Last night Lismore Council looked at two issues involving the town of Nimbin, with both having speakers during public access. One would have been mistaken for thinking the speakers were in a court of law after the clearly hostile grilling they received from certain councillors in the chamber.
The first to speak was President of the Nimbin Chamber of Commerce, David Hyett, in regards to a Council report that was prepared to determine funding to be paid to the Aquarius Festival.
At the 11 April 2023 Council meeting it was resolved to provide the Aquarius Festival $10,000 funding.
The issue that had arisen was in regards to a traffic guidance scheme (TGS). Some councillors felt that as the festival went ahead without a certified TGS that the funds should be withheld.
The staff recommendation was that that Council resolve to withhold $5,000 of the original $10,000 funding to the Aquarius Festival, as penalty for non-compliance of traffic guidance scheme responsibilities by the Festival organisers, and immediately forward payment of $5,000 to event organisers.
Councillor Big Rob moved a motion that Council resolve to withhold all of the original $10,000 funding for the same reasons.
There was no seconder.
An unexpected change
Mr Hyett said that the proposal to reduce the funding after Council agreed to contribute the $10,000 was completely unexpected. ‘I had attended a previous Traffic Advisory Committee meeting, at which they had asked me for details of the event, not a detailed traffic management plan, that came later,’ he said.
‘After the funding was approved, Council asked for a traffic management plan on every single event. At that time, we had 130 plus events in the pipeline. In reality, it was mostly small events over 10 days. There were a few larger events, such as a dinner at the town hall, plus a few events at the Nimbin Theatre. All the events chosen had appropriate approvals. So it was like nothing beyond what we would normally do in the village when we had something going on.’
Festival alarm bells
Mr Hyett said that in hindsight, calling the event a festival was a mistake as the word ‘festival’ set off alarm bells.
Cr Adam Guise said that the recommendation was essentially penalising the Nimbin Chamber $5,000 for not submitting a traffic guidance scheme. He asked Mr Hyett to clarify the agreement. ‘Were you under any impression or communication from Council staff, that when you accepted the money, that you had to provide that [TGS]? Was that a condition to getting the $10,000?’
Mr Hyett said that wasn’t the case. ‘No. Not at all. And we did actually submit a plan. The plan wasn’t suitable and we did recommend improvements, but they weren’t acceptable.’
What followed was a barrage of questions from certain councillors that could only be described as ‘badgering the “witness”‘. Mr Hyett provided suitable answers to all of these in response.
Cr Jeri Hall: ‘Sorry – as the chair of the traffic Advisory Committee, I feel like it’s only suitable for me to add my bit here.
Confirm or deny
‘Can you confirm or deny that there were multiple attempts made to you?
‘I believe we reached out to you in February in order to obtain a detailed traffic management plan. Can you confirm if you responded to the traffic management committee advising if you had an accredited Road Safety Officer present at any of the events held by the Aquarius Festival?’
Mr Hyett responded that they had patrol staff who are accredited. ‘I believe we can say yes to that question.’
Mr Hyett also said that the use of the word ‘festival’ was possibly a misnomer as it wasn’t a festival as such, and more a group of events.
A misnomer to gain funds
Councillor Big Rob suggested that organisers had used the word festival in order to gain funding: ‘Do you think it’s appropriate to call something a festival so we fund it, and then say it’s not a festival, it’s just a low key event, which we wouldn’t have funded if it was put to us that way?’
Mr Hyett said he found the comment by Cr Rob very interesting. ‘I don’t really think it’s valid. I think how it was put together, the intention of calling it a festival was not to get funds.
‘The programme was the programme. We could have called it a “gathering”. We could have called it a an “event”. We could have called it whatever – the group decided we’d call it a “festival” but there was so certainly no mis-intent. I reject that and I find that to be quite confronting that you would actually say that to me.’
The 50th anniversary of a festival
Adding a little salt was Cr Jensen who wanted clarification of the name. ‘Can I just confirm this was the 50th anniversary of the Aquarius Festival?’
Mr Hyett said it was.
‘So it was a festival?’ said Cr Jensen.
Mr Hyett said: ‘It was the 50th anniversary of the Aquarius Festival.’
‘So it wasn’t just a gathering. It was actually supposed to be the 50th anniversary of the Aquarius Festival?’
‘It was the was exactly what you said,’ said Mr Hyett. ‘But as I say, we could have called it what we liked. It was felt appropriate to call it that, but certainly not to gain funding.’
Cr Jensen apologised. ‘I was not suggesting that, I was just confirming that it was a festival in the 50th year.’
A note here might suggest that an anniversary of a massacre would not involve an actual massacre, an anniversary of a birth, i.e. a birthday, might not involve an actual birth, or an anniversary of Federation, like Australia Day, may not involved a federation process.
A anniversary of a festival does not necessarily mean it’s a festival.
After another half an hour of debate later in the meeting, councillors voted to let the Nimbin Chamber keep the funding. Councillors voting for were Bird, Gordon, Colby, Hall, Ekins, Cook, Jensen, Guise and Krieg – those opposed were councillors Bing and Rob.
For four decades The Echo has printed the stories some people loved, some people hated, and some pretended not to read. If you want us to keep telling the truth, the real truth, not the sugar-coated version. We’ll need your support to keep the presses rolling. 
