The City of Perth has cemented its opposition against two major state government projects despite allegations of political motives being thrown in the lead up to an election.
The City of Perth has cemented its opposition against two major state government projects despite councillors throwing allegations of political motives in the lead up to an election.
During a meeting last night, City of Perth councillors voted to not support the proposed Matilda Bay ferry route, dubbed Metronet on the Swan, and the Perth Entertainment and Sporting precinct plan at Burswood Park.
The councillors’ decision for both projects also included a request for Deputy Lord Mayor Bruce Reynolds to write to Premier Roger Cook, informing the state government of the city’s opposition, urging more consultation, and for all construction work to be paused.
However, several councillors voiced their concerns with the way the motions unfurled with both items presented as urgent business as council will not meet again until after the local government elections next month.
The City of Perth council unanimously voted to not support another major state government project, the proposed $217 million Perth Entertainment and Sporting precinct.
However, the unanimous decision came with allegations of a secret meeting and concerns over the proper local government process.
Landsdale MP Daniel Pastorelli met with Cr Reynolds over the Burswood Park project in May, according to council agenda.
At the meeting last night, councillor Raj Doshi claimed this was a secret meeting held between Cr Reynolds and the state government.
“Regarding this meeting, no outcomes were discussed formally or communicated to all elected members or city administration,” Cr Doshi said.
“You held this info and still for over three months, this could have been dealt with a lot sooner than today.
“This lack of transparency makes it difficult for other elected members to fully understand the state’s position and for the council to make an informed decision on behalf of our community and why protocol was not followed in regards to the meeting being held by the deputy lord mayor with state government.”
Cr Catherine Lezer claimed there was a breach of trust and proper process over information on the Burswood Park plan.
“I put a motion back in March where I requested consultation from the state,” she said at the meeting.
“Five months later in late August, council received a briefing yet questions regarding noise impact and environmental destruction – the core concerns of our residents – went unanswered.
“We agreed we needed more information.
“Therefore the presence of this motion on the agenda today, before we received the agreed upon briefing, is highly unusual.
“It is the very definition of a political stunt driven by expediency rather than sound governance.
“Further, I question the conduct surrounding this issue, the secretive meeting between deputy lord mayor and the state government followed by the deputy denying this meeting took place.”
Cr Reynolds rebutted the allegation, asking Cr Lezer “Are you saying I’m lying, councillor, in regards to a meeting? Or being deceitful?”.
While Cr Lezer did not address the question directly, she told council her loyalty did not lie with political gains.
“The community’s mandate is clear, approximately 70 per cent of our residents have expressed strong opposition based on genuine concerns regarding noise pollution, irreversible enviro destruction and the consultation process that they feel ignored them,” she said.
“I do not agree with the processes that led us here and I certainly do not support secretive dealings, but I’m always happy to support my community.”
At the meeting, Cr Reynolds rebutted the claims of the meeting with Mr Pastorelli being a secret and said his role was to represent the community and liaise with stakeholders.
“It was explained to me that it was a courtesy and that I was given the content that was the same [with what] was shared with community that week,” he said.
“I was understood elected members would receive a full briefing, which we now have had.
“Elected members entitled under the Local Government Act… to represent the interests of electors, ratepayers and residents and to facilitate communications between community, council and other stakeholders.
“That is exactly what I did, there was no secret meeting.
“There is no prohibition on courtesy stakeholder meetings provided they do not purport to be a decision of council, which it was not.”
Both Cr Lezer and Cr Reynolds are candidates for Perth Lord Mayor in the upcoming local government election, to be held on October 18.
Ferry route in troubled waters
The state government has invested $107 million to expand the ferry service along the Swan River, including adding new terminals at Matilda Bay and Applecross.
The proposed ferry route has attracted some community backlash, with more than 1,000 people attending a protest against Matilda Bay as one of the jetty locations.
A motion was poised before council, proposed by councillor Steve Wellard, to not support the Matilda Bay jetty plan and instead explore another stop option, Jojo’s café in Nedlands.
Despite voting in line with her fellow elected members to not support the ferry proposal, Cr Lezer said the timing and process over the matter being brought before council was deeply concerning.
“We committed, as a body, to awaiting further briefing and proper deliberation and the willingness to circumvent proper process, regardless of the issue, risk undermining the integrity of this chamber,” she said at the meeting.
“Frankly, this motion feels like a political manoeuvre.
“However, I cannot allow process concerns to drown out the clear and unified voice of the community.”
Councillor David Goncalves was the lone member voting against Cr Wellard’s motion, but his suggestion to defer the issue to a future meeting failed to receive backing from the chambers.
Cr Reynolds said the motion was brought forward as urgent business to act on the community’s concerns over Matilda Bay, as the next council meeting would be held in November.
“I struggle with the fact that it asks us to adopt a formal ‘no’ position immediately,” Cr Goncalves said at the meeting.
“I want to remind everyone that not only is this being considered as an urgent item, it’s being considered within our caretaker period.”
At the meeting, Cr Wellard rejected the suggestion that there was political intention behind his motion.
“Due to the terminal size, it will damage a large section of the riverbed and alter beach sand flow along Matilda Bay, one of only two protected east-facing beaches in the Perth metro area,” he said.
