After a two year campaign the Pool Committee believed the way forward was clear once committee of management status was granted, however, Council received a letter from the Minister for Environment and Climate Change Ryan Smith last month, who said he believed it wasn't appropriate for the committee to be the Committee of Management, as these types of major recreational infrastructure were best placed with councils.

The Minister suggested that if council wished the committee to have a greater control of the running of the pool then other mechanisms such as appointing a Section 86 Committee, or a lease structure would be more appropriate.

Director council services Neil Manning said in a report to council that the two suggestions put forward for the pool committee had implications for both the committee and council.

"Under both of the mechanisms Council remains ultimately responsible for all infrastructure, liabilities, risks and costs but in slightly differing ways," he said.

Mr Manning said a S86 Committee is formed by Council resolution and makes decisions on behalf of Council. In effect a S86 Committee acts and make decisions as if it were Council within the limits of the terms of reference set out in the Council resolution that sets it up.

"A Council effectively underwrites the operational costs, liabilities and risks and if the S86 Committee fails or committee members cannot be found to manage a facility then all responsibility falls back on Council," he said.

"Because of the increasing requirements on S86 Committees, Council is, wherever appropriate, seeking to move towards a leasing or licensing arrangement rather than using S86 Committees."

If the pool committee entered a lease arrangement, the terms and conditions of the lease would set out costs, accountability and responsibility for upgrades and maintenance.

"The lessor is generally responsible for major maintenance items but depending on the lease conditions the lessee may have full or partial responsibility," Mr Manning said.

"It would be the lessee's responsibility to manage and operate the leased facility independently of Council but within the terms and conditions of the lease agreement. If the lessee defaults on the lease or can no longer carry on trading then responsibility would fall back on Council as the land manager.

"If the lease arrangements are not adhered to then legal resolutions may be required to enforce lease conditions."

Mr Manning said a Crown Land committee of management role through the Department of Environment and Primary Industries also had particular responsibilities.

"Council as the land manager under DEPI are required to maintain infrastructure and if infrastructure is no longer serviceable or poses a risk to the community is required to remove the infrastructure and make good the land," he said.

"This responsibility remains under both the S86 committee model or lease model as Councils remains the land manager as the Committee of Management."

Mr Manning said under both models Council was the ultimate bearer of the financial risk if the pool operation did not live up to expectations.

"Council would be wholly responsible for the S86 Committee and, under a lease arrangement, if the lessee defaults on the lease," he said.

"Council is also where ultimate risk for injury lays. That is, if the facility is not properly maintained, administered or poor decisions made that results in injury or death, Council will be liable or partly liable. Council would be fully liable with the S86 model and, depending on the structure of the lease agreement, may only be partly liable as lessees are required to have public liability insurance by DEPI. The lessee and its individual members may be personally liable if negligence results in death or injury.

"As ultimate land manager, and the party with deepest pockets, Council would be a party to any litigation should it arise. Council cannot completely lease away its risk and responsibility. If a S86 committee failed or membership faltered then Council is responsible for the ongoing operation of the pool. If a lessee defaulted on its lease, and for example could no longer operate the

pool, Council would be responsible for the ongoing operation of the pool and may end up in litigation with the lessee. If the lessee were not being able to continue to operate the pool, Council would be responsible for any clean up or making good of the land."

The report indicated that the options going forward were to lease the pool and surrounds, appeal to the Minister to reconsider his decision, 'mothball' the pool by filling the shell with sand and capping it with possibility of reinstating it at a later date, and using the area for other multi use activities such as a sound shell performance area or children's water play area, or demolish the pool structure.

In requesting that recommendation on the future of the pool be placed on the November Council meeting agenda, Cr Gary Hull said the Minister's decision was disappointing.

A meeting has been arranged for next Tuesday between Council and the Pool Committee to discuss all the available options for the future of the pool.

"The reason for the meeting of pool committee on twenty-eighth of this month part is that it's part of the process that needs to take place to allow all councillors to be informed of the work the pool committee has done over the last 12 months," Cr Hull said.

"There's only some councillors in the chamber who actually know what the pool committee has undertaken, so I believe the whole chamber needs to know.

"It would be prudent of this council to make their decision on this issue as quickly as possible so that if the decision goes the way of the pool committee they can get going on the project."