No idea what effect (if any) my comments during public question time had - but for what it's worth, here's what I said:
1. The legal action to-date has proceeded with joint funding from four other local governments and one individual. Does the City of South Perth acknowledge that it has benefitted from the financial contributions of the other parties during this time?
2. The legal action is close to resolution, with the formal court hearing scheduled for 25th November, and most of the costs have already been incurred. Does the City of South Perth believe that the small saving from withdrawing from the action at this late stage justifies any potential detriment the other parties to the action and to local government as a whole?
3. The legal action will resolve a number of matters still relevant to South Perth, including whether proposals are valid and, hence, whether a poll needs to be held. In the event a poll is to beheld, the legal action will establish whether the electors of Canning can also call for a poll and if so on what basis. How would the City of South Perth resolve these issues without the benefit of the legal action and at what cost?
And Peppermint Grove has now added another element to the legal barrage facing Barnett and Simpson.
No comments:
Post a Comment