Residents of a Sunshine Coast holiday park are rallying against proposed changes to tenancy agreements that they say could see their homes become virtually worthless.
Sunshine Coast Council is considering gradually phasing out the 82 long-term residences at Dicky Beach Holiday Park by adopting a “natural attrition” approach to tenancy agreements.
The council has stressed that under the proposal current tenants would not be asked to leave.
Currently tenants can remain onsite for as long as they are willing or able, or can sell their dwellings with the right to remain onsite, meaning new long-term tenants can move in.
But the council could amend the policy so if a long-term tenant no longer resides onsite, the site is returned to the holiday park for use as a tourist site.
Residents of the holiday park are preparing to meet with Mayor Rosanna Natoli and four other councillors today to hear their concerns about the proposal.
Related story: Long-term holiday park tenants could be phased out
It follows a meeting last week between the residents and council’s holiday parks contract manager, which was also attended by Councillor Terry Landsberg.
Howard Hill from the Liaison Committee for Permanent Residents of Dicky Beach Caravan Park said tenants had been left “devastated and fearful for their future” by the proposal.
“The majority of permanent residents within the park are vulnerable and/or aged people and have purchased their dwellings in the permanent section of the park using their lifetime savings,” he said.
“Many have paid over $200,000. We believe council’s proposal does not give due consideration to the flow-on impact of virtually removing all value from our homes.”
A council spokesperson said the potential change would bring Dicky Beach into line with the five other council-managed holiday facilities on the Coast.
“Sunshine Coast Council is currently providing information to residents regarding proposed changes to the residential tenancy agreements at the Dicky Beach Holiday Park,” they said.
“The proposed change, expected to be considered at an upcoming ordinary meeting, is to gradually restore the park to its original purpose under the Land Act 1994 as a short-term holiday destination.
“Importantly, under the proposal, current tenants would not be asked to leave.
“If adopted, the proposed changes would only apply when a tenant voluntarily vacates their site. This approach, known as the natural attrition procedure, has been in place in five other council-owned holiday parks since 2005.”
The agenda for last month’s ordinary council meeting originally included an officer’s report and recommendation to adopt the policy, but the item was withdrawn by the chief executive officer before it went before the council after pressure from park residents.
Do you have an opinion to share? Submit a Letter to the Editor at Sunshine Coast News via news@sunshinecoastnews.com.au. You must include your name and suburb.
Mr Hill welcomed the opportunity for the residents to press their case at today’s meeting.
“Until now residents have only been provided information from council bureaucrats and one councillor, but have had no opportunity to discuss the proposal with the elected representatives who will vote on the matter,” he said.
“This proposal was laid out in a fact sheet distributed to residents at a previous meeting and included the following: from May 2026 no new residential tenants with ownership rights will be accepted into the Dicky Beach Holiday Park, (and) the ability to sell the non-fixed dwelling to new owners to remain on-site will no longer be afforded.
“This proposal would make the properties worth approximately $200,000 each (some over $300,000) worthless.”
The six council-run holiday parks operate on state government land under a trustee arrangement with the council.
“The stated purpose of the land, as per the state government’s direction and in accordance with the Land Act 1994, is for these reserves to be used for recreational and holiday camping. Long-term occupation by tenants is contrary to the dedicated purpose of the reserve,” the council officer’s report for the September council meeting stated.
But Mr Hill disputed that the council had to return the land to short-term use.
“From the beginning council has been insinuating that this change is required under the Land Act 1994, however when specifically questioned at a meeting, council representatives confirmed it was their choice, not a requirement,” he said.
“The purpose the council is providing for this change is ‘procedural alignment’ with its other holiday parks. However, Dicky Beach is unique in that it has had overwhelmingly the largest number of permanent residents, some of whom were encouraged to move to Dicky Beach from other parks.”
The officer’s report said that within the six holiday parks, 121 sites are occupied by 191 long-term tenants. Of these sites, 82 are at the Dicky Beach, which has 106 residents.
The report also stated the council had considered other options at Dicky Beach, including setting a fixed date to return all sites to tourism use, raising rent to fund park improvements, or continuing current arrangements.
It said the current revenue generated from the 82 permanent sites at Dicky Beach was $871,542 a year, while the average income for 82 tourist sites was $1,703,593.
