Existing residents have had two meetings with Council in the last week

How can Council claim it's done community consultation if meetings only resulted from the shocked community's determined fight for facts and push for info?

• Online meeting on 2 August.

• Round-table meeting on 9 September.

• Council data transfer, 6 September.

• Councillor site meeting on 4 September.

• Mayoral 'site' meeting on 24 September.

• Residents, Councillors and staff meeting on 30 September.

• Residents and Councillors on-site 28 October.

Residents met councillors Tom Wegener and Nicola Wilson on site, with apologies from Karen Finzel. Paul Noonan ran Tom and Nicola through the residents proposal powerpoint presentation as Tom was on leave on 30 September and so had not seen it before. Tom was particularly impressed. He was surprised to learn that council's contamination report for 62LMD identified contamination management options besides remediation for the 62LMD site, depending on the final site layout. This fundamental point appears not to have been communicated to the councillors by planning staff - in the same way planning staff attempted to convince residents that since the contamination has been identified it must be remediated at the first big residents and council meeting on 30 July. Planning staff had retreated from this position (with the residents) by 2 August.

The group then walked the site for local familiarisation.

• Meeting with planners and some Councillors 11 November.

The Residents Steering Committee met with Mayor Frank Wilkie, councillors Amelia Lorentson and Tom Wegener (and Karen Finzel by voice link). In a significant victory for residents, Council planners have accepted several key aspects of the residents proposal including the retention of the Gympie Messmates, doubling the width of the buffer zones from Dianella Court, doubling the greenspace between the housing and significantly reducing the housing density!! Planning staff are still attempting to convince residents that the contamination must be remediated, full stop - in one noteworthy case even where the site is not contaminated!! On 2 August Planning staff had retreated from this position. Council are still paying little regard to cemetery expansion needs. While these initial gains are important, the fight will go on as we push hard to get the outcome that best balances the needs of all stakeholders.

• Site meeting with Council appointed Contaminated Land Consultant, planners and Councillors 2 December.

It was good that the residents had pushed to meet with Council representatives to discuss the site contamination cleanup proposal and health risks. Councillors and residents thus had the opportunity to hear first hand about the seriousness of the risks from Contamination consultant to Council, Andrew Winters of Environmental Advisors. Andrew indicated the contaminants of concern during excavation and handling of contaminated waste include lead, other heavy metals, and asbestos. Andrew also acknowledged that the contamination could be left in place and effectively managed under a Site Management Plan, but that this would prevent the site being developed for housing.

Next event: - A meeting with Coast2Bay.

After assurances the next step was to arrange a meeting with Coast2Bay, (which would have given residents and Councillors the chance to understand the Coast2Bay development proposal first hand) residents were shocked to learn the Council would vote on the subdivision of 62LMD at the Ordinary Council meeting on January 23. More dissappointing was that in another staggeringly tone-deaf act, Council decided the fate of 62LMD, and with it, the shire ratepayers' finances, in another confidential session. This was justified by co-mingling commercially sensitive information with the decision about the overall site development strategy. 12 to 13 residents (including four children) awaited the outcome in the Council foyer for between 6 and 7 hours.

Apparently the 6 Councillors present (Cr Stockwell attended online) were asked to vote for one of two proposals - A Council staff modified version of the September 2024 Residents Proposal, and a Council staff recommendation for subdivision.

The Council voted 4:3 on the resolution to adopt the Staff Recommendation. FOR: Crs Wilkie, Stockwell, Finzel and Wegener. AGAINST: Crs Lorentson, Wilson and Phillips.

The resolution itself makes an interesting read. It essentially, committed the council to the remediation of the whole site before tenders had been sought for the cost, approved the deal with Coast2Bay before Councillors could meet them to ask questions, and approved full subdivision works (including roads and services) for a housing outcome across the site while promising Council would (finally) do some community consultation about the future uses of the site which may lead to a public open space outcome on most of it.

• Council goes it alone....

  - The Ordinary Council meeting 23 January.

• Large meeting on 30 July.

• Deputation to Council's Ordinary Meeting on 19 September 2024

• Residents and Councillors on-site 28 October 2024

• Meeting with planners and some Councillors 11 November 2024

• Site meeting with Council appointed Contaminated Land Consultant, planners and Councillors 2 December 2024

• Council goes it alone....

  - The Ordinary Council meeting 23 January 2024