into those recommendations as they went forward to Council. A lot of people have misunderstood that, and I think some people still misunderstand that. The aim of that was not to get rid of any committees.

The aim of that was to include the public in all the committees. And I'll be the first to admit that it hasn't worked as well as I would have liked and some others would have liked. But quite a number of other people have come to me and said that they really appreciated the fact that Council tried to—and it was a Council decision, by the way—that Council had tried to include the public in the decision-making process . What I'm worried about is now that we're throwing the baby out with the bathwater. I can see the need for this to change, but I also think, where are the public in this? Where do the public get involved? They can come along here on the night that we present something to the council and have a three-minute speech or whatever, but the idea was to get the public involved in the process of developing the policy in the first place.

That seems to have gone. I find that very unfortunate. And as I said, I'll support this motion, but I'm very concerned that we're now excluding the public, and I think this council would need, and the next council will need, to examine how they might overcome that, how they might get the public involved, not at the final stage up here at the lectern, but at the beginning stage when we first trying to develop policy. That's what this process was all about. It's unfortunate this part hasn't worked, but, you know, let's go ahead and see if we can fix that and try and include the public as best we can

If I could just clarify something for the— Sure.

Quickly, Councillor.

Yeah. In relation to the community consultation we've done with the floodplain management committee, the studies that have been done at Redbank, all of the Redbank catchment area, which is massive, it was letterbox dropped. There was only four responses from that area, but slightly different down at Lower Portland, Webbs Creek, St Albans. There was 44 responses, and again, there was mailbox drop to all of them, and that was in relation, and there was an online survey and stuff like that done as well. So there's a lot of interaction in relation to the documents that Councillor Wheeler was referring to, that we're working on, that all those will come to council later, and some of that was in the minutes, but— The documentation will come out in the reports that will be presented to Council.

Thank you, Councillor. Councillor...

Thank you. Let me try and articulate what Councillor Wheeler felt that she was unable to articulate. I remember the Deputy Mayor was very much the driver of the reform of Council's committee processes. And then, as now, I accorded him the courtesy of honest intent. His intention was to reform something so that it would be genuinely better. But it's also telling that he's prepared to admit now that that experiment has been an abject failure, and for precisely the reason that Councillor Wheeler has articulated.

Point of order, Madam.

Yes, what is your point

Of order? I didn't say abject failure.

Yes, sorry. Would you apologise, please, Councillor Zamprogno?

I'll withdraw that remark, inasmuch as I impute it to the Deputy Mayor. I'm saying it's an abject failure. It has been an abject failure. And I think the reason why is because it ends up being us. When we don't have those members of the public coming and contributing in the way that they used to, and I remember the structure of the previous Floodplain Committee, just like I was a member for five years of the previous Heritage Committee, where people sitting around a table without the structure or formality of a meeting like we're holding now allowed people to give very frank and very collegiate advice, and that has disappeared. And I agree that it's going to be the job of the next Council to try and win the community's trust back in finding ways to genuinely invite them in to participate in a variety of conversations, whether it's about floodplain management or emergency or disability access and inclusion or about youth matters or the very many issues upon which we had standing committees that did good work and contributed towards the deliberations of this Chamber.

That's why I find it difficult to support this motion, because I see it as yet a further diminution of our ability to invite people in, and it leaves us with a room where it's just us and we don't know what we're talking about.

Thank you, Councillor. Anyone else wishing to speak? Councillor Dogramaci.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Naturally, I am new in this council, but the people, the councillors that were before me, I'm sure that, you know, this matter has been going for so many years. I must be missing something. Nothing is going to be achieved. Have we not learned a lesson? What's going to happen? A working group, and then a committee, and then subcommittee, and have another one, and if we require, bring in some consultants, pay thousands of dollars, sit down and have coffee and a bit of chit-chat and smile and laugh. Nothing is going to change. Who listened? Who is going to listen anyway? I mean, we have, you know, some—maybe we have some business people in here now at the gallery. I just cannot understand, what are we talking about?

Who is going to listen? Who is going to take any notice? And if state government or anybody else above us listens, you know, this sort of things, something could have been done, you know, a long time ago. Nothing is going to change. So it's not a matter of me supporting it or not supporting it. I will just abstain because I don't know much about it, and I believe that nothing is going to change. It will just be a talk and talk, and just it will carry on, and some people will get satisfaction that they have spoken and they put some motions. So I'm not going to vote against or for. Thank you.

Thank you, Councillor. If no one else is wishing to speak, right of reply, Councillor Conolly.

Thank you. I largely agree with Eddie. However, we have to proceed and do everything we possibly can that's within our power to move closer to our objectives, and doing nothing because we don't think it's going to work isn't a good way forward, even if that might be what is the most likely conclusion of this. A lot of people, a lot of councillors, I think, well, I think everyone that spoke broadly, maybe other than Councillor [unclear], spoke in favour of the motion, which I appreciate . I'm very tempted as well to go back and put my side of the story and say what I think and what I said back when, but it actually doesn't serve anybody . The only thing I will say, the one little remark I'd say, I don't think it's at all fair.

I understand emotions are high. It's not fair to say we've done nothing for four years and wasted four years. This organisation is so far ahead of where we were four years ago in terms of flood preparedness, in terms of flood response. We have come a very long way. We're not perfect, but to say we've done nothing for four years and wasted, I think that's probably beyond what's fair to the organisation. So I appreciate the support and yeah, that's it.

Thank you. All those in favour, please raise your hand. In favour are Councillor Reardon, Councillor Veigel, Councillor Sheather, Councillor Conolly, Councillor Kotlash, Councillor Calvert, Councillor Djuric, Councillor Lyons-Buckett, Councillor Wheeler, Councillor McMahon. Those against, please raise your hand. Councillors Improgno, Councillor Dogramaci. You're against? You're abstaining. Yep. Councillor Dogramaci has abstained from the vote. I declare the motion carried.

Item 7.1.1, responses to councillor questions taken on notice at the council meeting. Any comments? No, thank you, councillors.

Item 7.1.2, questions with notice. Any comments, Councillor Wheeler? Thanks, Madam Mayor. I have concerns about this process. I would actually really like the opportunity to discuss this in a council briefing, if possible, in part because I'd like the details of how these systems actually work. We've had an issue in the past, which is why I'm cautious, and I have concerns with it going out under the General Manager's delegation.

And some of the information that has come in the response isn't completely clear to me. The stuff around making a profit, is that allowed? Is that not allowed? How much of a profit do you get to make? Why isn't Council in receipt of the profit it being our building that is being leased? I'd really like the opportunity to discuss this further, if that's possible. Thank you, Councillor. Take that on notice.

The next item. Oh, we're moving into confidential. Can I have someone move that way? Councillor Kotlash, seconded by Councillor Reardon. All those in favour, please raise your hand. That's everybody. Yep, moving into confidential. Yep, thank you. Unanimous. We'll close the doors. Thank you.

Thank you everybody. We are now out of confidential, and I'll hand over to the Acting General Manager.

Thanks, Madam Mayor. Whilst in closed session, the Council resolved on the motion of Councillor Kotlash, seconded by Councillor Conolly, in regard to item 8.3.1, that one, the General Manager be granted delegated authority to execute the contract for sale for the sale of part of 7 Fernadell Drive, Pitt Town, lot 1 in Deposited Plan 129176, if an offer is received within the range outlined in this report; two, the seal of Council be affixed to the contract of sale and any other relevant documentation. Voting in favour of the recommendation were Councillors Zamprogno, Wheeler, Lyons-Buckett, Djuric, Dogramaci, Calvert, Kotlash, Conolly, Sheather, Veigel, Reardon, McMahon.

Thank you very much, and that is the end of our meeting for tonight. I declare the meeting closed at 8.39 pm. Thank you for your attendance. Good night.