Efforts by Councillors Brian Murray, Don Forbes and Bob Rogan to rescind development approval for a funeral home in Polworth Street at a specially-called council meeting in January were ultimately unsuccessful, but Cr Murray is concerned that what unfolded reflected an undermining of the democratic process.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
His issue is with comments made by mayor (and meeting chair) Peter Petty at the conclusion of the meeting. Cr Petty criticised the robustness of the information presented to support the recission debate.
He said while councillors had every right to put forward the rescission motion, he had expected more additional information to be provided particularly given the conclusive result at the original vote, and the cost and effort involved in calling the extraordinary meeting.
READ MORE:
The development application was originally passed (with Cr Murray immediately indicating his intention to lodge a rescission motion) at the last meeting of 2018. Meetings are not normally held in January so an extraordinary meeting was called to prevent resolution of the matter being delayed until the next scheduled meeting at the end of February.
The rescission motion was the only item on the agenda, and council's senior planner Tamai Davidson returned from leave to be present to answer any queries.
Despite the cost and inconvenience involved, Cr Murray is adamant that the effort was warranted, which arguably was demonstrated by the packed public gallery for the meeting.
"There is a vital necessity that those entrusted with representing Tenterfield voters act in accordance with the wishes of the electorate," Cr Murray said.
"Despite over 100 residents petitioning council and objecting to the construction and operation of a second funeral parlour, with morgue, amongst homes in northern Tenterfield, council voted 7:3 in favour of the proposed development."
Cr Murray noted that seven councillors declared a non-pecuniary interest in the proposed development. These primarily related to those councillors using Harold Curry Stock Agency in their livestock dealings. The Currys are also part-owners of Tenterfield Funerals, the development applicant.
As the original DA debate approached Cr Murray said he received a number of calls from distressed residents fearing their properties would be devalued and seeking more time to gather evidence.
"I triggered an existing mechanism available for that purpose," he said.
"In an overzealous, overreaching of his responsibilities as mayor, Cr Petty decided to end the extraordinary meeting by making inapposite editorial comment on the way the mechanism had been used.
"He claimed that the effort involved -- staff being recalled from Christmas leave, a financial cost to council and only three councillors voting against the motion when he felt four would have been acceptable -- constituted 'reckless' behaviour on my part, and did not warrant the use of this ubiquitous mechanism.
"My response that cost could not be an issue when people's rights were at stake fell on deaf ears."
Cr Murray fears that Cr Petty's "purely personal expression of grievance, expressed at such an inappropriate time" could seriously discourage the future use of rescission motions.
"This necessary and important mechanism serves to provide an avenue to counterbalance autocratic tendencies within the process of government," he said.
In reply Cr Petty said it's certainly within any councillor's rights to call a rescission motion on any topic, and he would not deter them from doing that.
"It's not up to me to say 'yes' or 'no', it's in the (Local Government) Act."
He would encourage them, however, to either have sufficient new information in hand at the time of calling the motion to have some prospect of swaying votes, or be confident of gathering that information before the motion is debated.
"Otherwise you're wasting all of our time," he said.
He felt the US-based research presented on a funeral home or cemetery's effect on nearby land values, coupled with a Wikipedia report on Emotions in Decision-making, fell short of meeting that criteria.
In offering the US information Cr Forbes said he regretted he was unable to source any Australian data on the same topic, but that homes within a quarter-mile of cemeteries, funeral homes, and mortuaries tend to be 'more affordable' in most US metro areas. (Three certified valuers engaged by the development applicants were of the opinion that the Polworth Street funeral parlour will have no adverse effect on the value of the surrounding residential properties.)
That emotions play a part in decision-making (as to property purchase, for instance) was acknowledged by the senior planner and, in previous cases, by the Land and Environment Court, but 'without rational or justified foundation is not a matter which, in itself, can be considered as an amenity or social impact", according to the court.
