9 December 2025 - Ordinary

Thank you, councillors.

Thank you, councillors. Hawkesbury City Council acknowledges the Dharug and Darkinjung people of 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 First People of the country.

Members of the public attending the meeting are advised that in the event of an emergency, you will 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 5.3.3 of the Code of Meeting Practice, meetings 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 the podcasting and live stream 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 gallery can be seen in the live stream video, and if you do not wish to be recorded in the live stream, please move into the foyer and we will turn the foyer speakers on for you. The recordings may be made available to other persons where such access is in accordance with the relevant regulations. The recordings are stored on Council's record management system and uploaded to Council's website. Meetings of the Council may be separately recorded with the prior authority of the Council. For the benefit of those persons who will be addressing the Council tonight, it is expected that you will refrain from making any insult, allegation or personal reflection against any person present or not at this meeting.

This request relates to both your address to Council and any answers given in response to questions from Councillors. Finally, it is requested that if any person participating in or attending the meeting this evening has their mobile phone, can you please either turn it off or switch it to silent. Thank you, Mr Mayor.

Thank you.

Is there any apologies? All councillors are present, thank you. Declarations of interest. Yes

Mr Mayor, I have one on item 10.3.3, so I'll be leaving the meeting when that one comes up.

Thank you.

Councillor Mary Lyons-Buckett.

Thank you, Mr Mayor. Significant non-pecuniary interest, 10.3.5.

Councillor Ryan.

I have two significant non-pecuniary interests in 10.3.5 and on 10.3.3.

Councillor Wheeler.

10.1.1 and 10.5.1.

What was the second one, Councillor?

10.5.1.

Deputy Mayor. Thank you,

Mr Mayor. 10.1.1, 10.3.3, and 10.5.1.

Thank you. Lost. 3.3. Yep. 10.5.1. Councillor Creed. Thank you, Mr Mayor.

I have one on item 10.3.5, and I just ticked pecuniary interest. Thank

You

Councillors. Confirmation of the minutes of the meeting of the 18th of November. Councillor Reardon. And Councillor Veigel. Those in favour? Against? Carried. It's unanimous.

Right items to be addressed by the public. Excuse me, there are six speakers. The first one is 10.3.1. It's the Reconciliation Action Plan, Melissa Stubbings.

Those of you who are addressing Council this evening, at four minutes, there's a buzzer if you speak that long. You have a minute after that. Did you go.

Warrami, midiga, nayagiyara. Melissa Stubbings, Burruberongal, Malyangara, Darug Nura, Budjeri na Dunyella Darug Nura. Hello friends, I'm Melissa Stubbings of the Burruberongal and Malyang clans of the Darug Nation, and it's good to see you all here on Darug land today. I am also a very proud Hawkesbury girl, having been raised my whole life here on Darug land, land of my ancestors, and in the beautiful Hawkesbury. On the 2nd of April 2018, along with Erin Wilkins, Vicki Tom, Chris Miller, Sean Middlebrook, and myself, we were asked to come along and be a part of the Reconciliation Action Plan, along with a facilitator that was appointed by Council, and we worked really hard on that Reconciliation Action Plan for nearly two years, along with Emma Jane Garrow, who some of you might remember.

She was appointed as the councillor from this council chamber to be a part of that group. We worked really hard, and then along came a thing called COVID, and it kind of got shelved for a little while and was re-established a little while back, and we have been able to send it backwards and forwards to Reconciliation Australia to be where it is today, and for this document to be presented to you so that it can be adopted by this council. I don't want to say this council is a little bit behind, but I'm going to say that because reconciliation action plans have been around for a long time, and this is the first one that Hawkesbury City Council will be enacting. I'm here to speak in favour, obviously, of this plan, being a part of developing it for such a long time.

If you work that out, that's just over seven years that we've been working on this plan, so it really is about time. As a whole, the Aboriginal population of the Hawkesbury is about 3.8%, which is on par with the national average. And what that tells me is that within the Hawkesbury, the Aboriginal people here are present, we spend our time as part of this community, and we deserve for our council to have a reconciliation action plan that shows what's going to happen for us within our council. And also within that, just to be really clear, within that reconciliation action plan is what we can do for council, how we can provide information, historical content, support for council when there are Aboriginal people in this community who need help.

There are organisations like Murra Aboriginal Community Association, which many of you may know I am the manager of, and we are there to support and we assist council, sometimes daily or very often on lots of projects that help the broader Aboriginal community, which then in turn helps the broader community. So this reconciliation action plan will give a base for what council can do and how they can interact with all of the Aboriginal people living within the catchment of Hawkesbury City Council. Why is it important to us? Because it is important for our council to recognise that we do exist on this land and that we've never ceded this land. This land has never been given, treated or sold to anybody.

And so we find, as Aboriginal people, we really want this council to see us. And I believe this RAP, as it is shortened to, the Reconciliation Action Plan, is a way that this council can show That they see us, they acknowledge our presence, they understand our history, understand our connection. As some of you may know, when I have talked and done some welcomes, I've explained to you that a welcome actually means seeing you on our land, seeing your connection here, and honouring that connection that you have now built on our land. That's what that is about. And so this RAP then says from Council that you see us, that you honour us, you understand our connection, our longstanding thousands of year old connection to this community, to this land.

There's lots of bits in it that might need reviewing. That's the word I was looking for. We might need reviewing in a few years' time when we come back to do that. It is the first time, so not all of it is going to be accurate as we need it today. That happens in a lot of documents. So it will need reviewing, and we are here to support. Erin Wilkins and myself have worked tirelessly for seven years. Some of the others haven't been able to, but we have worked on this plan for seven years alongside some really committed Council workers. Currently, we're working with Justin Porter, Janine Madden, and they have been so supportive in this process. Megan Ang, before she left, amazing support that we have had from Council workers.

So now we're asking for that support from you as the councillors to adopt this so that we can get on with the business of putting it into practice, working alongside this plan to actually have it actioned within our catchment, within the beautiful Hawkesbury that I get to call home, that I get to raise my children, and that my grandchildren are being raised on, and so that they can be seen for generations to come as well. So I'm not going to take up all my time by the looks of it, but I will have some questions if anybody has any. Does anybody

Yeah. Thanks for that. I've got concerns about the plan, and uncomfortable with that view, I might add. I guess where I'm coming from is that, and there's no disrespect for the past or the like, but what's proposed in this document, I guess, puts in place a sexs our community, in some cases, in front of others. And that's where I have trouble. And I know the past doesn't sit well with us, but I'm looking to the future. With what you were speaking of with the reconciliation plan of the past, it'd only come to this chamber only a few months ago. It had been around for a long time.

And as something as important as this , and I know we have a lot to do with one another in different ways, but we've never sat down to discuss the things that are close to your heart. And I guess that's where I'm coming from. With the question that I ask of you, do you think that council should be looking at actions that would place part of our community, your community, in front of others, perhaps in certain areas?

It's okay,

I've got a big voice. I believe there is already division. There is already division. My community is already behind the mainstream community, and that's factual in all the data that you can gather. It's in health, it's in education, it's in the criminal system. All those areas, we are already behind. Home ownership, everything. We are in a lower category of all of those areas. So what this document does is gives us a chance to have some equality. It's not the same. We don't all need to have the same. We all need to have what we need to be the same, and that's what we're asking, is for a document that gives us a presence in the community, shows very clearly how the council staff interact with Aboriginal communities, shows clearly how councillors interact with the community, shows clearly how we can interact with council.

That's what we're asking for, and that's what this document does. So there is already division. It exists, and to say that it doesn't or to pretend that it doesn't really says that some people may not understand that, that there is division. Our community doesn't have the same conditions that the mainstream community enjoys, and we haven't had that ever for any time. So we're asking for that. We're asking for that at this time. The other thing around you and I having a conversation or councillors having more information, and I said this when I was here a few months back, we were commissioned at Murana Aboriginal Community Association to do cultural awareness training for the staff and the councillors.

We have delivered for the staff, and we are yet to deliver for the councillors. And some of these questions and the time to spend and ask these intimate questions that might be asked in a smaller group and not in a public forum, we could do in that training if we could get it delivered. So I'm offering again, I did a few months ago, that I'm willing to come and sit with the councillors. And as I say to lots of spaces where I go, ask me the hard questions of my community because I won't get offended. I've been asked before. But you can ask me, and I can give you the answers that I know for my community rather than go out and ask my community on the street. So I'm offering again to come and sit and have those yarns.

But I really would like to have this document that we have worked on, and I don't know why you didn't see it before, but I do know that getting to the stage of developing the document was passed by Council, if that's my understanding, a long time ago. So 2016, I think, was passed, and then we developed the group that we were to bring it to life in 2018. So it's time. And as I said, if you talk to all the neighbouring councils around the Hawkesbury, I believe they have RAPs. So it's time. Thank you, Drigal, for the question.

Councillor Zamprogno. Thank you, Mr Mayor. Melissa, how significant is the Torres Strait Islander community in the Hawkesbury?

It's not very large, and we're a long way from the Torres Strait Islanders, and I do know a couple of families, and they do come to Murawina. We, as we— sorry, our title says Aboriginal, but we include everybody. But we don't actually have a huge presence here in the Hawkesbury. In some of our surrounding areas, yes. Would

You concede that the phrase Torres Strait Islander community, because it's based on a geography that's thousands and thousands of kilometres from the Hawkesbury, seems a little bit contradictory ?

Well, I would say there are still families here, and it wasn't my decision to include them into the federation, or to include them. That was the Queensland government when they annexed the Torres Strait Islands into their community, and then when federation occurred, they became part of Australia. So that's the terms that's been given and handed down. You'd have to really ask the Torres Strait Islander community how they feel about that. What I can only say, what I know from talking to some of them, that they do want to be included because they do live here now.

You said that there

Might be a couple of families.

I'm just trying to work out why a community that's based on a geography that's thousands of kilometres from here and might represent a couple of families permits them to advocate for their flag being flown in this chamber or outside this building. I'm trying to understand that

Sorry, I don't know about that. They are now part of Australia. They weren't originally. They've been colonised by the Queensland government, as it was in the day, and so they are now part of Australia, and that's the terms, and that's how it's been presented to everybody. It wasn't my decision as to whether the Torres Strait Islander flag gets flown here, but it is an understanding that they are now an Indigenous community of Australia and that we respect them and show them that respect by flying the flag, by including them in documents such as the RAP. We do that even though they are thousands of miles. And as I said, there's a couple of families that I know of. I don't know every family in the Hawkesbury. I don't know every Aboriginal family, so there quite possibly could be more.

Yeah, and I always thought it was curious, and again, I love having these—

Is this a question, Mr Mayor?

Yes, it is a question, Councillor, because the document repeatedly references celebrating local Torres Strait Islander communities, and I was trying to un-knot what I thought was a contradiction. My last question is this: I'm the descendant of some very hard-working Italian migrants that came out and worked as hard as anybody else to build the nation that we now enjoy. Would you object to their flag being flown in the chamber or outside this building?

Point of order, Mr Mayor.

Melissa. Point of order.

Point of order, Mr Mayor. That is an inappropriate question. The speaker is—I mean, that is irrelevant to speaking about our RAP.

I don't disagree. I don't disagree, Councillor, thank you. May I ask a question,

Mr Mayor?

Melissa, you can answer that if you want to or not.

I think I did.

Yeah, thanks.

Councillor.

Thank you, Mr Mayor. Melissa, thanks for that. I wanted to know, would you prefer to have the Torres Strait Islander flag or have the Union Jack on part of the Australian flag? Because the Union Jack comes from a country that's thousands of miles away. I

See your point. I see your point. I'm not going to debate whether the Australian flag is appropriate today. You know, I will be very honest. My mum was English, so I can't really do that.

Not a good idea. Yeah .

Whether we need a new flag is another conversation altogether. But yes, it is thousands of miles away from here, yes.

Any further questions?

Thanks for your time, Melissa. Did you go.

Mr Mayor, could I move the recommendation in the business paper as a point one and add a point two that councillors attend— cultural training, or councillors who so wish attend councillor training with Marana. I'll second that, Mr Mayor.

Do we have a seconder? Thank you, Councillor Wheeler.

Thank you, Mr Mayor, and thank you to Ms Dubbings for speaking. It's always a delight to hear her speak and to share her knowledge so generously in the face of what sometimes I consider must be very challenging rhetoric going back towards her. I think that the RAP is for the future. I refer to your concerns, Mr Mayor, of us working for the future. That is what a reconciliation action plan is. It's about moving forward into the future with agreed sets of direction that have come from our local First Peoples, and I use the words first because they are the people that were first here in this land. This is about respect. It's about acknowledgement and respect. It's something that almost every organisation, every other council, every government department, every hospital, every whatever has already.

It's a commitment that has been made through the reconciliation process to take us on this journey where we can go forward. I think there's been some misinformation in the public around it. I think there's been some misunderstandings that it was going to cost us a lot of money, that we were going to be favouring people, which is entirely untrue. It's about working together, working side by side, and delivering the respect that has been taken from these people over the years. The systemic disadvantage that they have suffered is palpable. When you look at the history of what these people lost, of what policies of assimilation and various things, of the stolen generations, these sort of things, we have got a long way to go before these people feel that they are getting the respect.

An acknowledgement that they deserve. I don't think it's got anything to do with where any of our other ancestors came from. That is all encapsulated in our multiculturalism. But these are the First Peoples of this land, and that's the respect we give to them in their role as that. And that's a mutual respect. We've heard Ms. Stubbing speak, and she speaks with respect and hope for the future, for her children and grandchildren. We've got to honour that by respecting back in return and accepting that this document gives us a way forward, how Council as an organisation can work towards delivering actions and showing our community that we have that respect. I cannot understand why anybody would not want to go down that path to show that we are an organisation that acknowledges and wants to do that for these people.

We've got a strong existing relationship. We know that we have many activities, many events, many cultural events in particular, where the Darug people are so generously sharing not just their land that they share with us always, but they're sharing their knowledge and generosity of spirit. So I hope this is supported. It's been a long time coming. I remember the original motion. We are pleased to see it here finally after it being delayed on so many fronts. But I think it explores opportunities that support equity , cultural understanding and improved outcomes for our First Nation people into the future. Thank you.

Thank you, Councillor.

Any other debate? Councillor Wheeler.

Thanks, Mr Mayor. Look, Ms Dubbings is right. This has been a long time coming. Reconciliation is everybody's responsibility, and it should be considered the core business of this council. We are the public custodians of a place that has had custodians for thousands and thousands of years before we got here, and quite frankly, they did a better job. Today I was at Glossodia Public School's presentation day. They have children who speak quite comfortably in Dharug language in front of their peers. A young girl stood up today and addressed her school in language. The children are perfectly comfortable with that. This doesn't elevate her to some different tier. It doesn't give her any special privilege. It is simply an acknowledgement of where her family comes from and the continuous link that they have with this place that goes back tens of thousands of years.

I know there's been comments that this is not the time. There will never be a time that suits people who don't want reconciliation.

Council is capable of walking and chewing gum at the same time. We can fill potholes and deal respectfully with Indigenous people at the same time. We can make sure that culture is valued and that First Nations people's concerns are being heard and taken seriously. This plan has been negotiated in good faith and it should be dealt with in good faith. It should be— Welcomeed in that same spirit. One of the comments that's made here is healthy culture, healthy people, healthy country. I think that perfectly summarises really the core business of council, but also the example that we can take from First Nations people in their dealings. I want to thank particularly HEN and the Hawkesbury Historical Society and the Dharug Custodian Aboriginal Corporation for their responses to this.

There's some very powerful information in some of those letters, and I think if anyone questions whether this RAP is simply elevating people above everyone else, you only need to read the paragraph from Dharug Elder Leanne Redpath, where she says, ‘ The wealth in the Hawkesbury has come at a huge cost to our people that we still feel and live with the impacts of today. We are still displaced with minimal access to our ceremonial places, and the generational wealth and histories are something that we still have to fight for daily or are cut off from in perpetuity.’ That's what Melissa is referring to when she says that we all need to have what we need to be the same.

Colonisation has meant that First Nations people are now very much on the back foot. If you do some quick Googling of statistics, the disease burden of Indigenous people in Australia is 2.3 times non-Indigenous Australians. The incarceration rate is 10 times the non-Indigenous population. These are not personal failings of these people. These are the direct results of colonisation and 250 years of dispossession and abuse. This is our national shame. Shameful moments in my career as a scientist was being at an international conference where they put up on a slide the differences between Indigenous and the

General population across four different countries. And one of those was the US, another was Canada, the third was in Iceland. And they got progressively worse as they went along: health, incarceration, infant mortality, lifespan. But then they put up the figures for Australia, and every Australian in that room, and there were many of us, would have quite cheerfully got under our seats with the shame of that, the audible intake of shock from medical professionals across the globe. And at the end of the day, that wasn't the full figures. They were the maternal rates, which are much better than the rates for men or the rates for the general population.

The idea that the RAP determines which flag is shown is so fallacious it's gobsmacking. Flag protocol is determined by the Australian government, not the Dharug people living in— I'll speak in silence, thanks, Councillor Zamprono— not by Dharug people living in the Hawkesbury. I'm not a fan of the Union Jack. I'm a mongrel Celt. That flag has chased my people out of every country we've ever inhabited. But it's here and I live with it.

Thank you, Councillor.

Any further debate?

Okay,

Councillors, I am uncomfortable.

And it's not about the name of the document. It's about how we proceed, I guess, in moving forward.

What happened in the past, we can't do a lot about. We can certainly learn from it and change the future

And be part of that.

In saying that,

We can put in place, and we've got heaps of documents that we've passed, a hundred of them over the last 12 months about policies of this council, and this is another one, about doing things properly and the process of how we go about it.

This is probably one of the most important ones that's come before us.

And some of us had a little bit to do with Aboriginal communities in the past. I certainly have. I have great respect for them.

And in saying that, I'm not isolating a particular community, the Indian community I have a bit to do with and a whole heap of others.

The disadvantages ,

One of them is about procurement, and it's in this document. Now, I'm not sure how we're going to go about it, but it indicates for a certain section of our community we're going to make things different than any other section of our community in relation to work process. That's unfair. And that does nothing about rectifying the past. It's about destroying the future. The things that we need to do to get right, we need to get right. If we're doing things here that's inappropriate, then we should change that. When it comes to flags and the likes, that's not our department either. We're responsible for the Hawkesbury, not the entire nation. Why we can have a view on it, this room is not the place for it.

With equality, it's not only what's being proposed in this document, but we talk about— when I say we, it gets talked about in lots of places about, take women in local government, for instance, that we want equality or government. And this document is saying the same in relation to particular work processes within the Aboriginal community, in our service, in the council. And I don't have a problem with anybody getting a job or serving a purpose if they're qualified to do so. We talk about accountability and the likes. If you can fit the job, then you've got a fair chance of getting it. But if you don't, you won't. So if we put in place opportunities for people who may not survive just simply on their ability, but on their culture, then that's wrong too.

Now, there's been an offer taken up or offered to us to work through a process. And I'm not saying—and I know how hard our staff have worked on this—and it's really hard to work through a process like this. Because you're not sure of the words to choose, that you will be tainted with some scripture , I guess, in the sense of unfairness and the like. And that's the last thing I want. My life's been pretty straightforward all the way. The things I've been involved with and the like, I don't want that tainted. But we're here as a council to do a job, and we need to get it right. The office that's been taken up, that's been offered by Melissa, is something we... and the motion doesn't clearly say that it talks about councillors attend cultural awareness training.

That's not an obligation to council, but it's something we're all obligated to do. So, councillors, I can't support this as it is. I've read and I've made inquiries about some of the stuff, how we process the document. I will take whatever time is needed to work through to what I believe is a fair and equitable thing and document how we move forward in fairness. But I can't support it as it is. Thank you, councillors. Councillor.

Yeah.

Oh, sorry, I didn't give you my name.

Mr Mayor. If I, I'm trying to wrap my brains for some examples in my work history about procurement . You seem to have some issues with the way we're going to procure things. If we made the decision to, in a tender process, add some scores to give local people an advantage, a little bit of an incentive to work within the Hawkesbury, would you consider that to be unfair? Because that's a very common practice, and it's designed to stimulate sections of our community when they need it. Would you object to that on those same grounds?

Local work? No. We use less than 5% local work for our council.

Councillor Veigel.

Excuse me, through you, Mr Mayor, just a question.

I believe that the CFO was going to do a procurement policy based on this anyway , and I think that policy was going to come—if you could just answer this question—was going to be no advantage or disadvantage to anybody who might apply for contracts with council or anything that might be going on with the community. Could you just answer whether I've still got that right? Because this discussion has been going on for quite some time.

Through you, Mr Mayor, the procurement policy will be coming to council within this financial year for review. There's a number of aspects that we're looking to update in relation to cyber, local procurement, and we'll also incorporate any required... Changes because of the reconciliation action plan. I can't say definitively what those changes will be yet. We have yet to update them. But the procurement policy will come to Council, and it will be updated for a number of requirements that we'll have to do.

Yeah, okay, thanks very much. I'll look at the file. I think it's been answered. Thank you. Thank you, Mr Far.

Thank you, Councillor. Any further debate? Would I reply, Councillor?

Thank you, Mr Mayor. Mr Mayor, I'm very sad that the leader of our council does not support this. It makes me ashamed.

I think that you have missed the point that fairness and equity are what lie at the heart of this.

The Darug people have worked really hard to bring this.

It's come to us many times before. You didn't take any steps to stop the process, but you sit here and you say these things when we have a representative of their community speak. That shames me on behalf of this council.

I know you go to northwestern New South Wales. I grew up there. I saw the discrimination and the segregation firsthand. And from that time on, I have wanted to do whatever we could do.

I'm sorry.

There you, Councillor.

The motion before you, Councillors, is on your screen.

Those, those that are in favour?

Councillor Wills, Councillor Lyons-Buckett, Councillor Ryan, Councillor Djuric

Councillor McMahon, Councillor Kotlash, Councillor Creed, Councillor Veigel, and Councillor Reardon. Those against? Councillor Zembrod and Councillor Sheather. The motion is carried, Councillors. Thank you.

The second item tonight.

The second item tonight is 10.3.4, public charging infrastructure. It's Mr. William Snedden.

Mr. Snedden. Thank you.

Thank you, Mayor, Councillors, et cetera, for allowing me to speak on this item. I speak in favour of this report to Councillors. I have previously praised Council staff in this venue for assiduous and cost-effective renewables projects deployed by this Council, guided in part by quality consultants. A list photo voltaics, solar hot water, related water recycling, LED streetlights, energy efficiency, and others as items tackled by your staff, not forgetting the 10-year fixed-price renewables energy contract for a major part of Council's electricity purchases, for memory saving at least half a million dollars a year from the start. This report follows the earlier higher standards mentioned, at least in my opinion.

Council should not, in my opinion, be attempting public EV charging itself. This is a commercial area in the infrastructure energy change mix ongoing in Australia. There is still significant turmoil in the EV charging scene, with apparent early winners falling over. Even standards for chargers, plugs, and vehicle standards are still subject to change, both commercial and technical. Council should not be attempting to pick winners around an influx technology. In other words, still in change. You have in-house decisions hard enough for Council's own growing vehicle fleet and how to charge them. I wish you well. Hopefully , following the staff report here will allow Council to sidestep commercial risk on the difficult pick of winning technology for EV charging, even not being an early adopter of these technologies, even though they've been around for quite some time.

Also, Council needs to be ready to accept viable offers. We missed the NRMA offer for chargers some years ago, at least five years ago from my memory in this forum. Your report also lists emerging fundamentals of chargers now wanted by consumers. Safety is a big one in usage on the vehicle, the location, lighting nearby public and businesses, especially for women who feel very vulnerable at small hours or at weekends when not many people are around. Function: the chargers need to be 100% operational 24/7 at all times. Would Council be prepared to take on that themselves? Suitable speeds and costs of the chargers, and able to charge all vehicles with various standards. Charge costs: it's more expensive to charge at a public charger than at home.

High-speed charges are much more expensive, huge, up to three and four times the kilowatt hour price compared to home charging. I personally have bypassed all of this by home charging off my own solar system, nearly 70,000 kilometres for almost nine years of my BMW i3. EV charging is a new part of what I call the social contract, something I learned about in high school in the 60s. This allows citizens moving to low-carbon renewables future, helping also to meet Council's legal requirements for CO2 reductions, as noted in this report. Council reducing operator fees. This appears to me a small price to pay for reducing its commercial risk and moving us towards a lower CO2 emissions world. I commend the report to you.

It seems to be of the previous high standard of others that have been very cost effective. Thank you.

Thank you. Any questions, Ms. Stanton?

Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

Councillor Lyons-Buckett.

Can I move the recommendation in the business paper, Mr. Mayor? I'll second, Mr. Mayor.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'm very pleased to see this report and this intention to put some EV charges in public spaces. It's long overdue. I think we had a notice of motion in October 2019 calling for a report about EV charging locally, so it's great to see that it's here. I think it's a good idea to incentivise. We are behind other local government areas. Most local government areas have many public charging stations. We can see from within the report that even though emissions from electricity, for example, seem to have decreased, for transport they have increased quite significantly. I think that is an indicator of several things. It indicates the lack of public transport in this area, that we have many, many households that are multiple car owners, and also our car dependency, which relates also to that.

This will be very, very good for Hawkesbury as a destination. When people who drive electric vehicles are choosing which way to go somewhere, particularly when we know there are the two different routes up to the mountains , if they're driving an electric vehicle, they may well choose somewhere that has an electric vehicle charger for obvious reasons, just like a petrol station. So it will be good for Hawkesbury as a destination. I took note of the issues raised in the submissions. One said there was no EVs around. I think, I don't know where that person is because there's EVs everywhere you see now. They're very common vehicles on the roads here. But I don't think that these particular chargers are necessarily for local EV owners.

I think they're more about destination and people visiting. Most EV owners will have their own charger. There's a lot of misunderstandings around electric vehicles, and I think that with us moving into this space, we probably bring it into a sphere where people might understand more about the transition to electrification and the benefits of that. I actually read somebody blaming the recent power outages on saying, everyone with your EV vehicles, unplug them because the power has gone out. That's actually the simultaneous use of air conditioners across the area that gives that spike in demand. So on a hot day, it's the air conditioners, not the EV chargers. EV charging is more spread out than that.

So if people have those fears that, because the chargers do draw a lot more electricity, the public chargers, if people have a fear that that's going to interrupt the power, I think that's unfounded, and I don't think that that would be a problem. But I will be pleased to see this going forward. As I said, it's a long time coming, and I think that it's a very big positive for the Hawkesbury.

Thank you, Councillor. Any further debate?

Do you need a right of reply, Councillor?

No, thanks.

I'll put the recommendation, which is on page 71. Those in favour?

Against? Carried unanimously. That's Councillor Zanbogno, Councillor Wheeler, Councillor Lyons-Buckett, Councillor Ryan, Councillor Djuric, Councillor McMahon, Councillor Kotlash, Councillor Creed, Councillor Bogle, Councillor Regan, and Councillor Sheather. Thank you, Councillors.

Excuse me, it's 12.1.1, outdoor dining permit. Harry Singh is to address Council.

Good evening, Mayor Les Sheather, General Manager, Councillors and member of the public. My name is Harinder Singh. I'm the owner of Simon's Cafe. Thanks for the opportunity to speak tonight. I'm here to request that Council act on the motion passed on 4th of November to remove the garden beds in front of Simon's Cafe, as they have been significantly impacting my livelihood and that of my family. I was assured in writing by Director of Infrastructure, Will Barton, via email that I would have 29 square metre of space after the construction in line with my permit. However, I have ended up with less space than I was approved, and I have these two emails with me right now. I also want to make it clear that I never asked for garden beds, nor I was consulted by anyone from Council.

Their installation has created the very issues now being raised, including disability access concerns, trip hazards, a worsening pedestrian problems, all of which are affecting Simon's Cafe. I respectfully ask Council to address this matter as soon as possible because removing the garden beds would allow for more seating at Simon's Cafe and give me the ability to relocate tables, creating improved disability access both on the north side garden led— Garden bed leading to Lachlan Court and to Simon's Cafe by itself. Thank you again to everyone here tonight for listening and taking the time to consider my concerns. Thank you.

Any questions, Councillors?

Thank you.

Sorry, was that a question? Sorry

Councillor.

Thank you, Mr Mayor. Thank you, Mr Singh. Do you mind if I refer to these emails that you had referred to? Is that okay?

Would you like to have a look?

Is that okay? No, I have them. I have copies of them. Do you mind if I ask you questions about them? Oh yeah, yeah. Lovely. Thank you.

Excuse me. In May, it seems you sent, asked Councillors about six emails where you raised your concerns.

One of the things that I just wanted to ask you, are you aware that the changes to the cafe that's next door to your business, those changes were made because of accessibility. They weren't made with any notion of advantage to their outdoor dining. Do you accept that that is the case?

Oh, sorry, can you just—the microphone wasn’t on. Sorry

Okay, sorry about that. I have read the thing concerning at the same time about accessibility in front of Mike Cafe as well, to remove the garden beds, as the cafe next door have been removed.

Oh, okay. So your claim is that the assessment of the project team didn’t assess your concerns about accessibility in the same way.

Yeah, that’s what you think. And when they was pouring the slab, they cut down the garden beds at first place, and then after the slab got, like, they started putting the garden beds again when they was doing the construction.

Okay.

When you first bought the cafe , was it your understanding that you had more square metreage than was the case in the permit that you took over when you bought the business?

Yes, I had it in my contract.

So you had that you would have how many metres?

That was 29 square metres, yes.

Sorry, I didn’t hear that.

That was 29 square metres.

In your contract of sale?

Yes, please. Yeah.

So were you aware of the permit that Council had issued the previous owner?

I was aware. I have seen the permit, yes. Do you know

How many metres that permit—

That was 29 square metres. That was 29. I have the copies of that, like, in my emails here.

Okay. I might get that clarified by staff in a little while, because I don’t think that’s

Maybe 29 point—28 point something, but 28.5 or something, but it’s around 29 square metres.

Right, okay. Look, there seems to be a bit of misunderstanding on that one. The other question I had, excuse me. One of the things that you said was that the lack of the reduction, in your opinion, of your outdoor dining space was going to, and this is your estimate, was going to result in a loss of about $100,000 per year.

Is that based on just the reduction from the

29 metres that you thought you were getting and down to 24 that you have now?

I have lost 18 seats at my front of the cafe, and then people in Hawkesbury, they love to eat outside. And then on Sunday, I lost most of the income on Saturday and Sundays. And then this is an estimate; I have done it by myself.

Right. Okay.

Is that just on the weekend?

Yes, the problem is just the weekend, because most of the trade is on the weekends.

Right. Okay.

Do you have any—have you,

Because of the nature of the outdoor space, sorry Mr. Mifsud, one of my last questions, because of the nature of the outdoor space, are you able to incentivise midweek dining for lunch to make use of that space? It seems to me that there's quite a few days that you don't need that extra space.

I need that extra space. Trust me, I need that.

So every day of the week, you need extra space.

Because if I have the tables, like, at the front, I have a more chance more people coming, and more people can sit outside and enjoy their meals.

Right. Last question. Were you aware that a lot of the research these days about cooling public spaces is about not having so much hard surfaces and, you know, and pavers, and that if those gardens around your restaurant were planted in with, you know, nice species of plants, that would actually enhance and cool down that area for your outdoor dining space. And that could be an incentive. Are you aware of all of that work?

I have six big umbrellas to cool down my customers, to give them a shade, because the thing is, like, the garden bed is not doing any favour to the cafe right now. It's just, like, making a big mess at the moment. Right. Okay.

Thank you so much for answering my questions. And for the

Councillors. Thank you.

We have a motion

Yeah ,

Move

The

Motion and the rescission motion, please, Mr. Mayor. Moved by Councillor Kotlash, seconded by Councillor Lyons-Buckett. Yes, Councillor. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Look , I wasn't happy with the decision that was made in this Chamber at the last meeting, and the reasons for that were. .. When you make decisions about how you spend public money, it's really important that you try to weigh up what is sort of what is verifiable fact and what's maybe the case or, you know, it might be this or there's an assumption that something is causing a problem. And I really just didn't think we had nailed enough information and evidence, I suppose , to make the decision to

Actually change the outcome of a project that we had been working for years on. 2008, we were really excited. City Deals, they said we were going to get $18 million to spend on liveability in our city. And I can remember it. We were so excited. So we got , we put in a proposal, it was accepted, and we launched into a lot of public consultation. In the

Actual questions I noticed in this business paper, there's a very good summary of all of the things that have occurred in terms of consultation, and especially with our businesses in the Windsor Mall. We went through this whole process, community engagement. The draft plans were prepared in August 2020. September 2020, we adopted the master plan. The businesses were consulted on approximately eight occasions from February 2023 to August 2024 about the actual design or the construction. Now

It seems to me, and apparently there was no—well, apparently it has been indicated that no correspondence or inquiries were received from Simon's Cafe prior to the works commencing. Now, after the project has finished, we now have one business saying this is impacting on my livelihood. That needs to have a little bit more information around it for me to be able to assess whether that is actually the case, whether it is actually council's responsibility to

Use public money to rip out something that was just installed after—and that installation was agreed to, and it was a resolution of this chamber

To come in and say, no, that's no good, I want you to rip it out.

If there is an accessibility problem, that's fine. I think we have to establish whether that's the case before. We actually ripped the gardens out. I mean, we have to. There's no proper process in this. It is very—

I was going to say dodgy, the way we're making this decision, but it is dodgy. Let's face it, this is public money, and we're just saying, Oh yes, okay, that's all right. We'll spend thousands of dollars ripping out what we just put in.

Now, one of the —I'd like to see some

Numbers around whether that impact is actually to do with the loss of outdoor seating, because I just don't think that it could have that much of an impact. We haven't taken that much. I think the whole mall looks so much more inviting, and I'd be surprised if there wasn't more people going to flock to the mall now that it's been renewed. I've walked up a few times, and it's actually just delightful to walk past the gardens and the nice new pavers and the whole atmosphere is much, much better. I'll leave it at that. I can hear bills dinging. I'm glad the bills have gone down a few. Yes, the bills. Thank you, Mr Mayor.

Thank you, Councillor. Just a question to the staff. The area that was concreted and then taken up

That was spoke of, do we know where that concrete was removed?

Through you, Mr Mayor, without some firmer details, I'm not in a position to comment.

Further debate?

Councillor Ryan.

Thank you, Mr Mayor. Look, my concerns are with this, and I didn't vote for it in the first place, but it came to the Chamber the other day. We were told pretty strongly when we went for this SRV that we have to show better restraint when we use our public money. And that I got from people who were not even objecting to the SRV. They were telling me straight, Council has to spend its money and be more transparent with the way it does it.

And for us to go ahead with this, we've got reputational risk. And that's a big thing, as far as I'm concerned. That's my reputation. It's everyone sitting around this chamber's reputation that we can change our mind so quickly on such an item. And we're also setting a precedence. There's nothing to say that someone else will come along and say, I'm not happy with my garden bed either. Pull it out. To me, to give these people the opportunity to put their seats in the mall and to trade in the mall, that's a privilege given to them by the people of the Hawkesbury, and it should be treated as such. So with those thoughts in my mind, I will not be supporting the— I'll be supporting the motion not to have this go ahead. Thank you very much. Thank you, Councillor.

Councillor

Lyons-Buckett.

Thank you, Mr Mayor. I'm supporting this motion. Like Councillor Kotlash, I thought there was a lot of questions raised rather than answered when we dealt with this before. And I thought it was pertinent to revisit it to try and seek some clarification. Most of what I would say now I said in the last meeting, but, you know, I had concerns around the setting of a precedent, the cost to ratepayers. As Councillor Ryan just raised the reputational risk, and about fairness and equity, Mr Mayor, which we've just visited in another forum, and yet we can't be selective when we decide to exhibit fairness and equity. We need to do it all the time. So we have a situation here. I think nobody objects to Simon's Cafe having the outdoor area that they originally had.

This is about the additional space that has been allocated, another six or seven square metres. I think something that's really concerned me, though, is this jumping in with so much negativity around things such as the garden beds when this project has been done. I've heard from other shopkeepers how they're looking at ways how to maybe put in a couple of stepping stones to sort of deal with how perhaps the garden bed issue isn't an issue for them, that they can work with it, they appreciate it, and instead of us always jumping to the negative and saying this is a detrimental impact, we should be looking for a positive way to say, you know, let's take some pride in this. We've got this wonderful system which will one day be cooling and giving us a more beautiful, liveable space.

How can we work around that? How much experimentation has been done with the layout around that? You know, there's different ways to put tables and chairs. I don't see any of that having been made of an effort. It's a straight-out condemnation of council and request for a favouritism for one business. I went there on November the 30th at 1 p.m. That was a Sunday, a very hot day. There were two people sitting in the outdoor area. There was a lot of people indoors. That's one o'clock on a Sunday. It was too hot to be sitting outside. It's as simple as that. There's gas lamps in both of the gardens that are subject to removal, and I assume that the gardens were located around that when we had the change in plans of where the gas lamps were not to be moved.

So there's been various things that have contributed to what the layout and the current setup is there. I would just hope that people, when we build community and when we build spaces that we want everybody to enjoy. I would like to see some more positivity about solutions and how to work around it, rather than a condemnation of this council over and over. Thank you, Mr Mayor.

Thank you. I'd just like to clarify a couple of things.

When it comes to favouring someone, and I guess the comment was made at me,

While Simon's Cafe never , that I'm aware, and I don't doubt the councillor who mentioned hadn't put a submission in, I can tell you from when the plan that we approved up to the stage of the work being done, there was lots of discussion that happened between Simon's Cafe and council, and certain councillors, including myself, about what was being proposed. That there was garden beds to go in, as per the drawing. There was going to be another plan done that wasn't forwarded to Harry's Cafe. It was indicated there was another plan available. I'm not aware that he's ever seen it. But what did happen was, and I don't know the costs, and it's been told by our staff that they're unaware, but there was concrete poured for pavers in front of the shop after repeated requests from myself and others that we discuss opportunities to deal with the area where those tables and chairs are, because on the weekend, that's where people dine on weekends, and the business owners will tell you it's the most attractive part of town.

That concrete was taken up and replaced with a garden bed. It was replaced with 23 square metres of a not an oblong situation that allowed tables and chairs to be put squarely on it. It was a great reduction. He had 29. It was reduced to 23. A big reduction. And all the time the discussion, and as soon as the mall started and he came to me and I asked him to direct a letter to council, which he did do, the mall had started, but it wasn't down to his shops by any means. But we didn't do it like that. So , and the discussion that I'd had with the shopkeepers and stuff up there was to work with council staff in relation to the project as it worked through. And in the main, by far it worked well.

But there's one place it didn't work, and it was a place that's probably the most, probably the biggest straw, I guess, in the sense of the mall. People dine there. They might walk the mall and they might go to other shops, but they stop there, and it's attractive and the like. It's not only here, it's the one next door. But that's where people dine. And if that business was to fail, let me tell you, that'd be a big difference in the mall. So, councillors, it's not about looking after one shop more than the others. No one else come to me. Well, one shop did, and the council rectified that. They changed the garden bed slightly, and that was the fruit shop on the corner. There was a small modification made and it was made.

But in this case, it didn't happen. And the concern that the cafe had at the time, and I said, stick with it, we'll work with Council and we'll work through it. And we did work through it. But nothing changed from day one in relation to the sport that he was after. So no one else has approached me. I have no intention of putting up anybody else. If there's a process to go through, I've met with groups up there to discuss the future of anything they want to add to the mall, take away or whatever. There's a process to go through with the five groups up there, and I've had meetings with them in that regard. They're happy with how things are, and for any future opportunities or things they've got to happen up there, they'll work through that as individual groups and as a group.

But in relation to this, I don't believe we've set a precedent at all. I think it's something that we need to be mindful that this place was bigger before the mall started, outside of the limitations of what was posted as the area of use. So we had 29; it was used from probably 30, maybe 35 or something. It was going well out, but the mall was still accessible. Now it's not, and it's been brought back to a particular area. And what was proposed in the resolution that was supported by Council covers most of the area that he had before, certainly no additional area, even though it was outside what was leased by Council at that time.

Any further debate? Righto

Just before we go on . Yes

Councillor.

Mr Mayor, can I just get it cleared up that it says on page 199 of the business paper that the current interim permit was 23.7 metres squared. Can I just get that clarified? I mean—

That's what's been approved most recently, Councillor.

The current interim permit. Yep.

Yes.

So where do we get 29 metres from? There seems to be a lot of misunderstanding that has carried through for this whole entire time. I just want to be factual in my decision making, and it's very difficult .

It was—the General Manager clear it up.

Thanks, Mr Mayor. I guess the best way to just explain what permits have been provided for that site over the last few years. So in 2004, Council provided a permit for outside Simon's Cafe of an area of 28 square metres. That included the walkway outside the building. That walkway is about 10 to 11 square metres. So effectively, the permitted area was about 21, 22 square metres, although the whole permit was 28 square metres, but it did include the walkway. Following the livability works, there was an interim permit provided, which was 23.7 square metres. That excluded the walkway. Okay, so that was the area that is currently in place at the moment. Council obviously resolved in November to grant a permit in the area of about 35 square metres, and that excluded the walkway as well.

May I, Mr Mayor, I'll just ask Mr Misted just something about that. So, in the original

Permit that included the walkway, it still meant that walkway needed to be clear so people could walk or they could have tables across the walkway? I mean, a walkway is a walkway. Sorry, I'm a bit confused. Was that able to be used for tables and chairs?

Through you, Mr Mayor. No, the walkway was to be clear.

Okay, so then , essentially, it's the same 23.7 metres. Essentially, that's the same permit.

Through you, Mr Mayor, it's roughly the same, although it's a different area because obviously there was works there, but it's a different area. But it is around about the same square metre area.

Thank you for that, and I'm sorry to ask so many follow-ups, but thanks, that's much clearer. So

The dining area that is usable is 23.7 metres, let's say 28.

Councillor Wheeler

Thanks, Mr Mayor. Look, I've supported this rescission motion because my concerns are with— With access, and my concerns particularly are with point two of the resolution, which is to add an additional 2.4 square metres of dining space to the garden bed of the north side of the area. I can live with filling in a bit of the garden, even though it will take 13 years to recover the cost. But what I can't do is approve dining that sits in front of the entrance to Lachlan Court,

With a cafe on either side of that entrance space having access to spread into that area. Whether they're permitted to or not, we know that they'll end up in that area. We know that the cafe may not move the tables and chairs, but people move the tables and chairs because it suits them. People put additional chairs, they put prams, they put their stuff into those spaces. And then they get, then those spaces get cluttered up, and it becomes impossible for people in wheelchairs, people with mobility issues, people with prams. God forbid someone with a stretcher who needs to get somebody out of Lachlan Court or one of those businesses. That's the, that's what I see as the key issue here. That space in front of the entrance to Lachlan Court and up onto the footpath needs to be kept free.

We can probably control that with a single cafe on that side, so second home. But I don't think if we allow Simon's into that space, we can reasonably expect that everyone will do the right thing and leave a gap. Things expand to fit the available space, whether they're supposed to or not. And that's what I suspect, that's what's happened in the past, and that's a pretty good indication of what's going to happen into the future. The idea that everyone will stay with just a small table with the chairs running top and bottom, rather than on the side where they could easily pick up a couple of chairs and move them around, I think is just far too hopeful. It then presents an additional compliance burden for Council.

So if the rescission motion gets through, I would be happy to move option two as the substantive motion, which is the removal of what appears to be the offending section of the garden bed, which has now become a walkway. And let's be really clear, there has been no respect shown to the works that Council have put in in this area. Every time I go past there, there are chairs in those garden beds, there are people walking in them, there are people putting their stuff in them. These garden beds are trampled and ruined because people have made choices not to respect them. Now, people in the Hawkesbury want to know why they can't have nice things. Well, here's one of the reasons why we can't have nice things, because when we put in nice things, people don't look after them.

I've seen photos on social media of people at events with chairs all through those garden beds.

Do

We just give up? Maybe we just give up and concrete everything, because that seems to be easier and everybody loves a good bit of concrete. I'm happy to yield on that dogleg in the garden bed, but this represents for Mr Singh actually a bigger area than he had originally. The issue, I think, for him is that it's not as usable because it's not as flexible as the space that he had previously. But that space actually wasn't what was on the permit. It was a space that was assumed. Now, that's unfortunate for the business, but it's not actually council's fault. And council's entire goal with the Livability Project was to make them all more walkable, more open, and a better user experience for the people who come to it, not just a few people sitting at a cafe, but everybody that comes to it.

And so the more we clutter these spaces, then the harder it is for everyone to use those spaces effectively.

Thank you, Councillor. Just ask for you, General Manager, with the motion as it stands at the moment, the— sorry, the— Resolution of Council of the past, that area that Councillor Wheeler asked about, because I haven't got those details in front of me, the walkway into Lachlan Court, is it impeded by the resolution of Council? There's two and a half metres, I believe. Does that impede?

Through you, Mr Mayor. I think Councillor Wheeler's point was that should the table configuration remain as was intended by Council, I think in the last motion, where the tables and the chairs are running perpendicular to the garden bed , that that may well be satisfactory, and I'm happy for Councillor Wheeler to correct me. But the fear is that people will move tables, chairs, prams, and other pieces of paraphernalia outside of that licensed area. As it is, I would say that that area , which we had licensed through the interim permit in part, is probably less desirable in terms of maintaining access into Lachlan Court than perhaps embellishing other parts of the larger outdoor dining area in a contiguous way. I would think that that would be a more preferable solution.

What's the width of the walkway if people stick to what we're allowed?

Yeah, and to be frank, Councillors, that's a very big part of the problem. Both Simon's Cafe and Second Home Cafe, we have photographic evidence of significant breaches of the outdoor dining permits on both of those cafes. If everyone was to stick within their lines, so to speak, there is around a 2.3 to 2.4 metre space there, which should be sufficient, again, if everyone was to be within the guidelines.

Thank you, Councillor. Councillor Wheeler, again, if you've got any photographic evidence of chairs in those gardens, I would definitely like to see them, because when I've seen chairs in the garden, they were over backwards because they sunk into the wet ground. Walking across there, I've seen many people walk across it and the like. In relation to the area, 2.3, nearly eight feet. It's plenty wide enough for anybody to get through, multiple people. And if people are outside the given marks that we've allowed, and that's what we're talking about, a certain distance, then our council staff should take action against that. Any further debate?

Right of reply, Councillor.

Thank you, Mr Mayor. It's really funny that what I've been hearing, and it was mostly from you, Mr Mayor, is that we follow process. You said that you talked about the process that we followed at the corner business. They had an issue, they came to council, we went and looked at it, said yep, and we fixed it. The process that we followed to give one particular business a significant advantage over even the neighbouring business, giving them essentially

From 24, 28 square metres to 35 square metres, so we've given them a lot of extra table space. was brought to us by way of an amendment to an item in this business paper. That's not a good process. I have no idea whether the claims that there's an accessibility problem is true. We definitely don't know that the business has been having financial difficulty because of the reduction in table space. We have not—there's no evidence to suggest that. We aren't following that process. I would be happy to follow that process. It seems to me that there were issues made, eight emails, I think, from this particular business owner to us saying that there were problems, our staff saying, No, we've gone and checked it .

That's not correct, or You've got the wrong end of the stick, or This didn't happen because of that. I think we've exhausted our process there, and the answer was that there weren't any issues that it seems would warrant us spending more public money to get rid of something that we've just installed. I really think it's interesting that two garden beds in an outdoor setting, in a climate like ours, one, they would cool the dining area, they would make the dining area more attractive. Why are we saying that there are no measures, there's no incentives for getting people there on another day, or, you know, extending the lunch hour, giving people, I don't know, discounts or vouchers or something?

There is absolutely no reason why you— You couldn't make the most of this situation. But what we have here is somebody saying, no, this is definitely what's happened. This is what's causing my problem, and I want it gone, even though we have all agreed to these plans. Now, you know, it

Just doesn't—I'm not convinced that there is such a major problem here. I'm not convinced. Well , I'm definitely convinced that this is the wrong way about it, and it's public money, and I'm not prepared to spend any more on it. We have spent millions of dollars upgrading the mall. I think we've done well. Those in this chamber who have said, oh no, we have to compensate—well, essentially compensate this

Business— were the ones who stalled this process by saying, oh no, we need to change the plans because I don't like this. I want this. We need to keep this. We need to stop this, even though our staff had said, you're changing the scope of this project and it's going to delay it. It's going to cause more harm to the businesses that are being impacted. But yet we went down this path. We seem to lose the objective of livability, and that seemed to be okay with everybody. I mean, this is just a really, really woeful way of wrapping this project. Oh, the project is already wrapped up. We are undoing part of this project, and I think it is really beyond belief. One thing I'd like to say is when we were talking about the SOB, some in this chamber said that we have to review our fees and charges. If a few metres of outdoor

Dining space— Thank you, Councillor. —it's

Going to cost somebody a— Thank you, Councillor. —$

100,

000, we better bump up the

Fee.

Councillor Kotlash. That was my reply, Councillors. The resolution that, or the motion that's before Council is the rescission motion on page 195. Those in favour?

Councillor Wheel, Councillor Lyons-Buckett, Councillor Ryan, Councillor McMahon, Councillor Kotlash. Those against?

Councillor Zamprogno, Councillor Zeruk, Councillor Creed, Councillor Veigel, Councillor Reardon , Councillor Sheather. The motion is lost.

The next item .

The next item is item 12.13. We have three speakers, Irene Clayton, Berinda Karp and David Gearin.

Councillors, yeah, Councillors, one of our speakers, Irene is online. She should be on your screen.

If we might, Irene, can you hear us all right?

We haven't got you, Irene.

Working on it.

Can we go to our second speaker while we work through that? Can you hear us, Irene? Okay. While we're working through this, we might go to the second speaker, Irene, and then come back to you if you don't mind. Thank you. The second speaker is Berinda , is it? Berinda.

Thank you. Okay, I haven't done this before, so good evening everybody and thank you for having me here. So I'll just introduce myself and a bit of background and why I am supporting this motion that's being put forward. Please correct me if I'm addressing anything in an incorrect manner or how things need to be done. You're doing all right. Oh yeah, you can't see me over the lectern. Okay, accessibility problem 101. Right, I've been a resident in the Hawkesbury for over 30 years. I identify as a person with disability. I have a family with disability, my children, my grandchildren. I've been a member of the Disability Inclusion Action Plan and from the, we call it a working party, I think, from June 2023 .

Just a bit more background on me so you know my credibility. I'm a participant in the Hawkesbury Disability Network, the Hawkesbury Community Network, the Recovery on Wheels Group. I'm a life member of Richmond Players. Professionally, I'm an autism consultant. I was a TAFE teacher consultant for 27 years, and many of my current clients are residents of the Hawkesbury. I've also won the state and national awards with my winning programs from Resilience New South Wales in regards to disasters and emergencies. So what I'd like to just state the obvious, a few obviouses. So firstly, peer-led approaches centre the promotion of desirable behaviours by peer leaders who are trained and who are then formally and informally engaged with peers.

Peer-led approaches are characterised by shared goals and experiences, an improved sense of empowerment, and knowledge sharing. Learning under peer-led approaches is thus positioned as creative and active processes which are conducted within communities. This is taken from a recent paper, Disability Leadership. And the future of inclusive disaster risk reduction. What I'd like to confirm with what's being put forward is that pro-action, rather than post-action, is imperative within our community. And it feels like, since living here and being involved with the group , that there seems to be a lot of post-action. There's not a lot of thinking before doing. I don't know the ins and outs of, say, the last part of the discussion about the mall being redesigned and how much inclusive discussion was centred around that before it went ahead.

I myself have a lot of problems with the parking that's happened in Richmond and Windsor recently, and the trees, which I know are really nice for the environment, but really inaccessible. I had a little issue even tonight coming here. Mary can confirm that I actually made contact with her. I'm a recent user of a wheelchair, and I said, How do I get in? She said, I believe there's a lift. She said, Yes, there is a lift. It's downstairs. But the office closes at six o'clock.

Now, I had trouble with my battery today, so I couldn't have come in here unless I was able to stop and charge my battery somewhere. So that gives us, you know, problem number one for actually getting into this meeting. I had a problem at school today going to Hobartville Primary. You press the buzzer to get in. You try and open the door when you're in the chair, the gate.

Look, I could go through numerous, numerous issues within the Hawkesbury, and that's not— is that four

Minutes? No, no, you've got a minute.

Geez, okay. All right. So firstly, your language with everything that you're doing needs to be current. You don't assume access is just mobility and parking, and access that we're looking for is the inclusion of all people who have specific needs and for equity. So cultural access, language, age, youth, isolation, living up the river , LGBTQIA and SB, that, you know, there's obvious disabilities, but that doesn't mean you're going to be helping anyone. So I wish to support the motion 12, the establishment of the Access and Inclusion Committee, that is being dedicated with a dedicated paid officer, a budget to support the committee, and a working party. The terms of reference and the EOI for people to be on board is to be developed and included of all members of the community. Can I have two more sentences, please? Two more sentences

So

Firstly, 18% of the population are people with disabilities. You can develop a disability at any time in your lifespan, and the inclusion of the— it is also the responsibility of every individual, including our leaders and council, to ensure that disability inclusion and access in practice, awareness, acceptance and inclusion increases business, community and the wellbeing of all.

Thank you . Thank you. Do I stand and wait for any questions or what happens?

Thanks very much for your time. Thank you.

Linda, are we right to go?

Irene, is it? Irene, sorry.

Have we got Irene?

She's speaking, but we can't.

No, still haven't got you, Irene.

Yeah, you can hear us. We can't hear

You.

Can you just try speaking now?

Can you hear me now? Yes, we can.

The other one to mute, please .

I've done it. Okay. Good evening, Mr Mayor, Deputy Mayor and Councillors. I've come recently to be using a power chair, and up until about six months ago, I had not set foot, or been able to set foot, in the Windsor Township, Simons Cafe, which I adore.

And I thought it would be wonderful to go and step up in there, or not step up, roll up. And I think some of you have probably seen my videos. I was a bit shocked on my first visit because I'd heard that it was going to be a meandering affair, that I would be able to access the facilities there in the mall with ease. And I think from my video, many of you would have seen that on a Sunday, it's not so meandering. And I firstly would also like to apologise to you, the proprietors of Simons, because I feel like I unfairly portrayed some of the issues that probably really didn't need to be so heavily highlighted. But being that, I came away from that and I realised that essentially that there had been no planning, no consultation of people.

My chair up there in Powermode. It slides sideways. It has not been constructed correctly. When I used to go and visit [unclear], the podiatrist, I was able to park my car. I can still drive. I was able to park my car quite adequately, but there is nothing there for me, no space for me to get my wheelchair out of the back, particularly if there are two cars parked in front. God help me if I ever need an X-ray and someone else is parked in the disability parking spot at Castle Reimagining. So I then go out the back into the car park where the old KFC restaurant used to be on Macquarie Street and parked my car there in an ordinary car parking spot on not a weekend. And I went to go up through the old lolly arcade, couldn't even get up there because the dip that goes up into the arcade, again the gutter was too high, and so then I have to use the roadway to then proceed along towards the church bar.

I then turn left and what do I encounter? A whopping big garbage bin stuck in the middle of the pavement. I had to navigate around that down the drop of the roadway and again the camber of the roadway forces my chair so that I slide into the roadway.

You know what? If I want to go and shop at , say , in Caber Street at Woolworths, I can certainly find a wonderful parking space there. But God help me if I want to go up Caber Street and park up and roll up, I actually have to use the roadway.

Thanks, Irene.

The accessibility of getting onto the pathways is not to code.

Thanks, Irene.

Excuse me. Yes, the Mayor has called time. Okay,

Thank you. Is there any questions of Irene? Irene, thanks very much for your time.

The last speaker we have is David Gierin. Are you right there, David?

Firstly, I'd like to thank the Chamber for this opportunity to speak to this motion this evening. As you're aware, the motion is to create or reinstate the Access and Inclusion Committee in an advisory role. I used to sit on that committee before it was disbanded, and I was extremely disappointed that it wasn't reinstated before this point in time. Reason being, you've already heard from two previous speakers of issues. Now, I happen to be disabled, but that's not the only reason I believe in it. Access and inclusion is for all of our community. Now , it may be there are barriers to youth, to the elderly, to migrants coming into our community, English as a second language, could be First Nations people, could also be for those with a disability.

The services and goods the council provide to the community should be accessible and inclusive of all, where possible. The point made there on the livability upgrades, I could go on with the issues there, but so many of those things could have been avoided with some consultation with community members with lived experience in the various realms that the livability projects were trying to address. And as we all know, trying to rectify problems after the event tend to be time-consuming, costly, and cause a lot of angst for council staff. They're having to field the calls and the comments of disgruntled community members, and that is just, it's depressing for the council staff. Just one example I can present is I lobbied over a number of years, and the lobby did take on.

There was money provided to put ZoomText on a number of the computers. Now, ZoomText will help me with a visual impairment either by changing the colours, the sizes, the fonts, but also there's a reader, so people with literacy issues can have the screen spoken to them. Often people where English is a second language can understand the spoken form of a language more readily than the written form. So it was all agreed. It's a great idea to put it in, but it is not accessible. I cannot go on and activate ZoomText myself without first logging on, which is not done in an accessible way. I have to get a council staff member to help me. Then if there's any issues, which currently I've tried to access the ZoomText at the Richmond.

Library on a couple of occasions over three weeks, it's not operating. So nobody seems to know quite what to do about it. So with procurement and particularly with sort of digital goods and services, the mistakes can be circumvented somewhat if we get to trial run these things somewhat with the community members it's supposed to help and support, rather than just using the consultants.

Really, that's all I've got to say.

Thank you, David. Any questions? Councillor Zamprogno. David,

Thank you for coming in. It's Nathan Zampronio here. When we spoke on the phone, we discussed potentially one of the defects of the old committee system, and that was the ability for our committee system to create a lot of busy work. And I was wondering how you felt we might ensure that a resurrected access committee does useful work under the direction of the chamber instead of just making other busy work for itself.

Well, I think that can be addressed through the terms of reference, and by a careful selection through an expression of interest process of the people who sit on that committee. Now, I think it should be a blend of council, at least a council, which is generally what's required, but people from different sectors of the community. I think community voice— has been a short form because the replacement was to put in a community services committee, which has only met a couple of times in the last few years. It hasn't addressed any of the concerns of community, and it's very hard for somebody from the community to have anything put before that committee. And I think the process needs to evolve somewhat , but I think through clear agendas, through clear terms of reference, I think much of what you've alluded to can be addressed.

Thank you, David.

Any other questions? Thank you, David. Well, thank you for the opportunity to speak. Up

Come on, wake up.

It's all right, he's not talking to you, councillors, it's a dog.

Did we have a motion? I'll move the

Motion, Mr Mayor. I'll second, Mr Mayor.

Thank you, councillors.

Thank you. Sorry. Oh yes, I did send a somewhat, a few words changed in a new one.

Did I send that to you, Patricia?

Yes, I did. Yeah, it was very similar, so I'll speak to it anyway because the context is pretty much the same. So the reason I brought this forward is I know we've had issues around the committees, what to do about committees. Essentially it is around how do we capture these very things that have been raised tonight? How do we capture this from our community and translate it into actions, as has been stated, actions that occur before it's too late, before we have to go back and rectify things because we haven't addressed them in the first issue.

What I don't like seeing is I don't like seeing people have to take to social media to vent about an accessibility issue or about an exclusion issue when someone feels that they're not able to participate in Council in some way. So I think having a committee like this, and I am very open to how this committee would operate, from what David just said, he was on the previous one, he's spoken to me about it. There are various improvements we can make, but that's where the term of reference would come in, and we can work around that then. This is more to get the ball rolling, and it's not just about disability in the narrow sense. It's, as has been raised by the speakers, it's about access for everyone.

And we know that we, post-COVID, we've had ongoing issues around social isolation, and there simply just is a lot more that I believe that we can actually be doing in this space. And like it or not, there are just things that we walk around that barriers that individually each one of the 11 of us in here do not experience, may not experience, we may not have anyone close to us who experiences it. So somehow we have to understand what people are experiencing out there in the community. And we all sit here and we all want everybody to be involved. We're forever asking our community to be involved. So I'm looking for a positive way forward that we can include everybody in this process, that it can improve what we deliver within the community.

When we've got a lot of big projects coming up, we've got the West Invest projects coming up, we need to make sure, even though that there are various plans and things done, we need to make sure that we are checking around these various issues before we have to go back and redo something if we see issues emerge later. It's not a criticism of the current working group or of anything that's being done, but it does not appear to have established anything. And my biggest issue around that is that as councillors, I was not aware, Mr Mayor, that you were on that group. We had never had anything come back to us here from that group. It's something that I think we're all probably quite interested in.

I don't know what level of training in access and equity has been undertaken. It's mentioned in the plan, but I don't know if that's been executed. Maybe somebody could answer whether that has been undertaken.

No, you're not. Sorry, Belinda. Yeah. So I think essentially calling for expressions of interest, once we get the terms of reference done, is that we can begin to work promptly on this. I think it's very important. I'm interested of what Councillor Zambrano raised was also something I was going to raise with David, and that was around how do we operate these committees more effectively? How do we really embrace the voice of the people to translate that into meaningful change that we want to see?

Thank you, Councillor. Councillor.

Councillor Kotlash. Thank you, Mr Mayor. I'm speaking against this notice of motion in this current form. But before you all gasp and think that that's what I'd do because I was instrumental in shutting down the previous one, the reasons aren't because I don't want to achieve everything that our speakers and Council Online Sparkett has just said. I would be very happy

If this got flipped around a bit and we got , maybe the process is we have an expression of interest, people, to get people in here so we can sit down and talk about how we will address this issue. The format of this notice of motion is we're jumping into establishing a committee, having terms of reference and then working out what we do. And the reason that I didn't think that the old committee structure worked very well is because for an access and inclusion committee, it was actually exclusive because it only had a bunch of people that we chose to put on that committee for four years. So inherently it kind of was, it was limited in just the capacity of just those people to be able to get to all of the sectors in our community that we need to get to.

Not saying that that's wrong, but it's just that it It didn't quite, it didn't quite get us to where we needed to go. Now, I'd like to convene a group of people. I wouldn't put it down as a committee, and I wouldn't put all that framework around it. But I'd like to have discussions about how do we actually find out how many of our community actually have the problems that our speakers talked about. If you're going to prioritise the limited budget that we have, not only do we need to know about what the character and the extent and the locations of barriers and things that stop people, you know, getting involved in their lives, we have to figure out how many people that that happens to. And that won't happen in this committee structure.

It can't happen because there's, you know, there isn't the structure, there isn't the process. So I'd like to get a group of people together. I'd love to be involved. I'd like to talk about pop-up consultations. If we have, you know, we can go out somewhere, and I think the mall might be the first port of call where we have to look at how people get access the mall, seeing as the whole idea of livability. I'd like to look at using user groups for access audits, not technical audits like our previous committee had. I don't think that was appropriate. Users in all sorts of different wheelchairs accessing things, and we get to understand the whole breadth of problems that can occur. I think there's lots of potential to develop apps that can report problems.

Where I'm getting to with this is that we need data in order for us to then sit down, maybe then the community gets together and then they can start to, you know, make decisions proactively instead of, you know, when things go pear-shaped. The use of QR codes in various locations to do short surveys. This all gathers information, and it gathers information from lots and lots of people who have lots and lots of different lived experience. Make it easy for people to let us know what's happening.

Incentivising people being involved in testing things. You know, like, let's sort of figure out what data we need, and let's figure out how we're going to get it. There's lots of other interactive maps that we can have so people can sort of pin, you know, where issues are. Thank you , Councillor. I've run out of time. That thinger is very...

Thank you, Councillor.

Councillor Zamprogno. Thank you, Mr Mayor. I'm supporting this notice of motion. Here's some history.

Several terms ago, I played a part in rationalising Council's committee structure. And at the time, I said, look, it's our job to evolve , innovate, adapt, try different things. Perhaps the existing committee structure had become unwieldy. I dug my heels in, ensured that the Heritage Committee continued to exist, but many other committees were rationalised. I understood the logic at the time. Of course, it was true that some of those committees had become a little disconnected and were good at making busy work and consuming Council and staff resources. So I was happy to go along with that. But I also said at the time that this was an experiment, and that within a year or two, we would be in a position to work out whether the experiment had succeeded or failed.

I think it became fairly clear within a couple of years that people missed those committees because we had underestimated the role of community voice. And I know that there were attempts to bring in new structures that would allow people to feel like they had that agency and input into Council's decision making, but it didn't quite gel. So at this point, I confess my role in abolishing the Access and Inclusion Committee and conclude that that experiment to try and do away with those things and to try and absorb those functions into other processes has not worked, and therefore I'm happy to set this back up. And yet the point that I made earlier to David, and that's been acknowledged by Council Alliance bucket, I think stands.

I will be looking very carefully at the terms of reference that are drawn up to ensure that this committee does genuinely useful work and does not generate bureaucratic busy work. It is true that the Heritage Committee was put on a shorter leash and was constrained, in a sense, to act upon things that the chamber had devolved to the Heritage Committee to look at. And I think that model has some merit. So I think that this newly reinvigorated Access and Inclusion Committee could take some of that learning and draft terms of reference that will allow the chamber to be, as the emphasis should be, the primary decision-making body, but where there is a need to have periodic meetings and to invite members , stakeholders that have a dog in that fight about access, inclusion, disability and so forth, is that they feel that they've got an environment where they are heard and heeded.

Thank you.

Thanks, Mr. Mayor. About 13 years ago, I had a wonderful opportunity to gain some insight into what it's like to experience some disability, where I broke my back and had two major spine surgeries, and I eventually got out of hospital. I was in a wheelchair and had a walking frame, and eventually over six years progressed to a walking stick, and I'm semi-normal these days. Some might argue different. So I'm going to support this notice of motion, and I want to thank Councillor Lyons-Buckett for bringing it forward. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor.

Councillor Veigel. I think Councillor [unclear] might have had it. Sorry. All right, just a couple of questions. Does the Building Code of Australia give you guidelines for disability, accessibility through, Mr Mayor? Can I ask that question?

Yes, they do, but...

Buildings. And while— if I may be—

Sorry, through you, Mr Mayor.

Absolutely. The National Construction Code and a suite of Australian standards set out those. What the interesting part is, though, is at what point is accessibility upgrades required as part of, for example, alterations and additions to an existing facility or structure? Yep.

So if this committee was going to be supported by a resolution tonight and recommendations came forward, there's obviously things you can do which are simple, and obviously things like gutter height and camber of the road, it's just historic, and we won't have the funds to do that anyway. So through you again, another question: if we were going to anchor this for a term,

Can we make it work and it's actual— it's constructive that the ideas that might come forward, yeah, it is possible, or other things, well, it's no, it's not going to be possible. Yeah, I know it's a funding issue and we've got to put a resource into it, but on a voluntary basis, I get that. You know, look, I'm not against this motion, but I'm just trying to get— I don't want to be bureaucratic for bureaucratic's sake. I mean, there's too much bureaucracy at the moment. I get the— we should be making it easier. For those who need them, it'd be made it easier, but I just wanted to see how we can make this work and it's, you know, it's streamlined to a point. Thanks. Yeah

Thanks, Councillor. Not all of it might be practical work. Some of it might be their policy and stuff that's introduced as time goes on. There's a variety of ways. Some of the stuff's very practical and be done straight away. Others will go into system and others will go into a policy.

Well, okay. Well, based on that, I'm prepared to support it and see how it goes. But I do agree it can probably come down to terms of reference and how to make it constructive. I'm not here about to waste anybody's time here or there, but it'll be just to see if we get some traction in there. So let's see how it goes, if we can make it work. Thank you, Councillor.

Councillor Wheeler. Thanks, Mr Mayor. Look, I'm supporting this motion. I had some lived experience as a— when I was about 20, my father had a very severe stroke, and the little time that he had at home with us before he died, he was in a wheelchair. Getting a large, heavy person around any sort of space in a wheelchair is incredibly hard work. Most spaces, even when they have made some concession to accessibility, are difficult to negotiate. I also have a friend with cerebral palsy who spends much of her time in an electric wheelchair. I worked with her in state parliament. Just getting in and out of the elevator was a drama. The elevators are too small to turn the chair around in. The elevators are too small to put the chair in with more than three people.

The number of times that we watched the world's slowest elevator in state parliament go up and down, up and down, up and down, just waiting to get in. Really basic stuff like the fire drill for all of us. was to go down the fire stairs and get out of the building. The fire drill for her was to wait at the top of the landing on our floor, the 11th floor, and hope that someone from the fire brigade came to rescue her. Sit in the stairwell and wait. That's building. That meets building requirements. The fact that just because something meets building requirements doesn't mean that it meets reasonable accessibility requirements for people to have any sort of quality of life. To hear Mr Gierin talk about how just to use the computer at the library has to go and get a staff member, and he has to get that staff member not to tell him how to log on, but to log on for him, and then take him through a process in the hope that the software is actually working on that machine that day.

Just these little incidents of othering all the time. To hear Mrs Clayton talk about how difficult it is to navigate Windsor. Now, Windsor will never be an easy place to navigate. It's steep. The spaces are confined. We have a whole lot of heritage concerns around the sandstone guttering and all of those things. But what we need to do is not make things worse when we do work. We need to be making things better each time. Whether this committee works or not is actually up to us. Do we use it as a way of gathering information about people's lived experience, of their needs for access and inclusion?

Do we listen when they tell us, and do we act on that? We could set up a committee that we used as a political hobby horse. We could pursue all our own agendas. But what we really need out of this committee is something that really genuinely listens to the people who need us to make changes for them. Eleven able-bodied people sitting around the chamber simply can't have the same depth of knowledge and understanding as people with lived experience. And in my experience, the people who approach council with these issues are very well connected with others, and they take their role as advocates really seriously. We don't need to gather those minute pieces of information in order to successfully deal with access and inclusion.

Much of that information is already known. We could certainly go hunting for bits and pieces of information when we need it, but the people who will approach this committee, either as members or as people who come and address it and address council when those minutes come regularly to council as part of the reporting mechanism that is currently lacking, are very well connected to people who already understand what's needed in those spaces. There's clear physical challenges in this LGA. There is clear inclusion challenges in this LGA. We won't fix those by waiting and hoping that we'll get them right, or that someone will come through some process that we haven't invented yet to tell us those.

We have an option here of opening up a pathway to actively listen to the people who are affected and react to that information and to be proactive, as Burinda asked us to do. When we go on to, we've got some massive infrastructure projects that we've got funding for. They need to go past a committee in the same way that we rejigged the library and museum to be dementia safe spaces. We need to do that with all of the spaces that we're putting in. We have unprecedented infrastructure works coming at us. We need a mechanism for looking at those at the very least.

Thank you, Councillor.

Councillor McMahon, do you have your light on earlier? Oh,

Thank you, Mr Mayor. I just had a really quick question. It wasn't any expanded commentary. I'm supporting the motion because I believe in the merit of re-establishing this committee. I just wanted to know, when we do bring about these committees, and I'm happy to take this question on notice, is there a cost we can come up with annually in terms of staff time, what it is, just in this whole debate of an SRV, I just, these committees, as I said, they're great. They bring the community on board. I just sort of want to know what that real cost is. And as I said, happy to put it in the next business paper. That's fine.

Thank you. Through you, Mr Mayor, what we can do is when we bring the report back, provide an estimate around the cost dependent on the draft terms of reference, because that will determine the costs, most of which I would assume would be borne by in-house resources. It's really around that time cost.

Can I ask a question, Mr Mayor?

Councillor— Oh, I've got you, Councillor Ryan.

Thank you. With all wholeheartedly supporting this, I'm the grandfather of a child with high-level autism, non-verbal , non-verbal, and he's one of the best escape artists I've ever seen in my life. His parents, it's a life sentence for them to look after him and him too. And they're lucky they've got a family like ours that's strong, that do look after them. And I'm very concerned of the families that probably don't have relations close by. And to see what they have to do just to get this child to get—he goes to special school at Riverton—what has to be done for them. To get the bus to Riverston is unbelievable. They seem to have a, call it an undercover group where the mothers speak to each other about their autistic children.

They don't like to go to places because they went to Macquarie Park, Governor Philip Park down there to the waterworks, opened the gate, straight down to the river. They won't go back there. They're very concerned about stuff like that. And these kids are fast, they're smart, and they're planning. They're just autistic, and it's something that I think, as a council, we have to show that we are looking after these people, that we look after the, probably the people who are suffering the most from these sort of things in our council, rather than other people. We've got to put these people first because there's so many of them out there. Since I've had the autistic child, I've met that many of them.

My son and daughter-in-law went away overnight, and we looked after on the night of the local government conference. That's why I was running a bit late. They've been away twice in eight years, overnight . That's unbelievable. We have to be able to put things in place where these people can be looked after. They took him to the library, and they thought, well, hello, we'll see if we can introduce him to the library. Well, he wanted to reorganise every book in his own way. He does it to our pantry every time he comes. He takes every doubt, reorganises it, and we get into trouble because it's not right. These are the things we have to work with. These are the challenges that parents are working with, not just occasionally.

They have to do this every day. They can't take him to the mall. If he gets away, he's gone. We'll never catch it, and there's dozens of kids like this. So we've really got to think like the Richmond Pool. I'd be really keen on getting an area where we could take them, where we— we're not going to cage them up like animals, but we've got to make sure that they have this access where they can use all the facilities like normal, what I call normal human beings. So I fully support this. I fully support to take the pressure off the members of our community so that we can say, we're standing up with you and for you. So if this committee starts, I'll be extremely keen to be on the committee. And I thank you very much, and I thank Councillor Lyons Barker for bringing this forward.

It's a tremendous idea. Thank you.

Thank you, Councillor. Is there anybody that's not in favour that hasn't spoken?

Right.

Yes, Councillor.

I could be wrong, but I thought I heard reference to a dedicated staff member

Of the committee. Was that— was that the— have I just misheard? Yeah. Is that— if we're going to have a dedicated staff member, I would have thought that that would be—

The terms of reference haven't been—

Say again?

The terms of reference haven't been agreed to yet or discussed. Okay ,

That was just a wish.

A

Wish.

Did I get it wrong?

Through you, Mr Mayor, that's not part of the motion, Councillors, and I would simply say that we have considerable in-house expertise and a wonderful group of dedicated staff within our Community Planning and Partnerships team who I think would be well equipped to support the committee should Council resolve so.

Thank you, General Manager. Right of reply, Councillor.

Thank you, Mr Mayor, and thank you for all those contributions to debate. I particularly want to thank our three speakers who shared their experiences and exposed their vulnerabilities, and they told us, they gave us a little bit of insight into challenges, whilst also acknowledging, as Mr Gearan did, that , you know, this isn't all about people who have a disability, because disability isn't always visible. It's often not acknowledged or admitted to. Some people simply don't admit to it for fear of either some form of exclusion or, you know, seeing it as a detriment. So I really do thank them for giving up the time, and I particularly thank Irene for initially raising the issues around the mall, and I'm pleased that we were able to have that come into a conversation and hopefully address it.

I thank Councillor Kotlash for her alternative idea . I think gaining data is all well and good, but I think in terms of disability, that would be available data. But as we've just pointed out, it's not all about that. The issues around access and inclusion are an evolving space. It's a space where, you know, we've got people changing all the time. Things around social isolation are changing. You know, if we have another COVID, for example, we're going to have another whole round of problems emerge that could be connected to that. So I think that doing consultation around the area, while it sounds good, I think it could both be expensive in staff time and effort and then would require the analysis after that.

But I actually think the same voices or representatives of the same people would be the people who would come forward and engage in that, the same people who will put their name up. For the committee. As Councillor Wheeler touched on, the effectiveness of advisory committees lies with our direction and , you know, our interaction, how we as a chamber ask committees to give us information and how we direct what we would like, what sort of information that we want. And I think that can be a very positive thing. In terms of budgeting and so on, as the general manager just said, we have the in-house resources to do that, and I think that we have very good staff that work in that area that could cope with it.

There are some really small changes that can be made from time to time that are really quite inexpensive. And overall, I think we have to look at the cost of inaction, the cost of not gathering this data, of not gathering this information, of not being aware of the pitfalls that exist out there and therefore not doing anything proactively to address them. So I'm hoping this will get the support. It sounds like it will. There's no doubt that there's a need. That's well established. We know there's a need, and we thank everyone who raises it. What we just need to do now is work forward together and try and find what the best way to go forward is so that we better understand the needs and so that we understand, of course, within the framework of what our actual obligations and our capacity to deliver are, that we move forward on that basis and, you know, do the best that we can do in this space.

Well spoken, Councillor. The motion with the slight amendments as on your screen, the intent of the— The changes don't change the practicality of the motion. The motion's on the screen in front of you, Councillors. Those in favour?

It's Councillor Brodnack,

Councillor Wheeler, Councillor Lyons-Buckett, Councillor Ryan, Councillor Zerik, Councillor McMahon, Councillor Creed, Councillor Michael, Councillor Reardon, Councillor Sheather. Those against?

It's Councillor Kotlash. The motion's carried, Councillors.

Councillors, we have quite a few items on block. Sorry

Yeah

There's

Two. There's two

That's got disclosures. Three. Okay.

The ones that are on block, excluding the ones that have where councillors have an interest, is 10.2.1, 10.4.2, 10.4.3, 10.4.4, 10.4.5, 10.5.2, 10.5.3, and 11.1.1. Would someone like to? Councillor Reardon. Councillor Veigel. Those in favour?

It's unanimous. Those against? That's carried.

The first item, Councillors, is 10.1.1. It's the slab barns.

We need a resolution, Councillor.

Mr Mayor.

Councillor McMahon. Oh

Sorry . Mr Mayor. Oh, sorry. Councillor

Wheeler.

I have a pecuniary interest in item 10.1.1. I own an item proposed for heritage listing in the planning proposal.

Thank you, Councillor McMahon.

Thank you. I have a significant non-pecuniary interest in this item and will be leaving the room. And item belongs to my paralegal's family.

Thank you, Councillors.

Do we have a motion, Councillors, for 10.1.1?

Yeah, I'll

Move it.

I'll second . Okay

Councillor Kotlash, Councillor Creed.

Any discussion?

Did I move it?

Yep.

I thought I seconded it. Don't worry, I'll talk. Look, I really enjoyed reading about these.

It's taken us quite a bit of time to get here, but I think, you know, we had to do it, and it's a pity that we've probably lost some items along the way. Since I thought I had seconded it, I actually haven't thought about what I'm speaking, so if somebody gives me the page number, I'd be most helpful.

Thanks. Look, I don't think there's anything more to add. Good work, and—

Thank you, Councillor. Yeah

It was lovely reading all that history.

Councillor, do you have your— Thanks

Mr Mayor. I

Just

Wanted to clarify, I spoke with staff before, but I just wanted to, in full transparency, ask these questions in the meeting. So I think Mr Kearns. So one of the questions, one of the concerns I had was, was it the heritage placed on the structure or the property? And from what I was told by staff, that it was going to be on the property, not the structure. I did have concerns about that because of the potential added cost if they wanted to do something with the land. But Mr Kearns had laid those fears and said that by doing this, if property owners wanted to, it actually opens them up to other assistant grant funding and all that sort of stuff. So I'm happy to support the report or the thing. Thanks. I

Get that answered

Yeah, through you, Mr Mayor, that is confirmed. The listing is across the site and there are benefits that flow from that that apply to the site. Okay, thanks. I just wanted to—thank you

Councillor Ryan.

Thank you, Mr Mayor. In the original report, I believe in April, Mr Eds suggested that we do some sort of advertising, like a barn trail. I did bring that up at the time. You said you only got the staff to look into it. Perhaps we could get the staff to look into it a bit more and you could give me a— Idea of when this would be happening. We have all the information in the original report that would probably justify this, and it could be put out at the Hawkesbury Information Centre and that sort of thing.

Through you, Mr Mayor, that would require a resolution of Council. There's actually a fair bit of work in creating that, noting that the vast majority of these barns sit on private property, Councillors, so it would need the consent of all of those owners who wish to participate. Then we would pass that project through from our heritage officers through to our visitor information centre for them to curate the trail, necessarily. So it's not a piece of work that I would do without a resolution of Council. Yep

I'll look forward to putting that together.

Thank you, Councillor.

Any further debate? Right of reply, Councillor Kotlash.

Not necessary. Thank you,

Mr Mayor. Thank you, Councillor Kotlash. Those in favour?

It's Councillor Zamprogno, Councillor Lyons-Buckett , Councillor Ryan, Councillor Djuric, Councillor Kotlash, Councillor Creed, Councillor Veigel, Councillor Whelan, Councillor Sheather. Those against? That's carried.

The next item is 10.1.2.

Councillor Wheeler, you asked just to come forward. It's just 10.1.2. It's the section 7.12.

I'm happy to move the motion, Mr Mayor. Thank

You.

Seconded, Mr Mayor

Thank you.

I did, however, want to raise, however, that we are only just now finding half a million dollars for work in Thompson Square, which should have been a key part of the livability project. This is an incredibly important part of Australia's history, and yet it's become a dusty park with a few signs up on posts that people largely walk around and ignore. And the dining area now has no shade, no seating, apart from that that someone seems to have dragged into position from a patch known locally as the ashtray. It's really disgraceful that this incredibly important space has been left to 7.12 funding a year after the livability program is complete. So much money on pet projects in the mall, while Australia's oldest public square has been left bare.

No shade, no seating. No wonder the businesses have closed. What was the most popular dining area in Windsor. Now it's got a massage parlor and a whole lot of tobacconists and a whole lot of for lease signs.

What I'm a little bit concerned about with this item is that we seem to be pouring money into the same projects over and over again. I'd like to see us move on from these big signature parks and into amenities upgrades in other areas of the LGA. Not everybody comes to our big parks. We've just had a big discussion about access and inclusion for people with disabilities. If you've got a child or children with something like autism, often a big park is the last place that child wants to be. Many of those children are very happy in small, quiet parks. That's some of the places that we should be putting our money. I know it's not as attractive for grant funding, and it doesn't give the same big sod-turning event that we often quite like.

It's not as attractive on social media. But for communities who just want to walk to the park with their kids for an hour after work or after school, those places are gold. I will ask a question about the amenities upgrades. We had some information come in response to a question that I asked a few meetings back about the facilities for women and girls and gender neutral facilities. Can I get some indication about whether the amenities upgrades that are offered in this program will be for more inclusive facilities and not just more facilities for men and boys?

You most certainly can, Councillor.

Through you, Mr Mayor. Yes, generally it is the case that where we're upgrading these sorts of facilities, it's for inclusivity, but individual projects will respond to individual demand in terms of the demand for the sporting facility that is present at that time.

Thank you. Unfortunately, I think it's often a bit of a chicken and egg thing, in that if an oval offers sporting facilities for men, it continues to be men that ask for more sporting facilities at that space. And what I think we need is a comprehensive overview. And look, I got some of that information when I asked that question. I actually was surprised at how comprehensive the information was that came back to us. I think it leaves us in a very good position to move forward and have much more inclusive spaces. That's the sort of stuff that we should be putting funding towards, because it allows everybody to participate.

There's a lot of money here for sport. I know we hear a lot that we need more sporting facilities. I'd really love to see some 7.12 money going towards cultural activities as well. Thanks.

Just to clarify, Councillor, with the amendments you're talking about in particular, and we're a bit off section 712 at the moment, is that the sporting facilities who do have toilets that have been modified, that have need women's facilities, have been upgraded in that regard. The ones that haven't— Through their associations, the different organisations, the Sports Council makes queries with clubs who wish to change facilities, for instance the toilets, to see whether or not competition is going to be played by that sport on those grounds. That usually happens three to five years in advance to give us time to put it in the system to make that happen, and to date that's exactly what's happened.

So we're not behind in that regard in relation to playing fields. Tamplin Field, for instance, was modified some years ago because of that reason, and the most recent design with that and Governor Phillip Park utilised facilities along the lines of what you're talking about with the new design of the buildings and indeed Turnbull Oval refurbishment.

Thank you.

Any further debate? Right reply?

Do you need a right of reply, Councillor?

You've moved the motion. The motion is 10.1.2. Those in favour?

Against? Carried. Councillors Zamprogno, Councillor Wheeler, Councillor Lyons-Buckett, Ryan, Djuric, McMahon, Kotlash, Creed, Veigel, Reardon and Sheather.

Item 10.2.1.

Sorry, that's in block. We go down to 10 .3.2, draft planning proposal policy guidelines. Councillor Lyons-Buckett, you've called that up.

I'll move that, Mr Mayor. I'll second it, Mr Mayor. Before I begin, Mr Mayor, I did have a question about it, and I mean I could ask it as part of what I'm saying, I suppose, but I still have an issue in it around the point of when there is some feedback prior to a planning proposal going to the local planning panel for advice . I understand around the consultation that the public consultation is after that and that it comes to Council to determine whether it should go to a gateway or not, but I just want to know, is there any legal or legislative impediment to stop us being able, or to raise issues before that goes to the planning panel for advice?

Through you, Mr Mayor. Councillor, the procedure is set by the guidelines published by the Department of Planning. In saying that, as I understand it, there's no legal impediment to, I guess, offering comment in relation to a planning proposal. However, that comment would need to be on the understanding that there's no certainty in relation to that planning proposal until the planning panel has made a decision in that regard.

Thank you, Mr. Wynn. I'll speak to it now. Mr. Mayor, if I may. I'm pleased to see this policy. It was brought forward to increase the involvement of councillors and public in the early stages of planning proposals, and I'm happy to see it go on exhibition. It shows how the process aligns with the timeframes in which a planning proposal has to be assessed, etc. Just for the information of the public, who sometimes get confused between DAs and planning proposals, planning proposals are proposed amendments to the LEP, generally a change of zoning or some other development standard. Some minor or administrative ones can be put forward by council to go through, but not by individuals. So I'm taking from what I've read that councillors will be advised of any scoping proposals that are lodged, and we did see today some information about various scoping proposals that are in.

In an ideal world, we would have our LEP updated and we would have our strategic planning well in place that would make it clearer about where future areas for development. Unfortunately, in the absence of structure planning, we don't necessarily have a layer between strategic planning at a high level and our detailed planning of the LEP, so that doesn't give us a big picture long-term framework, and that leads to uncertainty for stakeholders. I'm pleased to see Councillor Wheeler's motion seeking some certainty around the future growth and development in Oakville. Having such structure planning can eliminate the tendency for spot rezoning, which we've seen has fragmented a lot of land in the Hawkesbury in the past.

The missing element for me here is what I've just asked about, and that is when the proposal is going to the local planning panel for advice, which then comes back to us as a recommendation regarding gateway, that at that stage there hasn't been any opportunity for any input around potential impacts and reasons for objections, apart from what our staff may raise. Now, I know they will be raising things in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, but sometimes in the Hawkesbury there are really locality-specific things that we know about, or locals know about, that maybe all the staff don't necessarily know about. So given that that process, when it goes to the local planning panel, only has the applicant able to address, I was asking about any mechanisms available for us to input if we feel, and I referred just briefly to in the past we had an issue around Kurrajong Heights where there was clearly a lot of really local interest and a lot of local specific impacts that were to be felt, and they weren't able to be inputted until after that stage.

I'm happy to see this go forward. The whole objective, of course, was to ensure that we are aware of what's going on. I'm happy to see that process is all set out. I think it'll work well. I do intend to follow up on what I've just raised about that, and so we can seek some clarity around what would be a method for doing that. Bearing in mind, I take on board what Mr Wynn just said, that of course it would simply be information being provided, it wouldn't be a council decision, and it certainly wouldn't be anything that carried any weight. I understand that. It's mainly drawing attention to various aspects of any specific development. Thank you.

Thank you, Councillor. Councillor Kotlash.

Thank you, Mr Mayor. When this was first proposed, I thought, no, we don't need this. This is, you know, we already know this. But actually, having read it, it was actually really good to have it all in one place. And it's surprisingly complex. I suppose if you've been a councillor for a long time, you know, and you get used to these terms and you get used to the legislative framework, you can presume that everybody else thinks it's straightforward and easy. But in fact, it is, and it's quite complex. So I'm really, really glad we've got this draft.

I might just pause for a

Minute. You're right. We've just got a little invasion.

It's not a snake, is it?

No, it's not

Okay, if it's

Not a

Snake, it's probably

A little bug. We've got a timid general manager. We

Can't have

Don't kill it.

It's a cockroach. It's a cockroach.

Oh, okay. I'll just give you a running commentary. The CFO has just destroyed

The cockroach

He's used the comp— I better not be silly. Thank you. That's

The first time I think a councillor's been interrupted by a cockroach.

That's right. The General Manager is looking composed.

Go for it, Councillor.

Nothing to see here. Right. Back to our very wonderful planning proposal and guidelines.

Could I just ask, could we have within this planning proposal an explanation of the stages that people can get a refund? Because if you go and look at our fees and charges in our current operational plan, under the Strategic Planning Services, where it says additional application fees, and it goes into this very complicated kind of process that if you put a planning proposal in to reclassify land only, it's X amount of dollars. Seventy percent of a refund if the notice is withdrawn up to 14 days, 50% refund if the notice of withdrawal is provided up to 14 days prior to the report going to the planning panel. This sort of information, if we could just either put it into the policy without actually putting the actual figures, because they will change from year to year, but the process of when you, or the protocol of when you get a refund, I assume doesn't change.

So... If that's all right from the mover, could we do that maybe without an amendment to include that? And is that, and, well, before I do that, is that something that is doable?

Through you, Mr. Mayor. Look, that's perfectly reasonable, Councillor. I think a simple statement to say that a partial refund of fees may be offered where an application is withdrawn prior to its consideration at potential different stage gates is something that could be incorporated. What we don't want to do is bind ourselves into the amounts or the quantums of that, given that they are subject to change annually through the operational plan and budget. And so we don't want to bind ourselves into that in the policy, but rather use the fees and charges to do that.

Because I think, thank you for that, because I think when people go into this, it's, I think they really need to know when they can pull out if things change. You know, if they really, if they come up against something that's unexpected, you know, they know that that's available to them. I think that would be absolutely essential for this policy. So that's really good, and I'm glad we can do that. And that's me. Thank you.

Thank you. Any further debate? Councillor Wheeler.

Thanks, Mr. Mayor. I thought this was really helpful. I think we're in a space where, and Councillor Kotlash is right, this actually isn't written for us. You know, it's probably great for people who haven't been on Council for nine long years, but— It's, yeah. It's, but I think it's, so it's probably quite useful as a document for people early in the council journey as well. One of the things that isn't clear from the document, and I know it's elsewhere, is what basic, standard, complex and principal mean in this context. So I wondered if that could be included in the definition section where we've got some other definitions. It would just save people going to another document to find it.

Yep. Through you, Mr Mayor, yes, that is possible

Okay. Any further discussion?

Since the planning panel, there's been ongoing frustration, I suppose, and the likes for quite some years, and there's not too many of that and discussions with the staff and the planners about issues that have come out of that. These documents, even though they're going on public exhibition, and I just spoke about the 28 days, it says at least 28 days. It'll be extended period because of the Christmas break and the like. But even though it'll be a policy, it'll be a working document. There seems needs to be work through here on the best process, and that'll only come about through the involvement and working with some objective to start in the first place. Is there no discussion? Did you need to clarify anything in

The ...

Councillor Buckett, you happy with that? Yes,

Thank you.

Provide a reply, Councillor?

Not necessary.

Thank you. You've got the matter on the screen in front of you, Councillors. Those in favour?

Those against?

The motion is carried. It's Councillor Brogno, Wheeler, Lyons-Buckett, Ryan, Djuric, McMahon, Kotlash, Creed, Veigel, Regan and Sheather. The motion is carried.

The next item is

10.3.3, committee sponsorship.

Sorry

Deputy Mayor.

Thank you, Mr Mayor. I have a significant non-pecuniary interest and will be leaving the room as I am a member of the Kurrajong CWA. Thank you.

Thank you, Deputy Mayor. Councillor Ryan.

I have a significant non-pecuniary interest as I'm a member of the Pitt Town Progress Association.

Thank you, Councillor. Jill, your

Light. I have a less significant non-pecuniary interest as a member of Kurrajong CWA, so I'll be leaving the room.

Thank you, Councillor.

We need a motion, Councillors. I'll move that. Councillor Creed. Councillor Kotlash.

Do you need to speak on the matter, Councillor Creed? No, not necessary

Okay, the motion is before you, Councillors, on page 63. Those in favour?

Against? It's carried. Councillor Zamprogno, Councillor Wheeler, Councillor Lyons-Buckett, Councillor Djuric, Councillor Kotlash, Councillor Creed, Councillor Veigel and Councillor Sheather. The motion is carried, Councillors. Yes, please.

Yep. 10.3.5.

There's a few tonight.

The next item is 10.3.5, Local Heritage Assistance Fund. Councillor Lyons-Buckett.

Yes, Mr Mayor, I have a significant non-pecuniary interest in item 10.3.5. A friend of mine, Anastasia O'Toole, is one of the applicants for funding. I'll leave the...

Thank you, Councillor.

Councillor Ryan, you need to declare a interest. Yep.

Yeah, I have a significant non-pecuniary interest in 10.3.5, as they're known associates of me. Thank you

Councillor. Councillor Creed. Thank you, Mr Mayor. I have a matter of stake. It's a significant non-pecuniary interest in item 10.3.5, as I serve on the Sister City Association of Hawkesbury Council representatives, and I have a friendship with one of the recipients of this particular item. Thank you, Councillor.

Can we have a motion, please, Councillor, 10.3.5.

I'll move the motion .

Councillor Wheeler. Councillor Ridden, thank you.

Councillor Wheeler.

Thanks, Mr Mayor. I'll speak briefly to it. These are really excellent projects that focus on stabilisation and protection of heritage fabric. I want to particularly thank Council's senior heritage officer, who has looked at each of these to see their merit and their capacity to stabilise fabric. I also want to thank the staff for adding the additional clause that draws attention to a lack of heritage assistance funding from the state government. If you notice in the business paper, $95,000 of this funding comes from Council. It's a significant contribution from a council that is not flush with funds and represents a real commitment from Council to protecting heritage fabric. It's the second increase in that funding in the last two years following recommendations from Council's Heritage Advisory Committee and a Council resolution to that effect.

Disappointingly, $5,000 only comes from the state government. This number has is unchanged for decades now. A level of government with far greater capacity to raise funds, and a far greater capacity, it would seem, to spend it on all sorts of weird and wonderful things, can only chuck five grand at the Hawkesbury's incredibly important heritage. There's an incredible wealth of heritage in the Hawkesbury. Much of it is quite old and needs protection and repair. Much of it is humble heritage that was not built out of materials that last without intervention. A lot of our heritage is timber or has timber details to it that require continuous , by the time it's 150 years old, continuous maintenance.

It's pretty pathetic that the amount hasn't increased for more than a decade from the state government, and that the same is given to areas with very little or very few heritage items, and that same amount of money is then given to areas like the Hawkesbury with such a wealth and number of heritage items. So I look forward to the Mayor and I going and making our case to the Minister. I hope for a hearing. You can always be optimistic about these things, but it's a point that I think we need to make. Thanks.

Thank you, Councillor. Any further debate, Councillors?

You don't need a reply, Councillor. The recommendations on page 83, 10.3.5, those in favour?

Those against? It's carried, Councillor. Councillor Sandbrook, then Councillor Wheeler, Councillor Zureb, Councillor McLarn, Councillor Kotlash, Councillor Veigel, Councillor Reardon, and Councillor Sheather. The motion's carried.

The next matter before us is 10.4.1. Councillor Wheeler, you've asked to bring that forward.

I'll move that way, Mr Mayor.

Second,

Mr Mayor.

Councillor, spoke up.

Thanks. I had a series of questions, which is why I've called it up. There's a — one of the resolutions relates to Bushells Lagoon. Can I ask who has authority over Bushells Lagoon if it's not Crown land?

Yes, I know it is.

I see it's private property, but—

No. I know that. Through

Just bear with me one second, Councillors. Through you,

Mr Mayor, I'd have to take that on notice and go and make some further inquiries. My understanding was that it was Crown land, but that's— I don't believe the case, so I will take that on notice.

Thank you. Give yourself some time. It's not a short answer. I think is that one of the things that disturbs me about Bushells Lagoon is that it just gets— Shunted from one lack of ownership to the next, and instead of being treated as a really significant and important waterway and wetland, it has just been treated as a drain. And I think that's one of the reasons why it's in such bad condition. But this matters not just from an environmental perspective, it matters from a flood management perspective as well, and it also matters from a weed management perspective. It's one of the most miserable patches of water that we have in the LGA, and I would very much like to turn that around. I'm not hopeful, but having some understanding of at least who has some authority over it might help.

The other question I've got relates to the works at March and Chapel Street, where it states that something will happen there under the active transport link. Can I ask what that something might be?

Through you, Mr Mayor, so the plan with the new Richmond Bridge includes an active transport link, essentially utilising the current bridge and part of the existing road. What we haven't seen yet, if my memory serves correctly, is the detailed design of how that links back into Richmond, and that's the detail that effectively we're waiting to see what that link looks like. Okay

I'd be really interested for that to come back to the chamber. The issues around this resolution were the problems for residents there crossing the road and getting to areas of Richmond without having to walk a long way into Richmond to use the traffic lights to cross safely. And the other issue that they have is getting out of Chapel Street, which I think is only going to get worse, frankly, unless some sort of mitigation is done there. It's going to get harder and harder for them to turn right out of Chapel Street. They currently report turning left, going up towards Yarramundi Lane and doing a U-turn somewhere and coming back, or looping all the way back around, which is obviously onerous.

If they don't do that, it's dangerous for them to turn right. So that's their choice. Neither choice is good. So if that could be kept in mind when we're going through that process, and if that could come back to us for discussion or some consultation with the residents of the facility there, that would be really helpful. And then I just wanted to ask, while we're on motions that haven't been acted on yet—sorry, resolutions that haven't been acted on yet—what happened to the resolution for a trial of free sanitary products in council buildings that council passed on the 14th of March 2023? The outstanding register says that it will come to council in December 2025. It's December 2025. When is it coming back?

I'd have to take that one on notice. It was a project being managed by the former Director of City Planning, and since she has resigned and left council, I would just need to check with the Community Planning and Partnership team what their progress is on that matter.

Thank you.

Thank you , Mr Mayor. Mine puts also in the form of a question to staff. I note that their desire is to close off the issue about pedestrian safety at March and Chapel Streets in Richmond. I get regular representations from senior citizens at the village there who still believe that that intersection is a hazard. And if I were to ask them whether they think these issues have been sufficiently addressed, universally they would say no. In addition to which, and I choose my words carefully, is a scoping proposal at a property proximate to this location that I cannot disclose, which, if it were to occur, would massively affect traffic in that part of Chapel Street. And while that issue is still in train, I would prefer not to see this issue closed off, and I'd prefer to see number two taken out of the recommendation and kept alive, if that's all the same to you. Comment from staff, perhaps.

Councillor, if I could, the matter that you, the property you speak of, it's been talked about a lot, I believe, in the past, and I'm not sure whether there's possibility of another outlet to another road other than coming onto Richmond Windsor Road there. So, through you

Through you, Mr Mayor, the matter of the performance of that intersection is a matter for Transport for New South Wales. We've previously raised the council's concerns with Transport, and my recollection is that we wrote to the— Member for Hawkesbury and relevant minister at the time, the resolution has been completed.

Take on board your comments, Councillor, maybe we discuss it. Mr Mayor

Following on from the director of infrastructure's comments, is it possible to add a fourth, or a Part B, so the recommendation would read that Council, A, approve the closure of the three Council resolutions, and then B, that further information regarding the March and Chapel Street intersection treatment come back to Council for discussion.

Are you moving that way, Councillor?

I can change my motion to that, yes. I might have my A's and B's and 1's and 2's rounded the wrong way, but I'll leave that to the staff to fix.

So you're suggesting 1, 2, 3 and a fourth part, that the Part 2, March and Chapel Street resolution be further reported?

Not that the treatment for March and Chapel Street intersection be further reported to Council

The resolution is complete. Council can't leave that resolution open, but we can call for it to come back to us, is my understanding.

Sorry, can I just clarify on— On that? Yep. I'm happy to support it. I'm just concerned that we're closing off the council resolution, but then we're still technically keeping it open with

The extra— Well, it's not a resolution. There's a recommendation there that—

No

I understand that. It's just that the wording says that we close the three council resolutions, but then we're technically keeping the second one open if we add the extra bit. Sorry, I just want to make sure that we're

Not— Yeah, no, I think the intent of what Councillor Wheeler was suggesting was that each of those three are closed off, and that we're introducing a second Part B motion that requests an update or advice be provided on the treatment of that intersection. So it's a slightly different and nuanced wording to what the report was.

Thank you, Councillor.

Chair. Could I just— Councillor Kotlash, an amplification on that as well. Would it be prudent to say in the second part, if this is okay with Councillor Wheeler, that further information about the Marchant Chapel Streets come after we find out what's happening with the bridge? Because that seems to me that that's the, you know, I mean, it's not our road, and whatever happens with the bridge will be — Because there's sort of two parts to it. We can do something, or we can get information about what we might do now. But with the Richmond replacement bridge project, that's going to stop things, so— Do we want to wait till that happens so we know what to, you know, how to update it, I guess?

Councillor, I think all avenues will be looked at. It's been on the books a long time now because it's been a concern for a long while. But the opportunities, other than getting onto Windsor Road, haven't been there. And I'm sure the staff will be well aware if there's other opportunities arise. Yeah

Deal with that

I would suggest it's prudent that we bring it back when we know what the proposal is. Yeah.

Can I just respond to that, Mr Mayor? My understanding is that the treatment of Chapel and Mart Street, of that intersection, is part of that project. So we'll have to know what's happening further with the bridge before Transport for New South Wales knows what they're doing with Chapel and Mart Street

Any further debate? Councillor Wheeler.

Not necessary, Mr Mayor. Thank you.

The recommendation is on your screen, Councillors. Those in favour?

Those against? It's carried. Councillor Zamprogno, Wheeler, Lyons-Buckett, Ryan, Djuric, McMahon, Kotlash, Creed, Veigel, Reardon and Sheather. The motion is carried, Councillors.

The next item we've got — there's a pen that don't write — is 10.4.6. Windsor sewer scheme. Councillor Lyons-Buckett, Councillor Wheeler, you called that out.

I'm happy to move the motion.

Thank you. Seconded? Councillor Feigel.

Any discussion?

Councillor Lyons-Buckett.

Thank you, Mr Mayor. I did send a question today inquiring about the operation and maintenance agreement for McGrath's Hill, to which the General Manager responded. Thank you. I was just following up, though, a question around that, given that the answer said that Sydney Water would cover all the costs, does that include covering the costs of the staff to operate it, or do we still pay for the staff to do that?

I'll get the staff to clarify any costs that may be incurred

By us at all, if any. Through you, Mr Mayor, no, that includes the staffing resource to operate McGrath's Hill sewage treatment plant. So

I'm just a little confused how that would work. Does that mean that we just bill Sydney Water for staff costs, and the staff remain employees of Council?

Yes, that's correct.

Okay, so those staff, who I'd like to put a shout-out thanking them for the work they've done there, they'll stay — are they the staff that currently work at McGrath's Hill? I'm just trying to understand how this works from a

Or they work at Windsor? Yes. So, having due respect to the discussions that are ongoing with staff at the moment— The intention is that a number of our current staff from the sewer scheme would remain in Council's employ for the period of the operations and maintenance agreement. We don't need all the staff, of course, but a small number, and they would remain at the treatment plant working at McGraths Hill, operating it, maintaining it, effectively under contract to Sydney Water, but through Council, until we're in a position where we can begin to decommission that plant.

Okay, and so then what will happen to those staff?

At that time, Council would work with staff and the union in terms of any opportunities for redeployment, and if there are no opportunities for redeployment, then the redundancy provisions of the award would apply. Okay,

Thank you. Just one other point. In the response it said the report about the future of the McGraths Hill site is to come back at some point. So I'm just clarifying that we will be involved in that at some point. So if we've got input into what some potential opportunities, et cetera, for that site may be, that will be something councillors will be involved in, sort of at a strategic level. Is that correct?

Certainly, that's how I envisage it coming back, is that once we know the timeline of Sydney Water and we've got some confidence around that timeline, then that will put us in a position to assess what needs there are out there and what the highest value use, as determined by Council, is for that remnant land. Okay,

Thank you.

Councillor

Ryan Thank you. This is probably just one that there is— The area there at the Grass Hills still, does it have a water access licence to cover that area, commonly known as a wildlife? I didn't invent that word.

Through you, Mr Mayor, given that we're putting water back in the river, I suspect we don't have one, but I can take that on notice. Please take that on notice. We have plenty of our own water that we can access at the plant. I'm

Looking forward to looking to the future in relation to this, and if that water access licence goes to Sydney Water, we would have to either reapply or buy another licence. And I think it'd be quite essential to have that remain with the property there. If we could possibly do that, it'd be great. Thank you. I look forward to the answer. That might

Be in an old file, Councillor. Councillor Kotlash.

Thank you, Mr Mayor. Have we set aside a budget to do any contaminated site assessment before we go into any sorts of discussions about what we can use that site for?

Through you, Mr Mayor, there's a whole process that has to be followed in terms of decommissioning that site, which would be part of the discussion at the time with Council. If you'll recall, and I can't recall the month, but we did discuss utilising some of the reserves from the sewer fund, which will be retained by Council for the decommissioning and the associated investigations and design work with that decommissioning process. So yes, there is budget that has been earmarked for that whole process.

Any further discussion? Councillor Ryan do you have a question?

Yeah, I have another question. When we send this information out to the owners or the people who are affected by the sewer, could we do it in a real plain English way? That is very important because some of the stuff that came from the SRV was very challenging. I got a number of phone calls asking me what was happening here. Can we do it in a real plain English way and at the bottom write off exactly what the monetary value that they will be saving, whatever it is. That'll save a lot of embarrassment or embarrassing phone calls, I can tell you.

Thank you. Take it on board, Councillor.

Councillor Brogden. Thank you, Mr Mayor. I concede that the die is cast with this issue, but on the few occasions where it will continue to transact through this chamber, I want to flag again my misgivings about the viability of the McGraths Hill wetland. And I'm wondering whether the mover would be prepared to add an additional point to the motion. If not, I'll move this as an amendment. The intent of which is to signal our desire to continue to work with Sydney Water to find ways of preserving the viability of that wetland and that its environmental status is of value to us. Could I work with Councillor— Well

I've raised that before and I just, that was what my question was about what was to happen to the site. Would we be having strategic planning around that? Because it will remain our site. Is that correct? It will remain ours to deal with.

Yeah. So following on from your comment and my concern, I was wondering if we might strengthen that by adding it as a dot point to the resolution. So that it's on the record and that council staff have some mandate to engage with Sydney Water so that they understand that the site and the wetland has value to the community and we represent that value. Can

I— I've got no objection with saying it, but I'm not still sure what it's got to do with Sydney Water. Can

I suggest that since I was the mover of the motion—

Oh, sorry, I thought it was me. That's why I was coming

Sorry, I thought it was Mary too. My apologies, Councillor.

No, look,

You

Know

Carry on. Look, actually, I have something useful to offer here because it's not unheard of for a site that's been used as a sewerage treatment plant to be contaminated, hence the question about that. I don't think we can— I wouldn't put that as a third point, only because I think we have to figure out, we have to do that decommissioning that Mr Button explained. It's quite a process and it does restrict what you do with the site. Because if it's contaminated with whatever it's contaminated with, you have to go through a big protocol of getting rid of it. It might take years. You know, like, we just don't— we have not— we rarely are at that stage. I don't think at this stage it is helpful to commit to anything, and we can't commit Sydney Water to doing that because that's not their business. It's not their land. They wouldn't have any skin in the game.

Through you, Mr Mayor, perhaps you misunderstand the intent of my question. That is indeed one issue relating to the site that might need to be resolved. But my question related to the viability of the wetland. And I just worry that if we don't say this when we have the opportunities to say this, eventually someone will say, Well, the wetland will dry up, and that habitat will be lost, and you never raised this before, so why should we care now? That was my concern.

Councillors , well, your point, Councillor, is valid, and we spoke about it in other places about the protection of what we see at this time for that land. We're talking here about the Windsor sewer scheme and dealing with the matter here. The staff's made it very clear, and I think all of us in discussions have made it clear that future works or anything that's happened is going to be reported back to Council to deal with, and those wetlands aren't going anywhere at this stage. And Sydney Water won't be doing anything to jeopardise that, I don't think. We're going to be managing it. Our staff would come back to us need to be very clearly there's a problem there, if indeed there is. And the reason I say that is with this process we're going now through now with Sydney Water, I think we need to deal with that and get on with it.

Mr Mayor, I'll yield, if it's not— thank you. If it's not the intention of the Chamber to kind of insert this concern at this point in the process, could I just ask staff through you, sir, what the approximate time frame is? How much life has that plant got? When will this issue become— Real, five years. Okay. Thank you. Do you like to—

Yeah, through you, Mr Mayor, whilst it's not a concrete figure, Sydney Water have indicated an approximate timeframe of five years. Thank you, Councillors. Councillor Wheeler.

Thanks, Mr Mayor. Just a few questions. Around contamination, does the divestment include divestment of the removal of our legal liability for any contamination into the future?

Through you, Mr Mayor, the Council retains ownership of all the land, and with that would come the responsibilities and liabilities of any contamination on that land.

At McGrath's Hill, or at both sites?

Generally, the proposition is across all sites that Council retains the land.

You'll have to forgive me, my recollection of the details of South Windsor escape me at this time of the night. But certainly for the pump stations in McGrath's Hill, it is that Council retains ownership of the land.

I understood that Council maintained ownership of McGrath's Hill. I assumed, perhaps incorrectly, that we were giving the site to— so that brings me to the question then of why Sydney Water would have access to all of our space without paying us a red penny. But we can have that discussion at a later date. Because I think if we are liable for the contamination—I mean, obviously we are responsible for the contamination—but there's potentially, that's potentially problematic, particularly of a site that we will have no control over once we have gone down this path. If I could have some more information on that liability, that would be helpful.

I'm happy to take that on notice.

I might just address that. So just from a transaction perspective, in relation to McGraths Hill solely, Hawkesbury City Council has the liability today, and Hawkesbury City Council will operate and maintain the site on behalf of Sydney Water. There won't be Sydney Water staff at

McGraths Hill — Sorry, I'm just going to jump in. I understand that about Windsor. Sorry, about McGraths Hill. It's the South

Windsor site that concerns me. Okay, you're specifically South Windsor. We can take that on notice

And without offering legal advice, the general principle under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act is one of polluter pays. So is that we would be responsible for everything that is up until today, and then that, I'm going to assume, that liability would then transfer to Sydney Water when they commence those operations.

Right So will we be doing any testing? And it's like all things, you only know what you've tested for. Will we be doing any testing before we hand this control over? Because otherwise I think we're leaving a bit of a black box.

Through you, Mr Mayor, are you referring to testing of soil and ground? That sort of detail we haven't yet worked through in terms of the testing regime as part of the transition plan. Until we had Council's final kind of tick-off of this process, we haven't gone too far down that path of transition planning, which is what tonight is all about. But the question of that liability is one that we will explore, and the other part of the information which I forgot to, or neglected to pass on is that the environmental protection licences would, for both McGraths Hill and South Windsor, sit with Sydney Water. So that also would be a mechanism for— for that liability to flow through to Sydney Water.

Thanks, and I assume that there would be some, if we have done the right things under our licence, and that would be— That would offer us some protection, I would hope, as well. Thank you. I'm satisfied that we, because we are maintaining ownership of the site, that we are maintaining, as far as we can at this point, some control over the McGraths Hill wetlands. I share Councillor Zamprogno's concerns about them going forward, but I don't think that's as simple as just keeping the wetland as it stands now. And I think we do have to be cognisant of the fact that there is likely to be significant contamination there that will require treatment. There's no membrane under that site. There's nothing that stops that contamination currently flowing into South Creek, and we are just relying on the good old, the solution to pollution is dilution, which it would seem they're doing with the St Mary's Fire into South Creek and our drinking water supply as well .

I am concerned about what happens to the staff. I hear that there will be some potential for redeployment or redundancy. These are, however, highly specialised staff, and offering them employment with those skills, I think, is almost impossible for us once we have divested from the sewer business. So I hope that, is the union involved at this point, and how much of that staff is unionised?

Through you, Mr Mayor, yes, the union certainly is involved. In fact, we've been very proactive in that space, and it has taken some time for the union to reply to us, but they have now replied to us. To the question of the percentage of union membership, I'm not across that, not aware of that.

I would yet again urge all our staff members to join the union. So I think it's really imperative that the staff are taken along in this process. In terms of paying for the $20 million debt that we will be left with once we gift this facility to Sydney Water and all its attendant problems into the future, I think it probably on paper represents good value for money for sewer scheme users in the long run, but I think it will be really understandable that they'll be less than keen on paying for a debt that they had no say in incurring. And so I agree with Councillor Ryan that we are really going to have to work hard on the comms for this so that it's both very simple, but also tells the longer-term story that they will save money, that they're not left carrying the can for what has been widely touted publicly as a stuff-up by Council.

And we've accepted responsibility for that, but we are not personally paying for it, and the people on this sewer scheme are. We should expect them to be a bit narky about that, I think.

Thank you, Councillor.

Any further debate? Thank you, Mr Mayor. Just a question, please. I know the wetlands has come up a number of times when we're just discussing this scheme, and I think we've had a vast questions in Chamber about, well, what happens to the overflow for the wastewater? I know it goes down to the settling ponds down there, the wetlands, and it flows through it. We're diverting. We're diverting the brown water, I think, into—where is it, Riverstone, is that the new facility there? If I can just take some notice, please, can you just ask where the recycled water is coming out from the Riverstone? Because that's close to South Creek. I can't understand why they couldn't divert some water back into the wetland, but that needs to be asked of the engineers of Sydney Water.

And the other thing is you've still got South Windsor there, and their overflow is coming—I know we're reticulating some of that back onto our parks, but that's going back into the creek as well. So if I may, can I just ask Council through you just to ask that question to Sydney Water whether some of that might go back into the wetlands, and that may help my colleagues here that keep asking questions about that area. I might take that on notice, councillor. It's on notice,

Yeah, absolutely. I wouldn't expect to see it before— Some of it's outside the scope of our staff. Yeah, I know that, but I'm just saying it needs to be asked . It'll be there. Thank you. Thank you.

Councillor Coleshill, is there anybody else?

Oh, I've got a—

You've got right of reply, Councillor Yep.

Following on from Councillor Vargoulis' question about the— sorry

About feeding

Water to the wetland, in the rehabilitation and the decommissioning—not the rehabilitation—the decommissioning phase of the McGraths Hill, have we factored in finding out the hydraulics and the hydrology of that wetland? Because I'm hearing a lot of comments that I necessarily wouldn't hang my hat on. For instance, the wetland will dry out when the, you know, it doesn't get fed water, or, you know, it's a vital part of the connection of— You know , birds and wildlife. If that wetland was constructed to be a working wetland connected to the sewage treatment plant, that gives it a whole different functioning . If it's an actual natural wetland, and by that I mean it's a swamp which is, you know, it drains, it dries out, it has to dry out to be healthy. You know, like we actually have to figure out what we've got.

I understand your question. And

Nobody's sort of, yeah, nobody's sort of— have we got a budget for that? I know that doesn't usually come in decommissioning.

The last briefing we had that you couldn't make, those questions you asked, but I'll get the staff to clarify for you now.

Through you, Mr Mayor, I think the more important question, and one which we're not in a position to know the answer to for quite some time, is what will be the obligations on Council with respect to remediating that site And it may well be that it is out of our hands whether the wetlands, in their current form, are retained. We live in an environment where particularly the issue of things like PFAS and forever chemicals, we don't know what that's going to look like in five years' time in terms of the obligations that will be on Council, let alone the costs that would be associated with trying to maintain the wetlands. They've been designed to treat effluent, treated effluent. They've been designed on the basis that they remove nutrients from a recycled water stream.

If those nutrients aren't there, it remains to be seen whether they can even survive in their current form. So there's a lot of work needed to firm up firstly what our actual obligations are with respect to the site are, and then following that, what we can actually do with the site in terms of the future state. So, yeah, well my question was, have we sort of budgeted that, because that's a big deal actually. Yeah, it'll be part of the rehabilitation process, but the council has made the staff very aware of what they'd like to see happen there. Through you, Mr Mayor, probably just to add,

We mentioned

At the last briefing

So as the general manager and the director of infrastructure mentioned, there is a reserve budget that will be utilised for the rehabilitation of the site, and we've got indicative quotes from Public Works New South Wales, but we've also reached out to Dr Michelle Ryan from Western Sydney University, who is a wetlands expert, and that consultancy work that we'd work with her on would be able to be funded from that reserve as well. So there's sufficient reserves to fund some consultancy work plus some rehabilitation work. It's all TBD because we're still to work out exactly. We haven't reached that junction where we need to make those decisions yet.

No further discussions? Righto, if necessary.

Just quickly, when I was the environmental scientist for water working for Blue Mountains Council, the number of people that said that Wentworth Falls Lake was just this beautiful natural lake that, you know, had always been there, and I was thinking, I think it got built to feed the steam trains water because they needed a water source. So it's funny how— Have things in the landscape, and that's okay. I mean, it was, you know, a beautiful, beautiful lake. Just thought I'd throw that in. Note writer for reply, I think it's— no, I will say, I think this was a really good move to simplify this. It's a, as Councillor Ryan said, we have to be clear and very in our communication to these customers, and I think that giving them that choice, I think was a little ambitious, and I think that the ten-year timeframe is right, and I think a sensible move. Happy to support it. Thank you.

Thank you. Councillors, the recommendation is on page 127. That's 10.4.6. Those in favour?

Against? It's carried. Councillor Bogno, Wheel, Lyons, Bucket, Ryan, Djuric, McMahon, Kotlash, Creed, Weigel, Regan and Sheather . The motion's carried.

The next item is 10.5.1. There's declaration—two declarations been made.

Councillor Wheeler.

Thanks, Mr Mayor. I have a less than significant non-pecuniary interest in item 10.5.1. I'm a member of the Hawkesbury Communications Brigade of the New South Wales RFS, and my son is a member of Wilberforce Brigade. The reason for no further action is that it doesn't meet the threshold for significance.

Thank you, Councillor. Councillor McMahon.

Thank you, Mr Mayor. I'm declaring a less than significant non-pecuniary interest. The item mentions the Hawkesbury Fire Control Centre. I'm a member of the New South Wales RFS Communications Brigade, and there's no pecuniary interest. Thank you.

Thank you. Do we have a motion, councillors? Was

It Councillor Veigel? Councillor Reardon. Any discussion? Those in favour?

Mr Mayor, I've got my light on.

Sorry .

Thank you,

Councillor.

Just a quick question. The bespoke heritage furniture under the livability project, where's that being—what's that—what is that, and where's it being installed?

Through you, Mr Mayor, that is furniture

That is as close to resembling the furniture that was in the mall as possible to maintain the look and feel through that whole section. With the changes to the area outside those shops up in part 1A— I think it's part 1A— up on near Thompson Square, that allowed for a concrete substrate to be used up in that location. With the inclusion of the concrete substrate, that allowed us, or gave us, more flexibility to use some street furniture which could be bolted in place. With a lot of the street furniture, it's a pro forma, so we've engaged with the manufacturer of that street furniture to do some customisation to provide a more sympathetic heritage feel to that street furniture. And it is going on those islands that were revealed once the temporary structure had been removed.

Thank you. And just another point that came up largely in the discussions of the Heritage Committee around the Thomas James Bridge. The reference to restoration of the Thomas James Bridge is really a bit optimistic, I'm afraid. We probably should be referring to reconstruction. I don't mean that to be a criticism. I'm not trying to make a derogatory statement. It's simply not possible to restore that bridge to its existing, to its original build and make it meet modern standards and withstand future flooding. So I don't think we should hide behind the fact that we have reconstructed that bridge. It's been an exceptional job. It looks lovely, the community is very happy with it, but it's not a restoration, and we shouldn't shy away from stating that we restored it to meet modern standards.

And I just want to add that there is a massive amount of work that is detailed in this document. For people who think that council isn't doing anything, that isn't delivering anything for the community for their rates money, read this document.

Any further debate?

Councillor Feigl.

The motion is just on page 133, 10.5.1. Those in favour?

It's unanimous. Councillors Zamprogno, Wheeler, Lyons-Buckett, Ryan, Djuric, McMahon, Kotlash, Creed, Veigel, Reardon and Sheather. Those against? Carried.

12.1.2, Councillor McMahon.

Notice of motion, Mr Mayor. Thank you very much. Thank you. I don't need to take a lot of time to discuss this one. I'm sure that everybody has read the intention of the motion. But just for the record, it's just asking Council to prepare a report regarding the process to officially name the two sporting ovals at Peel Park, North Richmond, as the Alan Carver Oval and the John Wellington Oval. Now, these ovals are both cricket ovals, and I'd asking to provide this report to Council at a future meeting so that we can actually make a decision to decide on whether we will rename these ovals. It's important to note that currently both the two ovals at Peel Park are called the John Wellington Oval Number 1 and the John Wellington Oval Number 2.

So changing one of them to the Alan Carver Oval really isn't that big a deal in my mind. Now, I do want to say that this notice of motion came to me from Aaron, who's the secretary of the North Richmond Cricket Club, obviously very familiar with the families in that club and the contributions that have been made by Alan Carver. If you read the background information there, I think that says enough about the history and the contribution that Alan Carver has made to the North Richmond Cricket Club and to cricket in general in the Hawkesbury. We have been through this process once before, if everyone recalls, with the naming of the two Green Tree ovals at the Breakaway. It's not impossible. It does take a long time, but we have done this before.

So, since this idea came to me via a community member, I was very happy to put this forward as a notice of motion. Thank you, Mr Mayor.

Thank you, Deputy Mayor. Councillor Zamprogno. Thank you, Mr Mayor. I have no doubt at all. Sorry,

A seconder. Thank you, Councillor Veigel.

Thank you, Mr Mayor. I have no doubt that the people suggested are eminently worthy, but I want to ask a broader question. And although I'll support this notice of motion, it's to add this commentary, I would expect that report also to discuss whether there is a broader naming principle or policy that we have, or that is commonly recommended by other organisations, geographical names board, you know, State Department of Sport, whatever, and whether there ought to be a death clause. I don't want to be morbid in saying this, but I mean, in other areas we don't commemorate or elevate somebody until they're dead. Look, they

Are dead.

They are dead in this case. Yeah.

No

No, no. Well, okay. So I wasn't aware of that, but still, if there was ever a suggestion that we name something after a living person, I would expect that to be part of the consideration. My apologies.

General Manager.

Councillors, we do actually have a naming of roads and public places policy that this proposal is consistent with.

Our intention was to address that when the report came back

Councillor Lyons-Buckett.

Thank you, Mr Mayor. I'm happy to support the motion. I just wanted to clarify for the public, because I did get a question from a member of the public, and they were confused that it was changing the name of Peel Park, but it's not changing Peel Park. I'm just going to say it publicly. It's ovals within that precinct, and the change is of one oval to another oval, just putting that on the public record. Thank you, Mr Mayor

Thank you. Just, this matter hasn't gone before the Sports Council yet, but I know it'd be supported because it's been discussed in that regard before. When it was called John Wellington Oval, as indicated in some of the information that's been provided, there's two cricket wickets on that oval, and there's the opportunity to name those grounds. It was Peel Park. It is Peel Park. And John Wellington lived across the road and did a lot of work on it before then. And Allan Carver was part of that, and one of the Mr Crickets, I suppose, of North Richmond, and all his life and his family associated with it. And so it's not very often that a ground sort of becomes available to promote the very people that, I guess, made it happen and continue to work in that regard.

Yeah, so what's proposed here, I certainly support. The opportunity is not arise very often, and there's very few people anyway that would sort of make the grade that would be nominated or supported in that regard.

Councillor Kotlash.

Thank you, Mr Mayor. I'd like to commend the Deputy Mayor for bringing this notice of motion, not only in bringing it, but in bringing it in the format that she has. And I think it's comforting that When a, and I think this is the right process, when a member of the public comes to you with an idea or something that they want, you don't just go in and say, Okay, yep, we'll do it. You ask via a notice of motion or some other way for us to consider asking staff to prepare a report , explain the process, what we have to do, all the ramifications, and that's good decision making. So well done. Thank you.

Thank you, Councillor.