ITEM NO:

COND 01

SUBJECT:

Condolence Motion for the Late Former Mayor Gary Lucas (read by Mayor Mannoun)

It is with great regret that I announce the death of former Mayor Gary Lucas.

A passionate Chipping Norton resident, Gary used his larakin spirit to help make the community better - whether in Council or out in the community.

Gary truly believed in Liverpool and its people and spent his life fighting for us. In 2008, Deputy Mayor Peter Harle, Gary, and I got elected to Council together right after the Administrator finished up. None had a clue what to do as we were first time Councillors and Gary was the only person who had experience as a Councillor.

His experience was invaluable to us and he taught us many important lessons that have never left me. In particular, he said to us “if you want to make change then put up your hand, use your bloody hand”.

He taught us that we had the power because the community gave it to us on election day and to make sure that we use it for them.

He was also an active and engaged member of the wider community. Mr Lucas was a founding member of both the Chipping Norton Sports Club and the Liverpool Action Group. He held leadership positions with the Liverpool Sub-Branch of the RSL and the Casula Powerhouse Arts Centre Board, and contributed to local sport through his involvement in cricket and soccer clubs. He also played a key role in initiating graffiti removal teams in the city—another example of his practical and lasting contributions to our community.

Our thoughts and prayers are with Berryl and the rest of his family.

He will be missed.

On behalf of Liverpool City Council, I extend our heartfelt condolences to Mr Lucas’s family, friends, and all who had the privilege of knowing or working with him. He will be fondly remembered for his unwavering commitment to public service and the Liverpool community.

Deputy Mayor Harle also read a condolence motion for Former Mayor Gary Lucas

RECOMMENDATION:

That Council:

1.     Accepts this condolence motion

2.     At the appropriate time, acknowledge Former Mayor Gary Lucas’s contributions with a suitable memorial.

COUNCIL DECISION:

Motion:               Moved: Mayor Mannoun               Seconded: Clr Harle

That the recommendation be adopted.

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

Councillors voted unanimously for this motion.

A one minute was then observed for Former Mayor Gary Lucas.

ITEM NO:

COND 02

SUBJECT:

Condolence Motion for the Late His Holiness Pope Francis (read by Mayor Mannoun)

It is with great regret that tonight we pause to mourn the death of His Holiness Pope Francis.

The death of Pope Francis is a profound loss to the Catholic Church and to humanity at large. His time as Pope marked a turning point in a move away from grandeur, and embracing modesty, humility, and closeness to the people. By deliberately setting aside the power and prestige of the role, Pope Francis demonstrated that greatness is found through humility and service.

Francis broke with tradition. He rejected the luxurious papal apartments for a modest room in the Vatican guesthouse. He wore simple white vestments and took more trips in his humble Ford Focus than in the papal limousine. These choices were not mere gestures; they were declarations of his vision for the Church—a Church of the poor, for the poor.

Francis lived the Gospel with quiet authenticity. His embrace of the disabled, his outreach to prisoners, his heartfelt concern for refugees and migrants—all spoke louder than sermons. He led not with authority but with empathy, walking with those on the margins and challenging the Church to be less institutional and more pastoral.

Unlike many of his predecessors, Francis did not seek to rule from above but to accompany from within. His focus was on mercy over doctrine, compassion over condemnation. In his teachings, he encouraged the Church to listen more than it spoke, and to act with courage in the face of injustice.

As we mourn Pope Francis, we celebrate a legacy that will continue to shape the heart of the Church for generations. He demonstrated a leadership that relied on the power of humility, the strength of compassion, and the enduring truth that the greatest among us must be the servant of all. May his soul rest in the peace he so faithfully preached.

RECOMMENDATION:

That Council:

Accept the condolence motion.

COUNCIL DECISION:

Motion:                         Moved:  Mayor Mannoun

That the recommendation by adopted.

A one minute silence was then observed for His Holiness Pope Francis and Former Mayor Gary Lucas.

That the minutes of the Ordinary Meeting held on 26 March 2025 be confirmed as a true record of that meeting.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1.   Receives and notes the Minutes of the Extraordinary Council meeting held on 15 April 2025; and

2.   Endorse the Minutes.

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion:                                  Moved:  Clr Macnaught       Seconded:  Clr Harle

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

Councillors voted unanimously for this motion.

MAYORAL MINUTES

ITEM:                  MAYOR 01

SUBJECT:          Partnership with Unity Grammar - Model Global Parliament

REPORT OF:      Mayor Mannoun

DATE:                 23 April 2025

Tonight, I propose that we provide our support to a unique and exciting opportunity to partner with Unity Grammar on their Model Global Parliament - an initiative that speaks to the very heart of civic learning, youth leadership, and community engagement.

Each year, Unity Grammar, in collaboration with the Institute for Global Peace and Sustainable Governance, hosts this educational event, which brings together local students to debate pressing global issues in a simulated parliamentary setting. This year, they have approached the Council to co-host the event right here, in our very own Chambers.

The opportunity before us is more than symbolic. It provides our young people with the tools, platform, and confidence to engage with global challenges, to learn the mechanics of diplomacy and governance, and to see themselves as future leaders—not only of Liverpool, but of the world.

As part of this partnership, I propose that Council assist in promoting the event to local schools, encouraging broad participation, and providing in-kind support valued at $2,500 which will include the waiving of the Council Chambers hire fee and the promotion of the event as co-hosts.

This project aligns perfectly with our ongoing commitment to inclusive education, community partnerships and the development of the next generation of leaders. It will empower students with a deeper understanding of civic responsibility. It will build stronger relationships between Council, local schools, and the wider community.

I express thanks to Unity Grammar for their initiative, and I encourage my fellow Councilors to support this partnership, so that together we can help bring this wonderful opportunity to life in Liverpool.

I commend this Mayoral Minute to the chamber.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1.     Endorses a partnership with Unity Grammar to co-host the 2025 Model Global Parliament (MGP) at the Liverpool Council Chambers;

2.     Approves in-kind support valued at $2,500, including the waiver of Chamber hire fees.

3.     Assists in promoting the event to schools across the Liverpool Local Government Area to encourage participation;

4.     Credits Unity Grammar and the Institute for Global Peace and Sustainable Governance for their commitment to youth empowerment and civic education.

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion:                                  Moved: Mayor Mannoun

That the recommendation be adopted.

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

Councillors voted unanimously for this motion.

Mayoral Minute

ITEM:                  MAYOR 02

SUBJECT:          Recognition of Superintendent Danny Doherty APM on his                                                Retirement

REPORT OF:      Mayor Ned Mannoun

DATE:                 23 April 2025

I move that Liverpool City Council formally acknowledges and congratulates Superintendent Danny Doherty APM on his retirement from the New South Wales Police Force after 40 years of distinguished service.​

Superintendent Doherty commenced his policing career in January 1985, following three years of service in the Australian Army. Throughout his tenure, he held various roles across the state, culminating in his leadership of the Homicide Squad at State Crime Command. His dedication to justice and commitment to community safety have left an indelible mark on law enforcement in New South Wales.​

While Superintendent Doherty's career encompassed numerous assignments, his connection to Liverpool is particularly noteworthy. His early years in the force included service at the Liverpool Police Station, where he worked closely with our community and contributed to local policing initiatives.

Superintendent Doherty's career intersected with our own CEO’s career as they worked to together in the late 80’s at 32 Division (Auburn) and later as detectives in the South West Major Crime Squad.

His experiences in Liverpool helped shape his approach to policing, emphasizing community engagement and proactive crime prevention.​

Superintendent Doherty's exemplary service has been recognized with the awarding of the Australian Police Medal, reflecting his outstanding contributions to law enforcement. His leadership, integrity, and commitment to public safety have set a standard for officers across the state.​

On behalf of Liverpool City Council and our community, I extend our deepest gratitude to Superintendent Danny Doherty for his unwavering dedication and service. We wish him all the best in his retirement and future endeavours.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Formally acknowledges the retirement of Superintendent Danny Doherty APM and his contribution to policing in Liverpool; and

2. Writes to Superintendent Doherty to thank him for his service and to wish him well in his retirement.

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion:                                  Moved: Mayor Mannoun

That the recommendation be adopted.

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

Councillors voted unanimously for this motion.

Mayoral Minute

ITEM:                  MAYOR 03

SUBJECT:          Incorporating NSW Government Planning Circular Guidelines into                                      Council Assessment Procedures

REPORT OF:      Mayor Ned Mannoun

Background

On 7 April 2025, the NSW Government issued a planning circular in response to a persistent issue delaying the delivery of housing across the state: avoidable errors and inconsistencies in development approvals—often as simple as typos or unclear consent conditions—have been triggering unnecessary modification requests, delaying construction and diverting council resources.

The circular introduces a new procedural step requiring councils to provide draft conditions of consent to applicants of residential developments. This allows applicants a seven-day period to review and suggest corrections before a determination is issued. This collaborative, pre-consent review is intended to reduce delays caused by post-approval modifications that stem from minor administrative or technical oversights, thereby improving efficiency and certainty in the planning system.

This issue is particularly relevant to Liverpool City Council. As one of the fastest-growing areas in New South Wales and a major contributor to the state’s housing supply pipeline, we are regularly tasked with assessing and determining complex and high-volume development applications.

The scale and pace of growth in Liverpool demand a planning system that is not only robust but also agile and responsive. Adopting a practical, applicant-inclusive step like the one outlined in the circular aligns with our commitment to being a modern, pro-housing, pro-community council.

While the state circular applies to developments with 30 or more dwellings, the principles behind it—collaboration, clarity, and pre-emptive resolution of minor issues—are equally valuable across all development types. Extending this approach to all DAs, regardless of size, will further streamline Liverpool’s assessment processes and foster improved relationships with applicants, builders, and the wider community.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Notes the NSW Government’s planning circular issued on 7 April 2025, aimed at reducing delays in the DA process by introducing a pre-consent draft condition review for large developments.

2.     Endorses the incorporation of the process outlined in the circular into Liverpool City Council’s internal planning procedures for all development applications, not just those involving 30 or more dwellings.

3.     Requests the CEO to update Council’s DA assessment procedures to reflect this change, including a standard practice of issuing draft conditions of consent for a seven-day applicant review and feedback period prior to final determination.

4. Requests a briefing to Council within six months on the implementation of this procedure and its effectiveness in reducing delays and improving assessment outcomes.

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion:                                  Moved: Mayor Mannoun

That Council:

1. Notes the NSW Government’s planning circular issued on 7 April 2025, aimed at reducing delays in the DA process by introducing a pre-consent draft condition review for large developments.

2.     Endorses the incorporation of the process outlined in the circular into Liverpool City Council’s internal planning procedures for all development applications, not just those involving 30 or more dwellings.

3.     Requests the CEO to update Council’s DA assessment procedures to reflect this change, including a standard practice of issuing draft conditions of consent for a seven-day applicant review and feedback period prior to final determination.

4. Requests a briefing to Council within six months on the implementation of this procedure and its effectiveness in reducing delays and improving assessment outcomes.

5.     Receive a briefing at the next Governance Meeting prior to the implementation.

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

Councillors voted unanimously for this motion.

COUNCIL DECISION:

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Harle                  Seconded: Clr Macnaught

1.   Notes the advice of the Liverpool Local Planning Panel;

2.   Endorses “in principle” the Planning Proposal request to amend Schedule 1 of the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 (LLEP 2008) to permit the use with development consent to facilitate the future development of a ‘service station’ at Lot 6 DP1217784, 1411 The Northern Road, Bringelly;

3.   Forwards the Planning Proposal to the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure (DPHI), pursuant to Section 3.33 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 seeking Gateway Determination;

4.   Subject to a Gateway Determination, undertakes public exhibition and community consultation in accordance with the conditions of the Gateway Determination and the Liverpool Community Participation Plan 2022;

5.   Subject to a Gateway Determination, endorses the public exhibition of the Draft Planning Agreement (Attachment 4) for a minimum of 28 days concurrently with the Planning Proposal pursuant to Clause 204 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021 and Section 7.5 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979;

6.   Receives a Post-Exhibition Report on the outcomes of the public exhibition period for both the Planning Proposal and Draft Planning Agreement; and

7.   Delegates to the CEO (or delegate) to amend the draft Planning Proposal and attachments for any typographical and other minor errors / amendments if required.

That the recommendation be adopted.

Councillors voted unanimously for this motion.

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Harle                  Seconded: Clr Adjei

1.     That this item be deferred until consultation with the previous committee members and then report back to Council at the appropriate time.

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

Councillors voted unanimously for this motion.

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Macnaught        Seconded: Clr Dr Green

That Council:

1.   Endorse the revised Liverpool Powerhouse Board Charter; and

2.   Council appoints one Councillor as a representative to the Liverpool Powerhouse Board

3.     Clr Dr Green is to be appointed as the representative.

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

Councillors voted unanimously for this motion.

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Dr Green           Seconded: Clr Macnaught

That Council:

1.         Adopt the Draft Complaints and Compliments Management Policy.

2.         Authorise the CEO to make minor amendments and updates to the Policy, including the preparation of any operational procedures on the basis that they do not materially change the intention of the Policy.

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

Councillors voted unanimously for this motion.

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Harle                  Seconded: Clr Harte

That the Council receives and notes this report.

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

Councillors voted unanimously for this motion.

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Dr Green           Seconded: Clr Macnaught

That Council:

1.     Revoke the Customer Service and Communications Policy (Attachment 2);

2.     Adopt the Customer Experience Policy;

3.     Authorise the CEO to make minor amendments and updates to the Policy, including the preparation of any operational procedures on the basis that they do not materially change the intention of the Policy; and

4.     Notes the resolution of Council at the 20 November 2024 and that changes be circulated to Councillors.

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

Councillors voted unanimously for this motion.

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Macnaught        Seconded: Clr Ammoun

That Council endorses the update Tourism and CBD Committee Charter

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

Councillors voted unanimously for this motion.

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Macnaught        Seconded: Clr Dr Green

That Council

1.     Receive and note this report; and

2.     Work through the current budget process, identify short, medium and long-term methods of achieving the outcomes mentioned in the report.

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

Councillors voted unanimously for this motion.

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Macnaught        Seconded: Clr Harle

That Council defer this item.

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

Councillors voted unanimously for this motion.

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Macnaught        Seconded: Clr Harte

That Council receives and noted the Minutes of the Tourism and CBD Committee held on 4 March 2025.

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

Please address the following:

1.   Has Liverpool City Council returned any money to either the NSW State Government or the Federal Government that it received from infrastructure grants since 1 July 2021?

a.      If so, how has this occurred?

b.      If so, why has this occurred?

c.       If so, what is the exact dollar figure of infrastructure grants that Liverpool Council has applied for and received from both State and Federal Governments?

i.     From this sum, what is the exact dollar figure that Liverpool Council has       returned to:

ii.     NSW State Government

iii.    Federal Government

d.      If this has occurred, what specific projects by title and area in the Liverpool LGA have not been able to commence or complete as a result of this?

2.   If not, does Liverpool City Council intend to return back any infrastructure funding from either state or federal governments?

a.      If so, why?

b.      If so, what are the financial implications for Liverpool City Council?

c.       If so, what specific projects by title and area in the Liverpool LGA that had grant funding approved are now not able to commence?

d.      If so, why has the funding grants received for infrastructure not been returned already?

Response from Operations

Consultation occurred with Council’s Project Delivery, WSIG, Grants and Partnership and Development Engineering teams.

1.   Council has not returned any money received from infrastructure grants since 1 July 2021.

2.   Council does not intend to return back any infrastructure funding from either state or federal government.

Note:  An updated response will be provided to the 21 May 2025 Council meeting as per memo dated 23^rd April 2025.

Question

1.      Can Council collate and summarise the cumulative operational parameters and limits set under the relevant concept and staged approvals for the dual Moorebank Intermodals?

Response from Planning and Compliance

Council was not the consent authority for the Moorebank Intermodal Terminal. The application was assessed by the Independent Planning Commission (IPC) who are part of the Department of Planning and Environment (DPHI). Therefore, any queries regarding the parameters considered during the assessment should be directed to the DPHI who are the Consent Authority.

Noting representation made in the Public Forum on 26 March 2025 regarding OPER 02 and Road Condition. Noting the forward projects of $100mil plus and the backlog of $52mil plus. Noting references to a “pavement management system software (SMEC PMS) and rating system”.

Please address the following:

(a)   Can Operations list the date inputs for its pavement management and rating system?

i. Identifying them as desktop (digital) or surveyed (inspected & counted) inputs.

(b)   Can Operations advise if forecasting in this system and thus road condition assumptions and analysis are based on strategic models provided by state agencies; or hard traffic counts and pattern recognition?

(c)   If strategic models (SSTM and similar) provided by state agencies are not representative of much higher traffic growth in Liverpool, could that augment the pavement management and rating system, such that real world road condition is worse than the software assumes?

(d)   How often does Council undertake hard traffic counts?

(e)   Can Operations list all hard traffic counts from 2018 to the present by date location?

Response (provided by Operations and Planning and Compliance)

(a)  Can Operations list the date inputs for its pavement management and rating system?

From 1993, Liverpool City Council has been using SMEC Pavement Management System (PMS) software for managing its road pavement network assets and rating system. Currently, National Transport Research Organisation (NTRO) is the new owner and sole supplier of the software in Australia. From this point in time LCC then input updated condition data and information relating to its road network on a cadence of 4-5 years. Each year LCC undertakes condition reports on 25% of its road network and therefore 100% of the road network is completed over a 4-year cycle.

i.     Identifying them as desktop (digital) or surveyed (inspected & counted) inputs.

       Council adopts a combination of desktop and survey methodology to the management of its 991 km road network. As part of this approach, the Council also conducts regular physical site condition surveys of the entire road network once in 4-5 years cycle. Collected data is uploaded, analysed in the Pavement Management System (SMEC PMS) to generate long term works program based on various budgetary scenarios and operational constraints.

(b)   Can Operations advise if forecasting in this system and thus road condition assumptions and analysis are based on strategic models provided by state agencies; or hard traffic counts and pattern recognition?

The International Study of Highway Development and Management (ISOHDM) is an internationally funded and executed project managed by the ISOHDM Project Secretariat based in Paris. ISOHDM developed a new suite of engineering/economic analysis software known as HDM-4.SMEC-PMS employs the HDM-4 tool to model, analyse, and predict future road deterioration patterns based on various road distress parameters such as structural cracking, rutting, and roughness etc. Council implemented the Pavement Management System (SMEC PMS), which is an integrated and formalised set of procedures, standards, and data for planning, implementing, and performance monitoring road network. This system provides a long-term, holistic view of whole life cycle road management by considering preventative maintenance and timely renewals/rehabilitations to ensure value for money. In addition, hard traffic counts are also conducted to understand traffic volumes that impact road condition.

(c)   If strategic models (SSTM and similar) provided by state agencies are not representative of much higher traffic growth in Liverpool, could that augment the pavement management and rating system, such that real world road condition is worse than the software assumes?

As outlined above LCC uses both desktop and surveys to determine road conditions. This includes traffic counts to consider the uniqueness of Liverpool LGA.

(d)   How often does Council undertake hard traffic counts?

Council undertakes hard traffic counts on demand based on the data request from internal stakeholders such as traffic and transport planning unit.

(e)   Can Operations list all hard traffic counts from 2018 to the present by date location?

Following list outlines all hard traffic counts undertaken internally by Council from 2018 to the present by date location:

1. Ash Rd  2018/12/14

2. Bathurst St 2018/11/30

3. Festival St 2018/02/19

4. Jedda Rd 2018/12/14

5. Moore St 2018/11/30

6. St Johns St 2018/02/19

7. William Buckly Dr 2018/05/09

8. Memorial Ave 2018/12/05

9. Brain Avenue 2020/10/22

10. Casula Power House 2019/10/10

11. Christie St 2019/10/10

12. Feodore Dr 2020/10/22

13. Flynn Ave 2020/10/22

14. Hall Cct 2020/10/22

15. North of Powerhouse Rd 2019/10/10

16. Powerhouse Rd 2019/02/04

17. Regentville Dd 2020/10/22

18. Sixteenth Ave 2020/10/22

19. Weir Cres 2020/10/22

20. Cartwright Ave 2022/09/16

21. Greendale Rd 2020/10/22

22. Kingsford Smith 2020/10/22

23. Railway Serviceway 2022/09/16

24. Western Rd 2022/09/16

25. Kurrajong Rd various locations 2021/06/23

26. Martin Rd various locations 2021/09/22

27. Balanada St 2022/09/09

28. Green Valley Rd various locations 2022/07/25

29. Mannow Ave 2022/12/05

30. Margaret Dawson Dr 2022/12/05

31. Pacific Palm Cct 2022/12/05

32. Stanwell Cres 2022/02/23

33. George St(From Elizabeth St to Campbell St)Outside Church 2024/07/03

34. George St(From Elizabeth St to Campbell St)Outside Westfield 2024/07/03

35. George St(From Moore to Elizabeth St) 2024/07/02

36. George St(From Scott St to Railway St)  2024/07/03

37. George Street(from Railway to Moore) 2024/07/02

38. Kennedy St 2024/12/17

39. Macquarie St various locations 2024/06/17

40. Moore St from George to Bigge St 2024/07/03

41. Moore St from Moore St to Northumberland St Outside 98A 2024/07/03

Moreover, Council’s Traffic and Transport team also collects Traffic data by engaging external consultants for reporting purposes.

Noting Council undertook Public Exhibition of RZ-6/2015 late last year, and that NSW DPHI has now taken over the assessment of this Planning Proposal under its newly established State Significant Rezoning pathway.

Please address the following:

(a)     Can Planning and Compliance advise if Council retained copies of all application and assessment materials?

(b)     Will Planning and Compliance be undertaking a post exhibition report to Council?

(c)     Can Planning and Compliance advise if DPHI will undertake its own exhibition under its new process; or if DPHI will merely undertake its assessment based solely on the submissions lodged with LCC via email and or its eplanning portal?

(d)     Can Planning and Compliance advise if it has thus made a submission to DPHI regarding RZ-6/215 under its newly established State Significant Rezoning pathway?

(e)     Have all necessary Directorates had sufficient time to review all the technical material; particularly for Flooding and Traffic? Has Council retained copies of:

-     Moore Point – Stage 2 Transport Infrastructure Assessment & TMAP (Aurecon)

-     Moore Point – TIWG – Minutes August 2021

-     Moore Point - Transport Infrastructure Staging (TfNSW Briefing) - 13 July 2022        Final

-     Any and All SIDRA modelling sitting behind RZ-6/2015

See   Flood advisory panel recommendations- Moore Point_PP-2022-1602 (pp.26 – 28 of 28) RZ-6/2015 Appendix 21 (pp.22 & 25 of 30) and Appendix 19 (pp.25 – 26 & 65 of 85)

(f)    Has Council reviewed and assessed the above Stage 1 and Stage 2 Assessments?

(g)   Does Council have the necessary internal staff and expertise to access files and understand the SIDRA and AIMSUN Traffic Models for Moore Point and their implications?

(h)   Is Council aware that the intersection upgrades as presented are not fit for purpose and represent a decrease of existing capacity which is already operating at LoS F (failing)?

Responses to these Questions with Notice will be provided in the 21 May 2025 Council agenda.

Noting Council rating standards are set by IPART NSW except as relates to ‘biobanked land’. Noting that Commonwealth Land is exempt from Council rates except where competitive neutrality arrangements, such as “taxation neutrality” and “regulatory neutrality” are “explicitly required for designated Commonwealth Businesses” under the CCNPS (1996). For example, Moorebank Intermodal Company Ltd, now National Intermodal Corporation Ltd and Western Sydney Airport Corporation Ltd.

Please address the following:

(a)        Can Council confirm if land set aside for biodiversity credits or ‘bio banked land’ is liable to pay local government rates (say based on unimproved value or similar) or are such lots and parcels exempt?

(b)        If exempt, please cite and supply the relevant legislation.

(c)        If not exempt, does Council maintain a registry of such parcels?

(d)         Can Council prepare a list of parcels of ‘bio banked land’ and the rate applied for each?

(e)        Has Council maintained a list of the specific ‘bio banked’ parcels created for the purpose of biodiversity offsets by MIC Ltd and WSA Co Ltd necessary to obtain approval for their respective projects?

I.       Please provide said list and itemise the rates collected for each since their creation.

Responses to these Questions with Notice will be provided in the 21 May 2025 Council agenda.

Can the Council provide details on how often the parks in Liverpool, are cleaned and maintained? Specifically:

1.    What is the current cleaning schedule for parks?

2.    How often are rubbish bins emptied, and general maintenance carried out?

3.    Are there any plans to increase the frequency of cleaning or improve park maintenance in response to community concerns?

4.    What measures are currently in place to address syringe disposal in parks?

5.    Are there any plans to improve safety and implement additional measures, such as more regular inspections or disposal units?

Responses to these Questions with Notice will be provided in the 21 May 2025 Council agenda.

Please address the following:

1.   Can the council outline the current street cleaning schedule for Liverpool, including residential areas, commercial precincts, and high traffic zones?

2.   What measures are currently in place to address the growing issue of litter on our streets?

3.   How many reports or complaints has the council received in the past 12 months regarding rubbish and illegal dumping?

4.   What actions is the council taking to enforce anti littering laws, and how many fines or penalties have been issued in the past year?

5.   Are there any plans to increase rubbish collection services, install additional bins in problem areas, or introduce more community education programs to reduce littering?

6.   What measures is the council taking to address illegal dumping, and how effective have these measures been in reducing waste on our streets?

7.   Are there plans to improve lighting in Liverpool’s parks and public spaces to enhance community safety, particularly at night?

Responses to these Questions with Notice will be provided in the 21 May 2025 Council agenda.

Council’s Community Strategic Plan (CSP) sets out the key priorities and long-term aspirations for Liverpool. As is the case when a new council is elected, the next iteration of the CSP is currently being developed to ensure it meets the needs and aspirations of Council and the Liverpool community.

In addition to the CSP, Council holds several other strategies and plans which align with and are complimentary to the CSP. Many of these plans focus on target groups or areas which support Council in its planning and delivery of the many facets of Council operations.

With several new Councillors elected in this current term, and considering the raft of strategies and plans in place, it would be beneficial for Councillors to receive a listing of all the current plans and strategies which complement the CSP. This will allow our Council to be well-informed of the full suite of strategies and plans under which Council operates, and highlight the connection to Council’s broader strategic position, key priorities, and long-term aspirations.

Please address the following:

1.   Please provide a list of all relevant strategies and/or plans that complement the CSP, including the name, a brief description of their purpose, and validity dates of each.

Response (provided by City Futures)

A CSP workshop will be held on 13 May 2025 and a list of the strategies as requested will be provided at this workshop.

1.    Has there been a significant rise in negative sentiment towards the Council across various social media channels?

Response (City Futures): Council measures the performance and sentiment of our social media and website platforms. This process gives valuable insights into how various issues and posts perform and helps Council’s team communicate more effectively.  For the past six months, the average of negative sentiment towards Council has been 20%.  Some months record a higher percentage, and this can be easily attributed.  For example, January had 44% negative sentiment, and this is attributed to the confusion over the second yellow recycling bin pick-up in the holiday period.  Negative sentiment in February was 37% and was attributed to the negative perceptions about dumped shopping trolleys (even though Council was cleaning them up).  In March, it returned to 23%, aligning with the average.

2.    Have posts relating to the Council on the Council's official social media pages had the comments disabled due to the negative nature of the feedback from the community?

Response (City Futures): Most posts on Council’s social media leave comments and responses open. Only a small number of official posts are closed to comments based on industry best practice. The social media guidelines are on Council’s website and reproduced below for information:

Social Media Guidelines

Liverpool City Council’s social media channels are designed to provide communication about Council services, initiatives, events, programs and news.

Council’s primary communication is via Facebook and Instagram with select communications published through LinkedIn, YouTube and Tik Tok.

For a full list of Council’s communication channels, please click here.

We’ve summarised below what you can expect from us and what we expect from you in the use of Council’s social media channels.

What to expect from us

·      Social media monitoring: Monday to Friday from 9.00 am to 5.00 pm (excluding public holidays).

·      Outside of these business hours, our staff do not moderate comments or respond to enquiries.

·      Enquiries or requests of Council should be directed to our Customer Service Team through the following channels:
Phone: 1300 36 2170
Email: lcc@liverpool.nsw.gov.au
Online

Enquiries via social media

While we try to assist with simple questions or issues, many matters can't be resolved via social media.

You should contact Council online, by phone or in writing if you:

·      have an enquiry

·      need to request a service

·      would like to give us official feedback

·      wish to make a complaint

·      want to understand more about our Customer Service and Communication Policy.

For urgent issues or potential hazards, please call 1300 36 2170 (24/7).

Moderation of public comments

·      Social media posts and comments must also adhere to that platforms’ own community guidelines, user agreements and policies.

·      Liverpool City Council does not accept responsibility for community comments – they are not representative of the opinions of the Council, nor do we make any warranty to their accuracy.

·      Official communications such as those related to media releases, election information and announcements, public exhibitions and draft policies will be shared on Council’s social media channels with comments turned off.  If you wish to share your feedback about these communications, we ask that you do this through our Customer Service channels.

·      Our team may hide or remove comments if they are considered to breach privacy or the guidelines listed under What we expect from you.

·      We don’t participate in Facebook groups or respond to any tagging within these groups.

What we expect from you

We support the Terms of Service and related policies of the social media platforms we participate in and request that visitors to our social media pages do the same.

Council’s social media channels should be a safe space for everyone.

We encourage open discussion, and in order to create a positive and engaging environment for the community we ask all users to treat each other and our social media moderators with respect.

Users may disagree with an idea or a person’s viewpoint; however, we ask you remain respectful when conveying that point of view.

Posts on Liverpool City Council’s social media pages may be deleted or hidden as determined at Council’s absolute discretion if they contain:

·      violent, obscene, offensive, profane, hateful, derogatory, racist, homophobic or sexist language, links or images

·      insults, threats or harassment of other users

·      information that may compromise the safety or security of the public

·      any discussion or promotion of behaviour that is unlawful

·      comments that threaten or defame any person or organisation

·      solicitations, advertisements, endorsements or spam

·      off-topic posts by a single user

·      repetitive posts copied and pasted or duplicated by single or multiple users

·      any other inappropriate content or comments as determined by the Council.

When interacting with our social pages Council requests you:

·      exercise courtesy

·      are respectful to others at all times

·      do not post personal addresses or phone numbers

·      acknowledge that the Council cannot check the accuracy of every comment and does not take any responsibility for reliance on comments

Users who do not comply with these social media community guidelines will be blocked from the page at the absolute discretion of the Council.

Recordkeeping

Council may record information posted to any of its social media channels for Council purposes. This includes your public social networking account name.

Disclaimer

Although we take care in producing the content for social media, we do not guarantee that the information is accurate, complete or current, and that the data is free from defects.

We do not endorse or take responsibility for content posted by third parties. This is also the case if we like or follow a page. Commenting may be turned off on content shared from third parties.

3.    During a public inquiry in New South Wales, a mayor can be removed from their position as a spokesman for the council under the Local Government Act. This could occur if the mayor's actions undermine the council's integrity.

With this negative feedback and criticisms directed at the Mayor can this impa

3. Could Council's credibility and effectiveness in communicating essential information be affected during the Public Inquiry?

Response (Corporate Support):

This is unlikely to occur.

4.    In New South Wales, the relevant section of the Local Government Act that addresses the removal of a mayor as a spokesperson or their ability to carry out certain functions is Section 226. This section outlines the roles and responsibilities of mayors, including provisions for their removal under certain circumstances.

         Additionally, if there are allegations of corruption or misconduct, the council may also    act under Section 440, which relates to the conduct of inquiries and the powers of   councils to address misconduct.

         Seeing as though that the mayor is a person of interest under investigation under the    public inquiry, this has the ability to undermine the Council’s integrity.

         During a public inquiry in New South Wales, a mayor can be removed from their position as a spokesman for the council. This could occur if the mayor is found to be acting inappropriately or if their actions undermine the council's integrity.

4.   Does Council measure its integrity with its ratepayers? If so, how is this measured? If   not, why isn't this measured?

Response (Corporate Support):

As noted in answer to questions 1 and 2, positive sentiment is monitored.

Responses to these Questions with Notice will be provided in the 21 May 2025 Council agenda.

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Macnaught        Seconded: Clr Dr Green

1. Receives and notes the Minutes of the Governance Committee meeting held on 15 April 2025; and

2.  Endorse the recommendations in the Minutes except for Item 07 – Dissolution of the Liverpool Access Committee and Charter which is to be deferred for further consultation.

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

Councillors voted unanimously for this motion.

RECESS

Mayor Mannoun called a recess of meeting at 8.21pm

RESUMPTION OF MEETING

Mayor Mannoun resumed the meeting in Open Session at 8.40pm with all Councillors present.

MOTION OF URGENCY

Item:          MOU 01

Subject:     Continuous improvement of governance and processes

Clr Harte requested Mayor Mannoun accept a Motion of Urgency with regards to the continuous improvement of governance and processes. He stated it was urgent since the CEO has been recently appointed and would like to take this opportunity to set a better standard. Clr Harte stated that Council should always look at ways to improve Governance and processes and should also look at leading the way wherever possible.

In accordance with Clause 9.3 of Council’s Code of Meeting Practice, Mayor Mannoun ruled the above matter as urgent and was dealt with as shown below:

COUNCIL DECISION:

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Harte                  Seconded: Clr Ammoun

That Council direct the new CEO to provide a list for recommendations to improve governance at the next council meeting or as soon as practicable.

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared LOST.

Division called (for the motion moved by Clr Harte)

Vote for:              Mayor Mannoun, Clr Adjei, Clr Harte, Clr Macnaught and Clr Ammoun.

Vote against:      Clr Ristevski, Clr Monaghan, Clr Dr Green, Deputy Mayor Harle,

                            Clr Ibrahim and Clr Karnib.

Background

Council advertisements have prominently featured the Mayor's image while neglecting to acknowledge the contributions of other councillors. This practice creates a perception that the Mayor operates independently of the Council, undermining our collective responsibility and teamwork.

Councillors are elected representatives of the community, and it is essential that constituents see the Council as a united body, rather than a hierarchy. By adopting this motion, we will ensure that all councillors receive equal recognition in all Council communications, reinforcing our commitment to transparency and collaboration.

NOTICE OF MOTION (submitted by Clr Ristevski)

That:

1.   Council resolves to implement a policy regarding the use of photographs in Council advertisements and communications. Specifically:

(a)   All advertisements and official communications featuring images of councillors must either include photographs of all serving councillors or refrain from including any photographs altogether.

(b)   The inclusion of the Mayor’s image in promotional materials should not dominate, as the Mayor does not possess presidential powers and should not be portrayed as the       sole representative of the Council.

(c)   This policy aims to ensure equitable representation of all councillors and to maintain the integrity of our collective governance, acknowledging that decisions and achievements are the result of collaborative efforts.

2.   Council to review existing advertising practices and make necessary adjustments within two months of the adoption of this motion.

Mayor Mannoun declared a non-pecuniary, less than significant interest in this matter NOM 01 as this relates to his role as the Mayor of the City of Liverpool and is directly targeted in my role to be able to do his job and has a debt to the mover of the motion.

Mayor Mannoun will remain in the Chambers for the duration of this item and voting.    

Motion of Dissent

On the ruling that point 1 is operational.

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

Division called (for the motion moved by Clr Ristevski)

Vote for:         Clr Monaghan, Clr Ristevski, Clr Dr Green, Clr Karnib, Clr Ibrahim and

                        Clr Harle

Vote against: Mayor Mannoun, Clr Macnaught, Clr Adjei, Clr Harte and Clr Ammoun 

Clr Macnaught called a Point of Order against Part 1(b)

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Ristevski           Seconded: Clr Monaghan

That Council:

1.      Resolves to implement a policy regarding the use of photographs in Council advertisements and communications. Specifically:

(a)   All collateral, promotional material, featuring images of councillors must either include photographs of all serving councillors or refrain from including any photographs altogether.

2.   Review existing advertising practices and make necessary adjustments within two months of the adoption of this motion.

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

Division called (for the motion moved by Clr Ristevski)

Vote for:         Clr Monaghan, Clr Ristevski, Clr Dr Green, Clr Karnib, Clr Ibrahim and

                        Clr Harle

Vote against: Mayor Mannoun, Clr Macnaught, Clr Adjei, Clr Harte and Clr Ammoun 

Note: Mayor Mannoun states that he believes the motion is unworkable in its wording.

Foreshadowed motion:      Moved: Clr Adjei                   Seconded: Clr Macnaught

That this matter be deferred for a workshop and thereafter brought back to a future Council meeting when the Media policy is tabled to Council for endorsement.

Background

This motion is put forward in response to the expressed desires of our residents for increased transparency and accessibility in local governance.

In recent discussions with community members, there has been a clear call for greater transparency in the public inquiry process. Residents have emphasised the importance of being able to engage with and follow these proceedings in real time, ensuring that all voices in our community are heard and considered.

Live streaming the public inquiry hearings would not only enhance transparency but also encourage civic engagement, allowing those who cannot attend in person to participate in the democratic process. This aligns with our commitment to fostering an open and accountable local government.

This initiative is a means to bolster community trust and participation in local governance.

NOTICE OF MOTION (submitted by Clr Ristevski)

That Council writes to the Minister for Local Government requesting that the public inquiry hearings be live streamed.

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Ristevski           Seconded: Clr Karnib

That Council:

1.     Writes to the Commissioner, Mr Ross Glover, requesting that the public inquiry hearings be live-streamed.

2.     Reaffirm the commitment to accommodate as best as possible to ensure that the Council Chamber consisting of technology available to ensure that the inquiry can be live-streamed if permitted and appropriate.

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

Councillors voted unanimously for this motion.

Background

Cost Efficiency: Current contractor rates for security services have proven to be significantly higher than the costs associated with employing security personnel directly. This motion seeks to analyse the financial impact and identify potential savings.

Quality Control: Direct employment of security staff allows for better oversight and training, ensuring that personnel are aligned with the Council's standards and values.

Community Engagement: Directly employed security personnel can foster better relationships with the community, enhancing the overall effectiveness of security measures and promoting public trust.

Flexibility and Responsiveness: Having a directly employed security team enables the Council to respond more swiftly to emerging security needs and to tailor services to specific local requirements.

Conclusion:

By adopting this motion, Council will take a proactive step towards improving security services while ensuring responsible financial management for the betterment of our community.

NOTICE OF MOTION (submitted by Clr Ristevski)

That Council direct the Acting CEO that a report come back to the next Council meeting to explore the feasibility of employing security personnel directly, rather than continuing to contract security services at premium rates.

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Ristevski           Seconded: Clr Monaghan

That Council direct the CEO that a report come back to the next budget meeting to explore the budget implications of employing security personnel directly, rather than continuing to contract security services.

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED

Vote for:    Clr Ristevski, Clr Harle, Clr Harte, Clr Karnib, Clr Ibrahim,

                   Clr Macnaught and Clr Adjei.

Vote against: Mayor Mannoun and Clr Ammoun

Clr Macnaught left the Chamber at 9.46pm.

Clr Macnaught returned to the Chamber at 9.48pm

Background

Council acknowledges the ongoing challenges related to waste management and illegal dumping within our city. Despite the efforts of our current Illegal Waste Rangers Division, the persistent rubbish issues in Liverpool indicate that a fundamental change in approach is necessary to effectively address these concerns.

Ineffectiveness of Current Structure: The current model, which places the Illegal Waste Rangers in an office-based role focused on investigations and fines, has proven inadequate. The increasing volume of litter and illegal dumping suggests that enforcement alone is insufficient to change behaviours or improve overall waste management.

Community Impact: The visible presence of waste in our neighbourhoods not only affects the aesthetic of our city but also has negative implications for public health, the environment, and local businesses. Residents have expressed frustration regarding the lack of effective action against littering and illegal dumping.

Need for Proactive Measures: To create a cleaner Liverpool, we must shift our focus from solely reactive enforcement to proactive waste management strategies. This requires reassigning the Illegal Waste Rangers to work more closely with waste management services, allowing them to engage directly with the community, educate residents on proper waste disposal, and encourage responsible behaviours.

Field-Based Operations:** Deploying Rangers to actively patrol areas prone to illegal dumping, allowing them to address issues in real time and engage with the community.

By restructuring the Illegal Waste Rangers Division and integrating them into the Waste Management Department, we can create a more effective and holistic approach to tackling the rubbish issues plaguing Liverpool. This motion aims to foster a cleaner, healthier, and more sustainable environment for all residents.

NOTICE OF MOTION (submitted by Clr Ristevski)

That Council agree:

1.   That an audit be conducted to show the fines issued by the illegal waste rangers over the following periods:

a.  1st June 2018 to 1st March 2019.

b.  1st June 2024 to 1st March 2025.

2.  That a review be conducted on the time spent in the field investigating illegal waste rangers over the following periods:

a.  1st June 2018 to 1st March 2019.

b.  1st June 2024 to 1st March 2025.

3.  That the Acting CEO review the current structure with a view of returning the illegal waste officers to the Waste team.

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Ristevski           Seconded: Clr Karnib

That Council direct the CEO for a report to come back to the June Council meeting comparing Liverpool to other councils in terms of fines issued by illegal waste ranges for the period 1 June 2024 to 1 March 2025 this is to be incorporated into the previously endorsed motion item no: NOM 12 - 5 February 2025 Council meeting.

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

Background

Abandoned shopping trolleys are a persistent environmental and amenity concern across the Liverpool Local Government Area (LGA). They contribute to visual pollution, obstruct public spaces and footpaths, block stormwater drains, and are often dumped in bushland and waterways. Despite regulatory compliance and trolley retrieval programs in partnership with retailers, the issue remains widespread and resource-intensive to manage.

In addition to traditional compliance efforts, a practical and socially responsive solution is proposed, providing residents with their own personal two wheeled shopping trolleys. Many residents, particularly pensioners and those without access to private transport, rely on supermarket trolleys to carry groceries home, leading to the unintended consequence of trolleys being taken off-site and later abandoned.

By enabling and encouraging the use of personal two-wheel shopping trolleys, Council can reduce the environmental impacts of abandoned trolleys, improve the local streetscape, and promote responsible behaviour in a supportive and proactive way.

Proposed Program Framework:

The initiative proposes that Council:

·      Investigate and develop a trial program to supply up to 500 personal two-wheeler shopping trolleys to eligible residents at a subsidised rate, with a focus on pensioners and individuals without access to private transport.

·      Consider funding options for this initiative, including:

o  A potential amendment to the charter of Council’s Environment Levy to enable funding of this environmental program;

o  External funding sources such as applicable grants from the NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA) or other relevant State programs.

·      Ensure the trolleys are of durable quality, including features such as:

o  Lightweight aluminium frames;

o  Rubber-tired metal wheels;

o  Canvas body;

o  Self-supporting upright design.

·      Incorporate branding and messaging on the trolleys to reflect Council’s support, including the Liverpool City Council logo and a message such as “Your Environmental Levy at Work.”

·      Prepare a report for Council outlining:

o  Implementation strategy for the trial including eligibility criteria, distribution method, and storage/handling;

o  Estimated costs, funding sources and revenue from one-off user contributions;

o  Community benefits and program evaluation criteria to assess effectiveness and potential for future expansion.

Review of the Environmental Levy Program

The Environmental Levy has been in place for approximately 25 years and has played an important role in funding bush regeneration and environmental restoration works within the Liverpool Local Government Area. As a restricted fund, the Levy must be used solely for the purposes for which it is collected, with a historical focus on bushland management.

While the Levy has delivered significant environmental benefits, a review is now timely to ensure that its objectives remain aligned with the evolving environmental and social needs of the community. Over the past two decades, the nature of environmental challenges facing local governments has broadened. Issues such as illegal dumping in waterways, biodiversity protection in urban settings, and community participation in sustainability have become increasingly prominent.

A review of the Environmental Levy would provide an opportunity to:

·      Assess whether the current scope of the Levy meets contemporary environmental priorities;

·      Consider expanding the scope to allow innovative and preventative environmental programs, such as initiatives to reduce urban waterways or promote behaviour change;

·      Ensure the Levy reflects the changing environmental expectations of residents, including support for vulnerable groups to participate in sustainability;

·      Enhance transparency and alignment with Council’s broader strategic environmental objectives, including the Community Strategic Plan and Sustainability Action Plan;

·      Maintain compliance with relevant legislative and financial governance requirements for restricted funds.

This review would ensure that the Levy continues to deliver meaningful environmental outcomes and remains responsive to the community’s current and future needs.

NOTICE OF MOTION (submitted by Clr Harle)

That Council:

1.   Undertake a comprehensive review of Council’s Environmental Levy to expand its uses for the greater benefit of the environment.

2.   Investigate providing a suitable two-wheel shopping trollies for residents such as pensioners and those who have no easy economical means of taking their shopping home.

3.   Provide a report to the May 2025 Governance Committee meeting on the cost-benefit analysis of implementing this proposal, including charging a suitable one-off fee for each trolley.

4.   Utilise funds available from the Environmental Levy to implement the scheme, subject to any required amendments to the levy charter.

5.   Investigate alternate funding sources such as the State Government and relevant grant programs from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

6.   Write to local State Members of Parliament seeking support and potential for subsidising a similar scheme for Councils across New South Wales.

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Harle                  Seconded: Clr Karnib

That the recommendation be adopted.

1.   Undertake a comprehensive review of Council’s Environmental Levy to expand its uses for the greater benefit of the environment.

2.   Investigate providing a suitable two-wheel shopping trollies for residents such as pensioners and those who have no easy economical means of taking their shopping home.

3.   Provide a report to the May 2025 Governance Committee meeting on the cost-benefit analysis of implementing this proposal, including charging a suitable one-off fee for each trolley.

4.   Utilise funds available from the Environmental Levy to implement the scheme, subject to any required amendments to the levy charter.

5.   Investigate alternate funding sources such as the State Government and relevant grant programs from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

6.   Write to local State Members of Parliament seeking support and potential for subsidising a similar scheme for Councils across New South Wales.

7.     Should this be enacted that after twelve months after the program that we reassess to make sure that we have achieved the goals that we set out to do.

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

Councillors voted unanimously for this motion.

Background

With Liverpool Council having just generated a $11 million loss in its recent audited financial statements and current unrestricted cash reserves sitting at near zero, as Councillors we have a fiduciary duty to ensure that ratepayers money is used to its maximum benefit for the community.

The recent court case against the New South Wales government to prevent the public inquiry into Liverpool Council has not been the best usage of ratepayers’ money and as such I propose the following:-

NOTICE OF MOTION (submitted by Clr Ristevski)

That Council agree:

1.    A report be given at the earliest possible Council meeting so that ratepayers are aware of the total legal fees and expenses and staff time in terms of dollars. The same report to also include the NSW Government legal fees that ratepayers will need to pay for losing the case.

2.    Council’s legal team seek advice whether these legal fees can be recovered personally from the Councillors that voted in favour of taking legal action against the New South Wales Government. This report to be tabled at the earliest possible Council meeting.

This item lapsed as there was no mover or seconder.

Background

Community Awareness: As new citizens are welcomed into our community, it is crucial to instil a sense of responsibility towards maintaining a clean environment. An educational video can effectively communicate the importance of proper waste disposal and recycling practices.

Reinforcing Values: Integrating this video into citizenship ceremonies emphasizes the values of sustainability and civic responsibility that are central to our community ethos. It reinforces the idea that every citizen plays a role in preserving our local environment.

Educational Impact: A concise, engaging video can inform new citizens about local waste management services, recycling protocols, and initiatives aimed at reducing litter. Providing this information at the outset will empower citizens to contribute positively to our community.

Visual Engagement: Utilizing visual media will enhance understanding and retention of information, making it more likely that new citizens will adopt responsible waste management practices.

Positive Community Involvement: This initiative aligns with Liverpool Council's goals of promoting community involvement and environmental sustainability. It presents an opportunity to engage new citizens in discussions about local initiatives and encourage them to participate actively in keeping Liverpool clean.

Implementation:

The video should be approximately 5-7 minutes in length, suitable for viewing within the schedule of citizenship ceremonies. Collaboration with the local waste management authority to develop content that is relevant and informative.

Conclusion:

By adopting this motion, Council will take a proactive step towards fostering a culture of environmental responsibility among new citizens. This initiative will not only educate but also inspire a collective effort towards keeping Liverpool clean and vibrant.

NOTICE OF MOTION (submitted by Clr Ristevski)

1.   That Council recognises the importance of environmental stewardship and community engagement in maintaining the cleanliness and sustainability of Liverpool; and

2.   A brief educational video on waste management be shown to new citizens before citizenship ceremonies.

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Ristevski           Seconded: Clr Monaghan

That Council:

1.     Recognises the importance of environmental stewardship and community engagement in maintaining the cleanliness and sustainability of Liverpool;

2.     For a prepare a report to be presented at the June council meeting containing a suite of community education campaigns suitable for a variety of media and ages that encourages community participation and changes in addressing litter and rubbish disposal that is engaging and positive; and

3.     Direct the CEO for Council staff to develop an information sheet on Council services addressing waste and rubbish disposal for distribution to new residents and is also made available to all residents for example at Council service centres, sent out in rates notices or engaging in local real estate agents.

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

Councillors voted unanimously for this motion.

Background

When a person is reported missing, every moment counts. The ability for search and rescue agencies to access relevant information swiftly is critical to the success of their efforts. One key resource in such investigations is CCTV footage, which may provide vital clues to a person’s last known movements. By working to remove barriers to accessing this footage, particularly when held by Council, we can help support timely and effective responses to missing persons cases.

NOTICE OF MOTION (submitted by Clr Macnaught)

That Council work with Search Dogs Sydney to understand their operational requirements for accessing Council-acquired CCTV footage in missing persons cases, and bring back a report to Council at the earliest opportunity outlining how this access could be facilitated and any associated costs.

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Macnaught        Seconded: Clr Harte

That Council:

1.     Review the CCTV Policy and table to a future Governance Meeting; and

2.     Work with Search Dogs Sydney to understand their operational requirements for accessing Council-acquired CCTV footage in missing persons cases.

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared LOST.

Division called: (for the motion moved by Clr Macnaught)

Vote for:        Mayor Mannoun, Clr Harle, Clr Ammoun, Clr Macnaught and Clr Adjei

Vote against: Clr Harle, Clr Ristevski, Clr Monaghan, Clr Dr Green, Clr Ibrahim

                        and Clr Karnib

Foreshadowed motion:         Moved:  Clr Monaghan               Seconded:  Clr Karnib

That Council review the Public Safety Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Policy and table to a future Governance Meeting.

Division called (for the foreshadowed motion moved by Clr Monaghan)

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

Councillors voted unanimously for this motion.

Background

Considering the recent decision to allocate a $20,000 donation to Lebanon, which has sparked considerable discontent among ratepayers, it is imperative that we address the priorities of our community. The previous urgency motion brought forth by Liberal Councillor Rachid Ammoun has highlighted the concerns of many residents who feel that their contributions should directly benefit the local area rather than be sent abroad.

Community Sentiment**: Recent feedback from ratepayers indicates a strong preference for funds to be utilised within the Liverpool LGA. Many residents feel that their rates should be invested in local projects that enhance community welfare, support local businesses, and address pressing issues within our own neighbourhoods.

Financial Accountability**: Allocating council funds to overseas donations raises questions about financial responsibility and prioritisation. The council has a duty to ensure that ratepayers dollars are spent where they can have the most direct and beneficial impact on the community.

Local Needs**: Liverpool is home to diverse challenges, including infrastructure issues, rubbish dumping concerns, and community development needs. By focusing our resources locally, we can address these challenges more effectively and foster a stronger, more resilient community.

Transparency and Trust**: Committing to local donations will enhance transparency in council decision-making and rebuild trust with ratepayers who feel their voices have been overlooked in recent decisions.

NOTICE OF MOTION (submitted by Clr Ristevski)

That:

1.   Council prohibits any future donations from council funds to overseas entities or causes;

2.   Council ensure that all donations are directed exclusively within the Liverpool Local Government Area (LGA) to support local community initiatives, charities, and organisations; and

3.     The $20,000 be returned from the following Councillors for missing Council meetings:

4. Prepare a Councillor Workshop to inform the development of a policy responding to donations related to disaster/s

Mayor Mannoun declared a pecuniary and significant interest in the following item: 

Reason: He is named in the motion and the consideration of pay docking or return of money for absences applies to him.

Clr Macnaught declared a pecuniary and significant interest in the following item: 

Reason: She is named in the motion and the consideration of pay docking or return of money for absences applies to her.

Clr Harte declared a pecuniary and significant interest in the following item: 

Reason: He is named in the motion and the consideration of pay docking or return of money for absences applies to him.

Clr Ammoun declared a pecuniary and significant interest in the following item: 

Reason: He is named in the motion and the consideration of pay docking or return of money for absences applies to him.

Clr Adjei declared a pecuniary and significant interest in the following item: 

Reason: He is named in the motion and the consideration of pay docking or return of money for absences applies to him.

Mayor Mannoun, Clr Harte Clr Ammoun Clr Adjei left the chamber at 10.33pm

Clr Harle as the Deputy Mayor became the Chairperson at 10.33pm.

Mayor Mannoun returned to the Chamber at 10.41pm and resumed as Chairperson.

Clr Ammoun, Clr Harte Clr Macnaught, Clr Adjei returned to the Chamber at 10.41pm

Point of Order raised by Clr Karnib

Point of Order raised by Clr Ammoun

Point of Order raised by Mayor Mannoun

Point of Order raised by Clr Macnaught

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Ristevski           Seconded:

The motion lapsed as there was no seconder.

Motion:                                  Moved: Mayor Mannoun      Seconded: Clr Ammoun

That Council:

1.     Informs the community of all similar overseas donations made previously and the circumstances they were made; and

2.     Direct the CEO for a workshop to consider a Donations Policy.

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

Councillors voted unanimously for this motion.

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Macnaught        Seconded: Clr Adjei

That the recommendation be adopted.

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

Councillors voted unanimously for this motion.

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Dr Green            Seconded: Clr Harle

That the recommendation be adopted.

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

Councillors voted unanimously for this motion.

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Macnaught        Seconded: Clr Harle

That the recommendation be adopted.

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Harte                  Seconded: Clr Dr Green

That Council:

1.     Notes the contents of the report.

2.     Request a report outlining the proceedings and outcome of the appeal, to be presented at a future Governance Committee Meeting.

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

Mayor Mannoun declared a non-pecuniary, less than significant interest in the following:

Reason: Is a friend of the owner.

Mayor Mannoun left the Chamber at 10.57pm

Clr Harle, as the Deputy Mayor assumed the Chairperson.

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Harte                  Seconded: Clr Adjei

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

Councillors voted unanimously for this motion.