►
From YouTube: City of Gold Coast Governance, Administration & Finance Committee Meeting - 25 January 2023
Description
00:00 Meeting Commences, Attendance/Apologies, Leave of Absence, Confirmation of Minutes
03:00 Conflict of Interest Declarations, Committee Forward Planning, Reports & Presentations 6.1, 6.2
07:00 Report 6.3
19:00 Closed Session Reports & Presentations (remained in Open) 7.1
20:00 Report 7.2 (remained in Open)
01:00:00 Moved to Close Session Report 7.2
01:07:00 Moved to Open Session Report 7.2
02:01:00 General Business and Meeting Closed
A
A
I
suppose
yep,
okay,
so
we'll
unstar
6.3.
Would
anybody
like
to
move
the
remaining
start
items
councilor,
young
and
seconded
by
councilor
Gates,
so
that
is
three
5.1
6.1
and
6.2,
so
I'll
take
the
boat
all
in
favor
all
right
pass.
Thank
you
carried
and
I'll
just
interrupt
to.
Let
Jackie
know
that
we've
just
carried
6.1
and
6.2
councilors.
The
next
item
is
complex
of
Interest
declarations.
We
have
one
this
morning
for
councilor
gates
in
regards
to
item
7.2.
So
we'll
deal
with
that
now,
councilor
Gates.
C
The
body
of
the
report,
which
is
confidential,
it
mentions
an
agent
appointed
by
Council,
a
sales
agent
in
Colliers
and
in
2016
I
accepted
a
1250
donation
from
Colliers
I'm
seeking
to
remain
in
the
room
due
to
the
Strategic
significance
of
the
proposed
sale
and
confirm
that
I've
had
no
contact
with
Colliers
International
during
the
current
term
of
council.
Okay,.
A
D
A
D
E
C
E
A
A
B
B
I
didn't
want
to
throw
a
catamount's
pizza,
but
some
of
us,
some
of
our
colleagues,
have
served
for
many
many
years
and
some
people
might
choose
to
serve
for
many
years,
depending
on
how
the
community
responds
to
their
election
campaigns
and
and
I
think
it
actually
makes
some
pragmatic
sense
for
us
to
at
least
have
this.
If
this
is
the
the
way
the
council
wants
to
go,
maybe
one
in
each
election
cycle
might
be.
A
B
I
think
if
you
change
the
word,
the
Australian
Institute
of
company
directors,
so
attention
to
a
Australian
country
in
the
director's
course
once
per
term
during
their
tenure,
that's
that'll,
actually,
those
just
those
two
yeah.
So
if
it
was
complete
an
Australian
Institute
of
company
directors
Course
once
per
term
during
their
tenure
as
elected
representative
to
me,
that
actually
gives
effective
way
to
whether
it's
the
main
course
or
a
refresher
course,
and
it
effectively
says
well.
E
Thank
you
and
I
agree
with
councilor
Tozer
that
once
you've
done
the
course
I
I
did
the
program
10
years
ago
that
there
is
a
need
for
Refresher.
I
I
thought
that
there
was
ability
under
our
expenses
policy.
If
we
do
want
to
do
other
kind
of
training
support,
because
it
may
be
that
people
need
them
at
different
times
and
depending
on
what
they're
doing
once
per
term
I
I
think
seems.
C
Could
be
funded
via
the
counselors
expenses
reimbursement,
puns
I
mean
I
I
get
that
it
would
need
to
be
in
the
in
the
policy,
but
how
frequently
a
refresher
course
might
be
necessary.
I,
don't
know
anything
about
the
course
so
I,
but
I
would
imagine
that
if
someone
wanted
to
do
it
it
and
they
wanted
to
pay
for
it
out
of
their
cash
advance,
they
should,
if
we
need
to
have
it
within
the
policy.
So
maybe
there's
some
words
that
can
be
developed
around
that
Council
Patterson.
E
So,
just
so
that
people
are
aware
members
cost
for
a
refresher
cost
courses,
two
and
a
half
thousand,
it's
a
two-day
program.
The
other
thing
about
it
is
because
we're
coming
in
aicd,
you
don't
normally
do
as
a
group,
but
because
there's
12
people
who
want
to
do
it
they're
coming
in
here
refresh
of
course,
would
more
likely
be
individuals
go
off
and
go
okay.
The
timing's
right
for
me
I'll
go
and
do
it
so
two
and
a
half
thousand
dollars.
C
B
Tozer,
so
there
is
already
a
budget
line
item
for
professional
development
and
conferences,
so
I
think.
Actually
that's
the
budget
needs
to
come
out
of
I,
don't
think
it
should
be
out
of
the
you
know.
The
allocation
that
is
effectively
us
stocking
out
to
community
events
and
supporting
charitable
activities
and
cancer.
A
It's
it
it's
actually
dealt
with
by
the
policy
in
regards
to
expenses
or
investment
and
resources,
and
so
where
the,
whether
or
not
it's
local
area
works
or
city
funding.
It's
dealing
with
the
policy
to
allow
effectively
councilors,
who
have
completed
the
Course
once
to
do
a
refresh
course
at
a
later
date.
G
So
three
Mr
chair
counts,
as
the
only
thing
I'd
suggest
in
number
two.
There
is
that
we
would
probably
want
to
put
some
timing
around
it,
so
we've
just
updated
it
to
put
the
correct
name,
which
is
the
update
course,
because
I
think
they're,
two
very
separate
courses
and
the
refresher
is
called
the
company
director's
course
update.
A
So
there
were
the
actual
name,
for
the
respiration
course
is.
The
company
director's
course
update.
So
so
could
I
suggest
this
rather
than
the
current
two
as
it's
written.
Could
we
mimic
the
words
in
one,
bring
that
down
to
two
and
and
reflect
that
the
the
two
is
about
the
update
so
Alicia?
Could
you
maybe
provide
some
assistance
to
that
cancel
the
Patterson?
Sorry.
E
Just
throw
you
to
the
director
in
terms
of
that
comment
on
making
it
specific
to
the
wording.
I
think
it's
probably
best
you
don't
because
they've
got
the
refresher
course.
Then
they've
also
got
reading
Financial
reports
recourse,
so
someone
might
do
it
and
think
I
really
need
work.
I
just
want
to
do
the
financial
reports
refresh
part
or
the
governance
ref.
You
know
there
may
be
bits
so
rather
than
making
it
prescriptive
and
well
do
you
just
want
to.
B
Professional
development
is
important
for
counselors.
Council
appears
to
be
of
a
mind
that
the
company
directors,
The
Institute
of
company
directors,
is
the
right
organization
to
provide
that
I.
Don't
think
we
should
be
too
constrained
on
what
we
engage
as
long
as
there's
some
discretion
around.
How
often
it
happens.
So
that's
the
way.
I
know
I,
don't
actually
mind
how
it
comes
out
and
I'm
not
on
this
committee,
so
you
can
work
out
what
it'd
be
like.
A
D
I
actually
would
have
agreed
with
councilor
Gates,
where
you
said
that
any
councilor
directors
update
course.
So
that
would
cover
your
governance
and
that
would
cover
your
financial
and
that
number
two
was
very
simple
but
change
the
art
to
any,
because
any
update
courses
are
going
to
be
either
Financial
or.
A
A
A
Rodeo
here
we
are,
we've
all
arrived
at
the
place.
We
want
to
arrive
Council
Patterson.
Would
you
like
to
move
that
for
us
councilor
Tozer,
let's
get
on
the
road,
so
councilor
Patterson
you're
happy
to
move.
Would
somebody
like
to
second
that
councilor
Hamill?
Thank
you
councilor
Patterson!
Do
you
need
to
speak
to
it.
E
A
A
F
F
A
It's
going
to
be
okay,
so
7.2
don't
go
anywhere:
Sandy
7.2
the
proposed
sale
of
the
surface,
Paradise
trans
center
and
Bruce
Bishop
car
park.
Our
council
is
clearly
the
report
presented
to
us
is
on
Gray
papers
but
and
I'm
I'm,
okay
to
go
into
clothes.
Should
we
have
any
particular
questions,
but
if
we
can
stay
in
open
for
as
long
as
possible,
let's
give
that
a
go.
A
So,
in
regards
to
the
confidentiality,
I
would
suggest
that
the
key
items
that
we
need
to
be
wary
of
are
the
names
of
the
parties
that
haven't
been
made.
Public
the
dollar
amounts,
and
maybe
the
anything
specific
to
the
actual
process
of
the
sale
can
I
ask
you
Jeff
in
regards
to
the
anticipated
future
costs
for
improvements
or
demolition
Etc
of
the
property.
Were
they
all
in
the
were
they
all
in
the
data
room.
I
I
That
one
great
thank
you
so
just
to
recap,
from
last
year,
from
March,
2022
Council
opened
a
open
market
tender
process
in
August
you
endorsed
negotiation
with
one
preferred
tenderer:
the
AIDS,
a
private
Equity
Equity
Group
from
Sydney.
Those
negotiations
ended
up
being
very
difficult
and
protracted,
and
so
towards
the
end
of
the
year.
We
gave
them
one
last
opportunity
and
ample
time
they
came
back
with
quite
unreasonable
conditions.
So
today
we're
seeking
a
decision
from
Council
to
terminate
that
process.
There
were
other
tenderers,
so
there
were
four
that
were
shortlisted.
I
We
had
the
approval
from
Council
to
engage
with
the
one
preferred
tenderer.
The
other
tenders
have
since
lapsed,
so
their
process
is
effectively
at
its
end,
but
we
would
like
a
council
decision
today
to
terminate
the
process.
So
then,
we've
come
up
with
in
terms
of
next
steps
for
options
for
consideration
today,
so
I'll
just
run
through
those
briefly.
The
first
option
is
basically
the
one
that,
in
the
administration's
view,
provides
the
long-term
economic
and
social
benefits.
This
would
involve
a
three-stage
process,
so
we
wouldn't
run
an
open
requests
for
proposals
with
industry
and
Community.
I
We
would
then
the
administration
would
assess
those.
We
could
then
come
to
council
and
have
a
workshop
looking
through
all
of
the
proposals
and
the
ones
that
are
recommended
by
the
administration,
and
then
we
would
go
and
run
a
formal
eoi
process.
So
there
would
be
optionality
within
this.
You
could,
you
know
fully
open
to
Industry
and
Community.
You
could
have
you
know
from
the
community
groups
coming
forward
wanting
recreational
space
a
park,
you
could
have
environmental
groups
one
into
a
plant,
ten
thousand
trees
on
the
site,
thought
to
offset.
I
You
know
City
emissions,
and
then
you
could
have
obviously
proposals
from
Industries
such
as
those
ones
that
we
know
are
current
and
we've
highlighted
in
the
paper
in
particular
ones
that
have
come
from
the
tourism
industry
perspective
and
then,
in
terms
of
once,
we've
considered
the
proposals.
If
you
wanted
to
run
an
eoi,
you
could
do
that
in
a
broader
sense.
So
if
you
wanted
to
narrow
it
down
to
okay,
we
want
a
major
visitor
economy
outcome.
Here.
You
could
Target
visitor
economy,
you
could
even
go
narrower.
You
could
say
that
we
want.
I
For
example,
we
want
a
six
star
hotel
or
we
want
student
accommodation
on
the
site,
such
as,
for
example,
you
know
my
recent
experience.
The
Queensland
government
did
with
Queens
Wharf
Brisbane,
so
you
know
they
wanted
a
major
tourism
economy
outcome.
There
can
I
just
check.
We
are
enclosed,
no,
no,
we're
not
right,
okay,
a
major
tourism
economy
outcome
and
they
stipulated
the
certain
elements
that
they
wanted
from
that.
So
then,
in
terms
of
the
second
option,
so
this
would
be
where
we
deal
now
with
other
parties.
I
So,
as
I
said,
we
had
the
market
process
last
year
we
had
the
one
preferred
tenderer
since
that
time
we
have
seen
that
there
is
some
significant
new
interest
coming
forward.
This
might
reflect
I
guess
some
of
the
very
few
count
on
one
hand,
strategic
large-scale
development
sites
along
this
strip
that
are
available
being
transacted
over
the
last
12
months.
For
example,
the
vomitron
site
has
been
acquired,
the
Sea
View
site
in
front
of
Pacific,
Fair
and
I
think
this
might
have
now
been
identified.
I
As
you
know,
one
of
the
few
remaining
strategic
opportunities,
so
this
would
enable
us
to
having
run
a
public
tender
open
the
process
and
deal
with
other
parties.
So
this
in
terms
of
the
final
outcomes,
in
contrast
to
the
first
option,
would
enable
us
to
provide
the
high
to
deliver
the
highest
cash
return
to
the
city.
The
third
option
would
be
running
a
new
tender
process,
so
this
would
be
repeating
what
we
did
last
year,
recognizing
that
there
is
some
significant
new
interest
coming
forward.
I
So
that
would
create
the
floor
for
the
dealing
with
other
parties,
and
then
we
have
the
fourth
option,
which
is
that
Council
decides
to
retain
ownership
of
the
car
park.
Some
of
the
considerations
there
are
the
return
that
the
car
park
delivers.
So
we'll
see
you're
aware
from
the
paper
that
it
does
break
even
in
terms
of
the
revenue
that
we
get
from
the
car
parking
and
those
few
commercial
ongoing
tenancies
that
we
have
in
the
transit
center.
I
But
the
big
questions
there,
I
guess
you
know
the
ongoing
ongoing
maintenance
and
liabilities,
so
those
have
been
taken
care
of
in
the
immediate
term.
But
if
we
look
at
the
asset,
life
and
17
years
remaining,
it
is
possible
that
you
know
there
are
liabilities
that
we're
not
aware
of
now
that
could
could
arise.
A
J
K
Thank
you
and
through
the
chair
and
hold
me
back
if
I'm
going
outside
the
premises
when
you
mentioned
about
the
current
facilities,
breaking
even
the
report
indicates
not
a
break,
even
so
as
an
operational
at
the
moment,
the
current
papers,
it's
showing
a
a
positive
projection,
moving
forward
that
could
be
investigated
and
got
get
a
better
outcome
on
that
return.
If
we
maintained
it,
is
that
sounding
correct.
I
Dude
thanks
Council
for
the
question
through
the
chair,
so
in
terms
of
the
operating
for
the
car
park,
it
does
break
even
and
it
delivers
a
very
modest
rate
of
return.
But
what
we're
talking
about
in
terms
of
the
unknowns
is
the
capital
expenditure.
So
there's
been
significant
recent
capital
expenditure
and
prior
years
there
was
even
greater
capital
expenditure
to
address
issues
with
the
diaphragm
around
the
transit
center
basement
car
park
and
the
projection
at
the
moment
is
the
capital
expenditure
over
the
next
10
years
is
moderate.
But
we
don't
know
what
we
don't
know.
K
I
Yes,
it
does
I
guess
it
doesn't
perhaps
meet
expectations
in
terms
of
the
utilization
of
the
car
park,
which
is
I'm
not
very
well
known,
long,
traversed
issue
here.
In
terms
of
you
know,
utilization
rates
are
very
low
at
Bruce
Bishop,
apart
from
you
know,
a
few
days
of
the
year
when
you
do
have
peaking
around
major
events
in
surfers
paradise.
I
E
Thank
you
through
you,
chair
question
on
that
utilization,
so
you've
identified
and
I
think
we
can
say
the
percentage,
so
the
current
average
monthly
utilization
rate
of
the
car
park
or
in
2022
was
37,
but
you
do
note
that
it's
own
it's
expected
to
exceed
Supply
in
2031.
So
would
that
suggest
then,
from
now
to
2031
that
we
would
be
expecting
that
utilization
to
increase?
Wouldn't
that
isn't
that
what
that
suggests.
I
Thanks
councilor
for
the
question
so
back
through
the
chair,
so
I
think
that's
based
on
the
status
quo
and
no
change.
So
the
opportunity
here
is
canvassed
in
the
paper
is
that
we
are
able
to
prosecute
better
some
of
the
active
transport
strategies.
You
know
the
extension
of
the
light
rail
should
make
a
difference
in
terms
of
how
people
travel
through
Surfers
Paradise.
So
we
would
expect
over
the
next
decade
to
see
a
change
in
utilization
that
wouldn't
necessarily
be
based
on
what
we
see
in
the
present
day
and.
A
Can
I
just
ask
Jeff?
Is
that
so
in
report
page
70,
you
do
talk
about
the
remaining
public
and
private
off
street
car
parking
facilities
having
better
level
of
occupancy
and
greater
use
of
dynamic
on
Street
paid
parking
pricing
strategies
to
achieve
overarching
transport
strategies,
that's
effectively
where
you're
coming
from
yeah,
so
counselor.
I
M
A
M
M
Just
curious
how
many
of
our
services
in
the
city
return
a
profit
like
I
know?
Obviously
our
libraries
and
things
don't
I
thought
the
fact
that
the
car
parks
I
saw
it
there
in
surface
Paradise
as
a
service,
so
that
people
could
go
to
the
center
of
the
city.
But
the
fact
that
it's
returning
a
profit
is
a
good
thing,
especially
when
it's
exceeding
the
10-year
Capital
forecast
in
a
year
and
a
half.
M
A
K
Obviously,
the
figures
we've
got
in
the
report
at
the
moment
talks
about
current
car
park
demand.
It
doesn't
have
a
look
at
what
the
opportunity
of
the
car
park
could
be
look
like
if
there
was
a
study
and
more
promotional
or
marketing
Improvement
on
the
spacing
could
be
so.
The
figures
we've
got
in
here
are
based
solely
on
the
current
usage,
not
based
on
a
potential
of
the
the
current
facility.
I
Thank
you
through
the
chain.
Yeah,
that's
correct!
It's
based
on
current
usage,
yeah,
there's
a
I
think
it's
the
paper.
Canvas
is
both
opportunities
to
encourage
residents
and
visitors,
to
use
other
parking
and
as
well.
There
is
the
opportunity
to
relate
into
Council
of
encouraging
greater
utilization
of
Bruce
fishing.
D
So,
and
just
coming
back
to
what
councilor
Taylor
was
saying,
then
I
think
you've
got
to
look
at
it
both
sides,
if
you're
saying
current
use
and
potential
current
use,
then
you've
also
got
a
factor
in
where
you're
saying
it's
breaking
even
now,
but
we're
not
factor
in
the
future.
So
you
can't
have
the
pie
in
one
hand
and
not
in
the
other.
D
So
if
we're
going
to
look
at
current
news
and
future
use,
then
we've
also
got
a
look
at
current
liability
and
future
liability,
which,
on
page
70,
indicates
five
lines
there
of
potential
current
liability
going
forward
and
that's
not
an
exhausted
list.
That's,
but
it
excludes
some
of
the
things
that
we've
actually
been
provided
in
the
past
and
the
costs
that
will
come
back
to
the
city
and
rate
pays.
Should
those
things
happen.
I
I
A
To
Ross
in
the
data
room,
could
you
just
grab
the
microphone?
So
people
can
hear
your
answer,
sir
Ross,
in
the
data
room?
Was
there
accurate
information
in
regards
to
the
daily
use?
So
I
know
that
as
a
as
a
resident
of
the
Gold
Coast,
when
we
drive
in
the
surface,
we
see
the
sign
that
says:
there's
a
thousand
vacant
spots,
but
that's
at
a
given
point
in
time
and
I
suppose
we're
trying
to
reconcile
that
with
the
statement
37
on
average.
So.
J
Through
YouTube,
the
the
information
in
the
data
room
was
the
information
provided
by
the
group
within
Council
who
managed
the
car
park.
They
at
least
that's
on
movements
in
and
out
average
rate
what
people
are
paying
Etc,
but
in
terms
of
how
that
then
extrapolates
to
that
37
I
can't
tell
you
exactly.
J
You
know
whether
that's
just
averaged
over
the
day,
whether
that's
the
movement
in
and
out
I
just
I
can't
recall
that
detail,
but
certainly
that
information
and
the
granularity
was
provided
to
the
bidders
back
three
years,
if
I
remember
correctly
in
terms
of
daily
and
monthly
figures
for
that
period.
Thank
you.
A
M
M
A
So
I'm
not
I,
don't
think
Jeff's
going
to
answer
that
for
us.
So,
but
so
we
as
a
council,
we
as
a
council,
set
our
fees
and
charges
on
an
annual
basis
as
part
of
the
rates
process
and
generally
we've
increased
those
at
around
CPI.
So
my
best
guess
is
that
there's
been
a
minor
increase
in
Revenue
in
regards
to
daily
rate
for
the
Bruce
Bishop
car
park,
which
we
as
councilors
have
set
as
part
of
the
budget
process
yeah
and
then
Ross
Center
ago.
A
So
it's
more
than
five
dollars
a
day,
so
I
think
if
you
go
in
there,
it's
11
or
something
like
that
for
a
day
yeah.
So,
but
it
is
our
standard
that
it
currently
is.
We
have
a
standard
off
street
car
parking
right.
That
is,
this
is
the
same
for
all
of
our
off-street
car
parks
and
isn't
specific
to
Bruce
Bishop.
So
so,
whilst
Bruce
Bishop
is
clearly
the
largest
asset
in
the
off
street
car
parking
portfolio,
it
is
charged
the
same
hourly
and
daily
rate.
A
E
Thank
you,
chair,
I,
am
very
grateful
for
the
questions
and
points
of
council
about
in
Lumsden
today
and
I
was
wondering
if
the
ball
before
full
Council,
if
we
could
get
a
comparison
of
what
was
presented
to
us
in
terms
of
the
break
even
of
this
car
park,
the
last
time
we
met
to
vote
on
it
and
now
because
it
does
seem
quite
significant.
The
difference
is
that
something
we
could
get
Ross.
J
Just
to
clarify
I
think
my
recollection
was
the
previous
report
indicated
a
trading
surplus
of
around
400
000
per
annum.
So
it
was
actually
cash
positive,
but
only
yeah
marginal
in
terms
of
the
asset
value.
So
again,
I'm
not
privy
to
the
figures
that
Jeff's
inserted
in
the
report
in
terms
of
how
that
figures
increased,
but
yeah
Council,
Gates.
C
I
think
was
different
in
a
number
of
ways,
and
so
it
places
us
all
in
quite
a
difficult
position.
Today
some
of
us
have
had
very
strong
views
about
this
asset
and
I'm
one
of
those
people
who,
on
the
basis
of
previous
information,
felt
very
strongly,
but
this
is
a
very
different
report
to
consider
and
so
I
don't
know
what
the
benefit
is
of
comparing
one
with
the
other.
If
this
is
the
correct
information,
then
this
is
what
we
need
to
be
guided
by
in
making
our
decision
today.
So.
A
A
I
know
so
in
regards
to
answering
councilor
Patterson
Jeff.
Can
you
take
it
upon
yourself
to
provide
to
councilors
between
now
and
full
Council
the
net,
the
net
amount
that
was
provided
in
the
last
report
and
then
that'll
at
least
inform
Us
in
regards
to
what
councilor
Gates
is
saying,
we
make
decisions
based
on
the
information
provided
at
the
time
and
the
information
we
provided
in
this
for
is
different.
I
One
point
yep
for
the
conversation
I
think
it
probably
is
the
capital
expended.
So
previous
reports
had
the
operating.
They
were
also
highlighting
some
significant
rectification,
work
that
was
required.
That
is,
is
now
underway.
So
we've
turned
the
focus,
I
guess
more
on
the
operating
for
the
future
and.
A
K
Yeah
I
was
just
going
to
clarify.
There
was
a
period
of
time
that
we
did
reduce
it
five
dollars
because
I've
covered,
but
it's
been
returned
to
around
ten
dollars.
I
just
want
to
respond
to
council
Pauline
Youngs
in
relation
to
page
70
and
I.
Just
want
a
clarification,
those
numbers
there
I
don't
believe
today
we're
talking
about
renewing
our
assets
or
making
a
change
to
an
assets.
This
would
be
the
cost.
If
we
did
do
that
type
of
project
I,
don't
my
understanding
is
today
page
70
down
the
bottom.
A
N
Mr
chair
to
come
to
what
the
officer's
recommendation
actually
is,
so
I
just
want
to
clarify
with
Jeff,
because
I
think
there's
been
a
couple
comments
on
the
Surplus
and
and
the
amount
of
it.
But
the
officer's
position
is
that,
while
it
makes
a
marginal
profit
that
it
would
be
better
to
look
at
what
options
may
be
available,
that
could
make
a
bigger
profit
out
of
the
right
pays
asset.
Is
that
the
Crux
of
the
recommendation.
I
Thanks
Council
for
the
question
back
through
the
chair
slightly
different.
So
if
we
look
at
the
options
there
so
in
terms
of
greatest
profit
for
the
city,
so
that
would
be
disposal
as
as
well
as
basis
so
either
dealing
now
with
other
parties
or
running
a
new
tender
process
that
would
deliver
the
greatest
cash
return
to
the
city.
While
we're
talking
about
the
administration's
recommendation
was
that
we
look
at
the
greatest
strategic
use
of
the
site
with
industry
and
Community,
which.
N
In
option
one,
if
we
went
and
opened
it
up
to
a
process
where
we
could
let
the
industry
come
back
to
us
for
what
they
think
could
happen
on
the
site,
would
it
be
a
fair
assessment
that
part
of
that
could
be
where
industry
comes
back
and
says
it
as
part
of
a
development?
We
would
include
public
car
parking
still.
I
N
On
a
few
of
the
options
you've
got
in
the
report,
they
would
be
needing
to
have
car
parking
anywhere,
so
maybe
that
that
car
parking
when
they're
not
using
it
for
their
use,
is
about
the
resection
of
it
could
be
absolutely
yeah,
I
think
so
and
share
in
the
same
way.
So
while
the
industry
could
suggest
that
back
to
us,
we
would
also
be
in
a
position
to
say
to
Industry
at
that
stage
as
part
of
any
proposal,
we
would
like
to
see
an
element
of
public
car
parking
still
absolutely.
N
A
N
A
But
it
would
be
fair
to
say
that
the
council,
over
the
last
10
years,
has
already
had
one
go
at
setting
an
amount
of
minimum
car
parking
and
one
go
of
setting
no
amount
of
car
parking
option.
One
ultimately
is
to
ask
the
broad
industry
what
what
it
might
look
like
and
then
for
Council
to
work
backwards
from
there.
So.
N
M
I
Oh
no
Chad,
that
was
actually
more
historical
where
we've
thank
you
from
here.
So
to
answer
the
counselor's
question
both
through
the
chair,
so
that
would
be
a
council's
discretion
if
it
were
minor
to
support
option
one
to
decide
the
time
frames.
We've
just
indicated
what
we
think
might
be
realistic
in
terms
of
a
market
process
and
the
preparation
for
that
around
property
and
other
considerations.
M
So
that's
why
I'm
also
like
the
idea
of
option
one
but
I
also
don't
want
to
rush
industry
in
terms
of
you've
got
to
give
us
your
idea
in
this
short
period
of
time
when
it
might
take
longer
than
what
is
only
really
a
few
days
to
put
something
together
so
I'd
much
rather
to
go
to
some
intermingling
of
option.
Four
and
one
sounds
okay,
so
I've
got
a.
K
So
it's
just
a
point
I'm
making
in
relation
to
the
transit
center
as
maintained
as
an
asset
and
also
as
a
public
space
that
we
actually
own
at
the
moment.
Part
of
surface
Paradise
at
the
moment
is
Green.
Space
is
what
we
will
need
in
the
future.
Has
that
has
been
discussed
in
other
reports
that
there's
an
asset
here
that
we
may
have
to
purchase
in
the
future?
So
I
think
this
report's
telling
a
different
story
to
previous
reports.
K
Has
come
to
Council
in
relation
to
not
maintaining
it
and
I
feel
that
I
would
like
have
a
change
of
recommendation,
because
I
think
there's
an
opportunity
to
revisit
the
transit
center
as
maintaining
under
the
city's
control
and
improving
the
outcome
of
return
and
where
that
actually
sits
in
the
city.
Moving
forward
right.
A
No,
it
doesn't
yeah,
so
so
my
best
guess
is:
the
transit
center
was
built
to
service
Greyhound
and
skinners,
and
a
generation
of
bus
transport
that
has
probably
been
replaced
by
the
the
modes
of
Transport.
That
came
after
that
which
was
ANZ,
Tia
virgin
Jetstar,
and
that
and
in
the
like,
which
is
the
majority
of
domestic
travel
on
in
Australia.
So
councilor.
K
There
is
ongoing
conversation
with
the
buses
and
where
they
actually
stop
round
surface
Paradise
at
the
moment,
which
is
a
problem
which
we
met
with
the
industry
recently
because
they
are
parking
around
surfers
paradise
and
trying
to
spine
spots
to
park.
Are
they
naturally
trying
to
find
like
we
do
as
residents
trying
to
find
the
best
spot
to
park?
But
I
think
it's
important
to
understand.
K
It
is
a
challenge
out
there
and
I
think
we
need
to
really
understand
where
our
buses
are
going
and
where
the
light,
apart
moving
forward,
because
I'd
hate
to
see
a
situation
where
we're
saying
it's
not
a
impact
at
the
moment,
but
it's
not
an
impact
at
our
present
site.
It
could
be
a
impact
through
the
city
which
I
can
say
we
have
been
meeting
with
the
bus
industry.
K
It
may
not
be
Greyhounds
coming
from
the
airport,
sorry
from
Interstate,
but
there
is
a
lot
that
actually
do
come
from
private
usage
from
the
airports
Brisbane
and
around
so
the
usage
of
buses
are
still
there.
In
my
opinion,
the
way
they're
used
might
be
a
slightly
different
and
it's
in
my
view,
as
we
grow
as
a
city
and
as
we
continue
as
a
destination
holiday
destination,
we
are
going
to
rely
on
public
transport
and
I.
Think
we
just
need
to
be
mindful
of
that.
Okay,.
N
Church
could
Jeff
give
a
bit
more
detail
about
what
an
open
market
engagement
process
looks
like
and
I.
Guess
in
my
simple
view,
I'm
seeing
it
is
that
all
options
are
on
the
table
and
that
whatever
the
time
frame
would
be
I
probably
agree
with
Ryan
Bowden
councilman's
a
little
bit
six
weeks
might
be
a
little
bit
short,
but
I.
Think
less
than
three
months
would
be
an
appropriate
time
frame
to
get
something
back.
N
So
we'd
go
to
market
with
a
short
sharp
period
where
anybody
can
put
forward
an
idea
to
us
and
have
an
open
dialogue
with
this.
So
everything
is
on
the
table.
You
bring
forward
a
proposal
to
us
and
then
on
the
back
of
that,
once
they've
been
assessed
to
a
certain
point,
would
all
of
the
options
that
were
put
out
there
be
brought
back
to
council
or
would
you
would
your
organization
go
through
and
bring
back
a
short
list.
I
Thanks
councilor
for
the
question
back
through
the
chair,
so
we
could
provide
more
detail
around
how
we
want
to
design
the
process
and
I
think
that's
a
conversation
to
have
with
you
all
here
and
in
full
Council.
We've
indicated
conceptually
how
that
would
look
to
answer
your
questions,
so
the
first
stage
would
be
more
conceptual,
so
bring
forward
your
ideas
and
then,
in
terms
of
the
assessment,
it
would
depend
how
many
proposals
that
the
administration
received
we
might
seek
to
categorize
them.
I
You
know
in
terms
of
if
it's
as
broad
as
it
as
I
outlined
it
potentially
could
be
subject
to
your
decisions.
If
we
had
Community
proposals,
if
we
had
industry
and
by
different
sectors,
you
know
we
talked
about
student
accommodation
or
you
know,
hotels.
So
then
we
might
categorize
them
and
then
provide
some
advice
and
then
have
a
workshop
with
counselors
around.
How
do
we
want
to
have
a
pick
a
sector?
Do
we
want
to
have
a
particular
type
of
development
like
we
want
a
six-star
hotel?
Do
we
want
a
number
of
different
outcomes
here?
I
We've
talked
this
morning
about
doing.
You
know
have
car
parking
included,
whether
you
know
private
or
you
know,
to
some
concessional
ongoing
public
car
parking
and
then
we
would
run
a
more
targeted
process
and
and
for
where
you'd
see
requested
for
detailed
proposals,
which
would
then
assess
and
come
back
to
council
for
the
decision.
Yeah.
N
A
L
A
E
No
I
agree:
it
didn't
allow
for
officers
to
go
back
to
others,
it
didn't
allow
it
didn't,
allow
them
to
go
to
others.
But
what
happened?
My
understanding
we
all
we
can
do
it
in
close
is
that
that
just
got
off
the
table
because
of
timing.
So
it
was
not
even
an
option
to
bring
it
back
or
to
have
a
discussion
about
it.
They
would
have
had
to
have
come
back
to
council
to
agree
to
another
tenderer,
but
you
know
the
timing
didn't
allow
that.
A
A
A
So
we've
we've
moved
back
into
open,
having
discussed
some
confidential
matters
in
regards
to
some
of
the
identified
processes
around
the
tender
counselor
Taylor.
Do
you
have
any
more
questions,
no
questions
just
to
change
recommendation
when
you're
ready
yep
so,
but
we
could
have
the
recommendation.
K
K
K
Also,
then
ask
the
chief
executive
office
to
take
and
review
all
existing
public
and
private
off-street
car
parking
facilities
in
surfers
paradise
to
identify
what
opportunities
is
to
improve
the
levels
of
occupancy
and
greater
uses
of
dynamic,
on-street
off-street
parking
prices
and
present
report
back
to
council
to
consider
in
October
2024.,
and
the
idea
is
to
ensure
that
we
are
using
our
asset
at
the
most
Optical
level
we
can
now.
We
have
gone
to
the
market
twice
over
a
period
of
time
with
no
success
and
I.
A
A
K
Thank
you
and
through
the
J.
The
reason
for
my
change
of
recommendation
is
over
a
long
period
of
time.
We
have
tried
to
sell
this
asset
with
no
success.
We've
tried
to
sell
it
with
car
park
and
without
car
park.
The
long
long
term
protection
prediction
for
surface
tarot
Paradise
is
high
density
and
it's
our
heart
of
our
city,
and
we
have
a
piece
of
asset
there
that
the
community
owns
at
the
moment
and
may
be
required,
is
required
at
the
moment
and
will
almost
certainly
be
required
in
the
future.
K
K
K
K
K
We've
had
numerous
businesses
and
Community
expressing
a
need
for
an
asset
in
the
middle
of
our
city,
and
we
need
to
ensure
that
we
keep
this
asset
and
we
get
the
best
return
from
it
and
like
any
good
organization,
we
review
our
assets
on
a
regular
basis,
but
we're
talking
surface
Paradise
we're
talking
the
center
of
our
city.
We're
talking
a
major
asset
that
people
around
the
world
and
Australia
are
paying
big
amounts
of
money
for
assets
on
this
along
the
strip
and
it's
going
to
become
rarer,
rarer.
K
N
Mr
chair
through
to
councilor
Taylor
I'm,
is
there
a
reason
why
we
can't
have
what
the
officers
are
recommended
but
also
get
the
work
you're
looking
to
be
done,
so
we're
assessing
all
options,
because
to
me
what
you're?
Looking
for
in
number
five
in
terms
of
a
review
to
be
done
on
the
car
parking
situation
and
are
we
getting
the
return
out
of
it?
We
could
and
ongoing
utilization
numbers
and
whatnot
in
the
future.
We
just
one
of
several
options
that
should
be
considered.
At
the
same
time,
possibly
foreign.
K
My
opinion
is,
we
need
to
keep
the
asset
it's
needed
for
the
city
for
the
long
term.
That's
the
first
discussion.
Do
we
need
it
and
that's
been
the
reason.
We've
had
the
previous
conversations
previously
the
challenge
that
we've
never
had
that
what
we've
never
seen
and
I've
never
seen
a
report
is
actually
understand
what
we
can
actually
get
as
a
return
from
the
assets
we've
got,
and
then
that
way
we
can
maintain
a
asset
that
we've
got.
K
Previous
reports
have
always
indicated
that
we
cannot
afford
to
keep
the
asset
or
there's
been
challenges
for
it.
That
applies
to
any
asset.
I
believe
this
just
gives
us
the
ability
to
really
look
at
the
asset.
We've
got
and
understand
what
this
asset
means
the
city
moving
forward
and
and
make
sure
that
we're
getting
the
right
Return
of
the
asset
we've
got
right
now.
A
M
A
question
to
the
to
the
Mover,
if
that's
okay,
yeah
sure,
just
for
0.4
0.4
yeah
0.4.
My
question
is
those
course.
It
says
maintenance
and
upgrade
do
any
of
those
Works
actually
improve
the
utilization
or
the
the
service
to
the
residents
in
terms
of
the
car
park,
or
they
just
for
the
most
part,
maintenance
works
that
would
be
undertaken
over
the
10-year
projected
timeline,
as
required.
J
M
L
J
A
L
Just
never
arrived
yeah
I'm,
just
looking
at
that
recommendation
and
or
that
resolution
I,
don't
think
it
says
anything
so
anyway,
I
think
that's
better
yeah!
Thank
you
and
then
my
two
cents
worth
which
I've
already
shared
was
Council
Taylor.
Before
the
meeting
is
that
I
don't
feel
like
we
should
be
paying
for
car
park
maintenance,
which
is
standard
business
practice
over
the
next
10
years.
L
Out
of
the
Strategic
priority,
Reserve
I
I,
don't
know
whether
we
need
to
identify
it
as
a
separate
resolution,
because
we
would
do
it
anyway
as
part
of
general
maintenance,
but
I
certainly
don't
think
it
should
come
from
a
strategic
priority,
Reserve
so
I'm
not
on
the
committee.
But
my
suggestion
would
be
that
we
come
up
with
some
alternative
wording
that
suggests
that
that
those
Works
be
funded
from
the
usual
maintenance
program
identified
in
the
annual
the
city's
annual
budget.
L
L
A
A
So
we
have
discussed
in
open
today
the
fact
that
the
property
does
Net
Income,
but
what
the
city
doesn't
do
at
the
moment
is
we
don't
ring
fence
the
income
and
keep
it
to
a
particular
area,
but
I
think
that
it,
if
we're
making
a
decision
in
regards
to
the
asset
returning
money,
which
should
also
be
mindful
of
the
at
the
the
expense
required
over
the
next
10
years
in
regards
to
the
asset
management,
so
I've
got
counselor
and
I'm
assuming
we're
a
quest.
We've
got
ongoing
questions.
Okay,.
N
A
question
for
you
to
councilor
Taylor
and
it's
to
propose
an
amendment
to
his
amendment
to
see
if
he's
open
to
it,
so
you've
probably
detected
that
I've
got
an
interest
in
the
open
market
process
in
finding
out
what
options
may
be
there.
But
I
also
have
an
interest
in
finding
out
the
answers
to
the
question.
N
And
then
that
would
be,
that
would
be
a
new
number
six
or
whatever.
The
number
of
sequence
needs
to
be,
which
Mr
chair
just
to
explain
quickly
before
you
go
to
councilor
Taylor
in
my
eyes
would
mean
that
all
councilors
get
the
opportunity
to
see
all
the
available
information,
including
what
comes
out
of
the
open
market
engagement
process,
which
may
be
nothing,
but
maybe
something.
But
we
also
get
the
information
that
councilor
Taylor
is
looking
for
in
terms
of
the
parking
study
being
done
so.
A
N
K
From
there
I
appreciate
your
comments
and
understand
the
reasoning:
what
why
you're
considering
it?
But
it's
not
what
I
believe
that
we
need
for
that
particular
land
to
keep
in
our
assets
at
the
at
the
moment,
and
we
need
to
understand
the
body
of
work,
because
the
asset
is
an
important
part
of
the
city
and
the
bit
of
work
that
we've
never
done
is
underpin
what
the
asset
can
return,
because
we
need
to
try
and
maintain
that
that
asset
forever.
A
E
I
know
I
appreciate
that,
but
it's
also
something
that
I
wanted
to
communicate
to
the
chief
investment
officer
in
in
context
of
this
and
other
things
that
are
coming
from
the
new
Chief
investment
officer
office,
the
on
page
72.
We
are
given.
The
reason
for
this
is
because
of
the
alignment
with
the
council
plan.
E
The
element
of
the
council
plan
relating
to
the
diverse
thriving
economy
and
through
you,
chair,
if
I
may,
to
Jeff,
is
to
say
that
I
will
find
it
very
difficult
to
support
or
focus
on
projects
that
are
presented
from
the
investment
office.
If
it
is
solely
on
that
one
element
of
the
council
plan,
what
I
would
prefer
to
see,
rather
than
something
which
is
that
Amendment,
which
focuses
solely
on
that
also
reflects
the
other
objectives
of
the
council
plan.
E
E
I
anytime
I
see
that
the
project
and
the
present
presentation
is
diverse,
thriving
economy.
Without
those
other
elements
considered
that's
going
to
cause
a
concern.
What
would
be
greater
is
if
we
could,
if
we're
going
to
do
an
analysis
is
do,
let's
do
it
with
all
those
elements
of
the
council
plan
considering
yeah.
A
L
Personally,
don't
want
to
see
this
bubble
up
again
in
six
months
time,
because
someone's
been
doing
some
secret
project
behind
the
scenes
to
re-prepare
it
to
launch
it
back
into
the
marketplace,
for
example.
So
would
it
be
cleaner
and
easier
for
the
offices
if
there
was
a
paragraph
that
said
that
Council
not
proceed
with
the
sale?
L
L
Yeah
I'm,
just
I,
just
want
to
make
this
crystal
clear
because,
for
example,
yesterday
we
were
hearing
about
green
Bridges
and
now
there's
some
sort
of
business
cases
about
green
Bridges.
Even
though
we
had
stopped
the
budget
allocation
thinking,
that
might
be
enough
previous
resolutions
bubble
around
and
there's
one
action
from
our
resolution
from
five
years
ago.
That
leads
to
a
body
of
work
being
done
and
all
of
a
sudden
the
things
being
sold
again
so
I
just
want
to
know.
L
Should
we
add
that
we're
not
selling
it
and
should
are
there
any
other
resolutions
that
are
outstanding?
This
was
going
to
be
a
second
question,
but
are
there
any
other
actions
that
are
outstanding
from
previous
resolutions?
That
would
lead
to
a
body
of
work
to
create
a
sale
environment,
okay,
so
Jeff.
I
L
I'm
just
always
worried
that
we
walk
out
of
this
room
and
then,
what's
in
writing,
isn't
then
remembered
in
two
years
or
five
years
or
post
Jeff
or
post
Cameron
or
post.
Whoever
else
you
know
what
I
mean
so
as
far
as
possible,
I
always
prefer
that
the
resolutions
are
complete.
So
that's
fine,
because
the
difference
is
we
have
over
the
last
five
years.
I
D
But
in
this
room
we
represent
the
residents
of
the
whole
of
the
city,
so
I
actually
believe
that
we
need
to
actually
go
out
to
Market
and
to
and
not
for
the
sake
of
the
purpose.
If
you
want
to
take
out
that
last
in
number,
four
there
take
out
that
future
procurement
process
that
it's
fine
but
I,
actually
think
it's
incumbent
upon
us
to
see
what
the
best
strategic
use
of
a
site
of
this
size
in
the
center
of
the
city.
D
When
we
know
that
in
the
past
it's
the
use
of
that
site
is
decreasing
all
the
time
and
then
on
the
other
side
of
things,
and
it's
not
to
do
with
marketing
that
it's
to
do
at
the
position
within
the
city
and
then
also
to
talk
to
councilor
or
just
to
come
back
to
councilor
Taylor
with
the
idea
with
providing
a
private
company,
which
is
our
bus
companies.
Space
to
park
in
the
center
of
service
at
the
expense
of
the
rate
pays
is
not
something
I
could
support
either.
D
C
C
A
C
So
that's
I
can't
support
it
in
its
current
form.
The
only
other
thing
that
I
would
like
to
say
is
that,
if
we're
going
to
consider
this
again
at
the
conclusion
of
the
parking
report,
then
why
wouldn't
we
have
the
open
tender
process
as
well
and
consider
the
whole
lot
and
deal
with
it
once
and
for
all,
because
at
this
point
in
time
it's
another
delay
in
just
it's
simply
an
another
delay.
C
Rather
than
saying
we
want
to
cover
all
bases,
we're
not
committed
to
selling
quite
clearly
today,
there's
not
an
overwhelming
desire
to
sell
that
asset
in
this
room.
Today,
from
what
I
can
gather
from
the
comments
that
have
been
made,
I
think
more
information
is
always
valuable,
rather
than
less
and
I'd
be
happy
to
have
seen
an
another
amendment
that
included
that
option
for
not
to
to
take
out
those
words
to
inform
a
future
procurement
process.
We're
not
there
yet
we're
not
there
yet.
C
But,
yes,
we
could
have
suggestions
about
the
future
use
and
we
might
find
an
appetite
for
some
of
them
and
we
might
not
I'm
certain.
We
won't
find
an
appetite
to
put
ten
thousand
trees
on
one
of
our
most
valuable
Assets
in
the
city.
I
mean
that's,
it's
ludicrous
to
even
think
that
that
might
be
the
outcome
that
we
hold
for
that
parcel
of
land,
that
18
000
square
meters
of
land
right
in
the
center
of
surfers.
A
C
A
C
C
A
A
Councilors
I
think
that
that
removes
the
uncertainty
in
regards
to
the
timing
of
the
required
works,
as
identified
in
the
report.
It
sets
it
out
over
10
years.
It
doesn't
actually
give
it
a
source
of
funds,
which
is
what
the
Strategic
priority
Reserve
does,
but
we
know
from
the
report
that
there's
net
income
from
the
property,
so
it
would
be
imagined
that
those
Works
would
be
done
to
try
to
maximize
the
revenue
that
was
could
be
received
from
that
property
right.
A
So
I
think
that
by
adding
those
words
we
resolve
the
four
and
now,
if
we're
in
the
world
of
amendments,
we're
going
to
go
down
two
parts.
One
is
to
talk
about
going
to
some
type
of
open
expression
and
then
to
have
that
come
back
to
council
as
a
future
date
and
then
the
alternatives
to
draw
in
the
line
draw
a
line
in
the
same
regards
to
a
future
tender
process
for
sale.
Would
would
we
agree
that
that's
where
we're
at
at
the
moment,
two
separate
parts.
M
Thanks
Joe
just
wanted
to
have
been
there
that
I'm
growth
counselor
Taylor
that
we
should
not
sell
the
asset
and
I
want
the
word
to
be
very
clear
that
we
don't
sell
the
asset
because
conference.
The
last
report
of
the
report
before
that,
but
I
asked.
Why
has
this
come
forward
now
and
the
suggestion
was
it
just
seemed
like
a
good
time
to
bring
forward
the
report
and
I
don't
want
those
kind
of
reports
to
just
Bubble
Up,
where
we
start
suggesting
the
sale
of
the
Bruce
Bishop
site
again.
M
I
would
not
want
to,
but
that
that
can
include
things
that
PPP
and
those
kind
of
things
like
there's
a
lot
that
could
come
about
from
it,
because
if
we
sell
the
site,
it's
just
going
to
become
another
residential
Tower
and
surface
paradise
and
there's
no
there's
no
public
car
Parks.
There's
no
broader
benefit.
M
A
So
and
I
will
I
will
accept
that
yeah,
but
oh
first,
let's
resolve
where
we're
at
regarding
councilor
Taylor's
proposed
change
recommendation
so
which
will
be
alternate
one
and
then
let's
look
at
alternate
two
from
there.
So
is
everybody
happy
with
where
we
sit
in
regards
to
councilor
Taylor's
change
recommendation.
A
If
we
just
slow
down
to
allow
for
Amazon
secretary
to
catch
up
yep,
so
we're
going
to
start
with
the
core
of
the
original
officer's
recommendation
yep
and
then
we're
most
likely
going
to
add
some
elements
of
counselor
Tailors.
And
then
we
will
supplement
that
in
Duke,
correct
Mr,
chair
so
Council
about
mumson
I'm,
just
going
to
have
councilor
Hamill
finish
and
then
I'll
come
back
to
you.
N
A
N
A
A
N
And
then
yep
and
then
I'd
like
to
slide
back
up
so
back
to
councilor
Taylor's
again.
So
the
section
about
looking
at
Pub
car
parking
and
private
off
street
parking
and
and
what
that
looks
like
I'm
happy
to
take
that
in
because
I
think
in
the
what
I'm
hearing
from
the
room
is
from
some
counselors
is
that
we
would
like
to
look
at
all
the
available
information.
And
that
is
an
important
part
of
the
information
we
should
be
taking
into
account.
N
N
N
A
I
I
We
I
think
in
terms
of
that
drafting
that
we
probably
would
need
a
report
back
time
frame,
as
you
were
indicating
earlier
active
mayor.
So
we've
got
that
as
October
2024
for
the
transport
and
parking
study-
and
you
talked
about
both
report
backs
happening
at
the
same
time,
so
that
the
information
could
be
considered
in
tandem.
So
that
might
be
an
addition
to
considering.
N
N
I
Think
it
goes
to
your
intention
what
you
would
like
so
as
we've
indicated
in
our
paper,
so
we
could
run
that
open
market
process
in
a
much
shorter
time
frame.
But
if
you'd
like
it
in
a
longer
time
frame
and
the
information
comes
back
together,
then
we
could
insert
that
draft
in
it
does
mean
that
we
wouldn't,
if
we're
talking
about
October
2024,
we
wouldn't
be
opening
an
open
market
process
soon,
because
then
you
would
be
getting
ideas.
That
would
no
longer
be
current
when
we
presented
it
back
to
council.
M
I
M
And
the
other
part
I
had
concerned
about
trying
to
suggest
before
when
Council
Hamill's
word
crafting
I
think
was
point.
Six
was
joining
four
and
five
together
so
that
it
says
that
the
open
Mark
engagement
is
to
assist
in
determining
the
most
advantageous
strategic
use
of
the
site
or
the
property.
I
was
Keen
to
stop
at
a
property
which
I
think
he
had
suggested
the
first
time
and
then
saying
reporting
back
to
council
for
consideration.
M
So
I
wanted
to
say
that
it's
as
I
said
before
I'm,
not
supportive
of
sale
of
the
site,
so
I
don't
see
sale
of
the
site
as
the
most
advantageous
strategic
use
for
the
site.
So
having
that
wording
in
there
I
think
is
important
to
understand
it's
cancer
Hamill's
motion.
He
said
he
wanted
it
completely
open
to
any
and
all
but
I
like
that.
The
wording
was
in
there
saying
that
it's
for
the
most
advantageous
strategic
use,
not
the
most
cash
effective
return
for
the
city.
A
E
A
Right
so
I
think
that
we
should
return
to
councilor
Taylor's
proposed
recommendation
and
councilor
Taylor
I
appreciate
that
you've
opened
I
think
that
I
asked
for
anybody
want
to
speak
against
it
and
a
half
an
hour
later.
I
think
that
we're
now,
maybe
it's
somebody
to
speak
for
it.
Councilor
Pauline
young!
If
you
don't
mind,
I'm,
going
to
take
your
earlier
comments
as
speaking
against
councilor
Taylors
councilman
McDonald.
H
H
This
motion
certainly
covers
that
I
just
like
to
point
out
too,
that
all
kinds
of
facilities
in
this
city,
whether
it
be
the
administration
area,
whether
it
be
our
Parks,
our
libraries,
our
the
car
Parks,
it
all
costs
to
maintain
and
to
upgrade
and
do
whatever
else
we
do
with
it.
So
it's
no
different
to
any
of
our
other
facilities
in
this
city,
and
this
resolution
I
believe
that
councilor
Taylor
has
put
up
today
and
that's
why
I've
decided
to
Second.
L
Councilor
Caldwell
yeah
thanks
if
I
can
sorry
I'm,
not
part
of
the
committee,
but
you're
welcome
to
contribute
look.
I
am
quite
satisfied
that
over
the
last
15
years,
we
have
made
multiple
efforts
with
different
approaches
to
try
and
work
out
a
way
to
dispose
of
this
asset.
So
far,
none
of
it
has
worked.
L
I
think
the
time
has
come
for
us
to
actually
bed
down
this
asset
as
one
that
we
recognize
that
we
need
and
that
we
should
invest
in
and
see
it
come
to
its
best
use
for
the
community
as
a
car
park
and
with
supporting
commercial
and
and
other
activities
around
it
on
even
more
satisfied
in
supporting
councilor
Taylor's
motion,
because
the
foreshadowed
motion
in
my
assessment
provides
a
great
deal
of
uncertainty
around
what
that
might
mean,
because
I
don't
understand
whether
it
means
a
sale
is
potentially
on
the
table
or
not.
I.
L
Much
is
made
of
the
low
occupancy
figure
of
you
know
in
in
arguments
to
sell
that
it
has
37
occupancy
type
numbers
or
whatever.
It
might
be.
That
at
least
equates
to
600
vehicles
that
if
the
car
park
was
closed,
following
a
sale
tomorrow
would
be
displaced
from
their
usual
place
of
parking,
which
I
think
is
a
problem.
L
L
We've
now
found
out
a
number
of
years
later
that
the
that
this
actually
is
a
cash
flow,
positive
asset
with
nowhere
near
the
forecast,
Capital
Works
required,
as
what
some
of
us
may
have
been
led
to
believe,
was
the
case,
which
I
think
strengthens
my
resolve
in
making
sure
that
we
keep
it
within
our
portfolio,
because
the
public
benefit,
in
my
view,
is
served
by
keeping
it
in
its
current
form
and
then
trying
to
enhance
it
in
its
public
use.
Knowing
that
we
will
keep
it
in
our
portfolio
for
the
foreseeable
future.
L
So,
whilst
I
can't
vote
today,
I
am
supportive
of
councilor
Tyler's
motion
and
will
do
so
at
full.
Council
I
think
it's
time
for
us
to
State
publicly
that
we're
not
going
to
proceed
with
a
sale
and
that
we
should
do
our
very
best
and
let
the
organization
do
their
very
best
to
get
this
asset
working
as
best
it
can
for
the
city.
Thank
you.
C
However,
many
years
like
I've
been
adamant
about
the
best
course
of
action
being
the
sale
of
this
asset
based
on
previous
information
that
I've
absorbed
and
I.
Don't
feel
that
way
at
all
today.
I,
don't
feel
that,
on
the
basis
of
the
report
before
us,
we
should
be
selling
the
asset,
but
I
also
don't
think
we
should
be
just
closing
our
mind
two
other
options
that
might
exist
and
just
because
it
says
in
this
recommendation
that
Council
not
proceed
with
the
sale
at
this
time.
C
That
doesn't
mean
we're
not
going
to
consider
the
sale
into
the
future
when
we
have
a
look
at
the
the
next
report
that
comes
back
so
I,
just
I
just
think.
The
discrepancies
in
the
reports
that
we've
received
have
caused
pause
for
many
of
us
today,
the
occupancy
and
the
profit
that
we're
looking
at
today,
they're
real
considerations
and
they're.
It's
valid
that
we
know
about
the
future
population
of
surface
paradise
and
if
our
most
valuable
asset
I
do
agree
with
councilor
Caldwell
too.
C
A
So
I've
made
comment
offline
to
the
CEO
in
regards
to
the
city's
invested
several
or
the
city
and
the
state,
and
the
federal
government
has
invested
quite
literally
billions
of
dollars
in
creating
a
light
rail
network
that
threads
from
helensvale
down
to
broadbeach,
and
that
does
change
the
way
that
people
should
move
around
the
city
and
in
particular
in
particular
the
fact
that
you
can
drive
into
the
middle
of
the
city
and
park
for
potentially
less
than
it
costs
to
do.
A
return
trip
on
the
light.
A
Rail
is
that
fundamental
issue
that
I
think
that
we
also
need
to
address.
But
we
cannot
can't
do
that
in
isolation.
We
need
to
do
that
by
understanding
what
the
available
on
street
parking
is
and
what
the
occupancy
there
is,
and
what
the
pricing
of
that
looks
like
I.
Think
that
we've
all
experienced
the
joy
of
driving
into
the
center
of
Brisbane
and
taking
out
a
second
mortgage
to
pay
for
a
couple
of
hours
of
car
parking
there.
A
I'm
I'm
I'm,
clearly
not
afraid
to
make
those
decisions
if
they
need
to
be
made.
But
I
think
in
regards
to
today.
Today's
best
decision
is
to
conclude
the
process,
improve
the
asset
and
see
what
comes
out
of
the
CEO's
report
or
the
administration's
report
in
October,
2024
and
I'll
conclude
by
saying
that
I've
also
never
gone
to
a
local
government
election
promising
to
make
a
sale
or
some
type
of
transformation
in
regards
to
the
center
of
surfers,
paradise
and
I.
A
K
Thank
you
through
the
chair.
This
asset
that
we're
talking
about
is
in
the
center
of
surfers.
Paradise.
I've
had
mentioned
it
many
times.
Why
are
we
talking
about
selling
a
public
asset
over
these?
These
10
20
years,
Surplus
to
our
needs,
I've
heard
in
a
growing
City
pay
for
other
projects
that
I've
heard
it's
costing
us
money.
Today's
report
is
telling
us
that
the
asset
is
making
money.
K
We
all
know
the
city
is
growing
and
since
covert
I
think
we've
even
gone
to
another
level
and
the
city
and
I'm
going
to
keep
saying
the
city
and
the
Heart
of
our
city
is
growing
as
in
relation
to
as
a
local
representative.
I
am
but
I'm
representing
the
city.
A
lot
of
people
on
the
Gold
Coast
want
to
come
to
surfers
paradise
and
many
of
the
emails
or
conversations
I
have
are
from
people
that
are
actually
outside
my
division
that
want
to
come
into
Surfers
Paradise.
K
We
all
have
a
stake
in
surface
Paradise
and
it's
an
asset
to
our
city.
We
all
own
it
I'm
going
to
keep
reinforcing
it's
in
the
heart
of
our
city.
It's
once
in
a
lifetime
opportunity
to
keep
a
prime
piece
of
land
that
the
city
needs
now
and
will
need
more
moving
forward.
So
I'm
hoping
I
can
get
supportive
everyone
today
to
support
the
motion.
A
A
Councilors
there
there
was
a
presentation
or
some
words
that
I
would
like
to
have
shared
with
Sandy
Wright
in
regards
to
Sandy
Rice's
involvement
in
the
city
she
had
to
leave
because
of
the
extended
Play
version
that
we
have
had
in
regards
to
that
last
item.
So
Alicia.
If
you
could
maybe
speak
to
the
mayor's
office
and
we
might
be
able
to
do
something
at
full,
Council
acknowledging
her
39
years
with
the
City
of
Gold
Coast.