The first Lismore City Council meeting of the year included a deja vu experience yesterday when councillors debated motions and amendments that had already been decided in 2025.

Moving council chambers to the Municipal building, changing council meeting times and the number of speakers during a meeting were raised, debated and voted on with the same outcome. You couldn't help but think that it was a waste of time.

When voting to accept the new Draft Code of Meeting Practice, Councillor (Cr) Adam Guise put forward the first amendment that the reference to 165 Molesworth Street, the Municipal building, be removed.

Cr Guise has supported that the Municipal building remain the home of the Lismore Historical Society, and once again reiterated that point. He also said that moving council staff and facilities back into the CBD was an "absolute bonkers idea", according to the community feedback he had received.

Cr Gianpiero Battista said this was already a council resolution, to "Bring people down to the CBD, and improve the life of the CBD and provide more economic input into the life of the CBD."

The rhetoric was basically the same, depending on which side of the political debate you sit.

Crs Guise, Knight-Smith, Dalton-Earls and Waters didn't want to move staff back into the floodplain, with the Historical Society as an underlying point, while Mayor Krieg and Crs Hall, Battista, Gordon, Bing, and Jensen support the move as it will bring prosperity to the CBD businesses through lunches and personal purchases. Cr Rob voted against adopting the Code of Meeting Practice document in principle, but voted with the Krieg team against the amendment, which was defeated 7/4.

Cr Guise then tabled another amendment to change Council meeting times to 6pm, as they were before a resolution in October 2024.

The reasoning was based on the same arguments from 18 months ago: councillors having day jobs and the lack of opportunity for residents to speak during Public Access at 9am, before the meeting proper starts at 10am.

The opposing argument centred on council staff safety: driving home late at night and starting early the next morning, and on staff accessibility being better during the workday.

Public Access was also challenged. One side says daytime meetings don't provide the opportunity for people to have their say, and the other says the numbers were stronger now than when the meetings were held at 6pm, as were the streaming numbers. Cr Andrew Bing said, "We had seven people speaking on four different items."

This amendment was defeated 8/3, with Cr Harper Dalton-Earls voting against, along with the Krieg team and Cr Rob.

Amendment 3 from Cr Guise was changing the speakers from 2 for and against to 4 for and against.

Cr Guise said it used to be an unlimited number of speakers, before moving to 4 and now 2, so 4 would be a good compromise. Mayor Krieg responded by saying that two is enough because "How often do we want to hear the same story said in a different way."

Once again, the amendment was defeated 8/3. Councillors were then able to vote on the original draft Code of Meeting Conduct policy after 42 minutes, which was adopted 8/3.

While the same old arguments came up during yesterday's meeting and were defeated again, a new theme emerged. Community feedback.

In debates, the rhetoric often draws on community feedback. No one knows how large or small the community feedback is, but it is used as part of the argument.

Cr Gordon struck a new chord yesterday by saying that the Krieg team was voted in with 65% of the vote, indicating strong community support. "They wanted a different category of representation, and they got it".

This is a point that still does not sit well with other councillors, as yesterday proved.