newsletters

From: mnegus@bigpond.com [mailto:mnegus@bigpond.com]
Sent: Wednesday, 13 February 2008 12:26 PM
To: Joe Porter
Cc: Graham Foster; crs@nedlands.wa.gov.au
Subject: Re: Dalkeith
Good afternoon Joe

The PADD meeting was very well run, it was great to see such a good turn out. I would estimate 400-500 people attended including the Nedlands CEO, the Mayor and 4 members of council.

PADD has done a great job raising the Councils awareness of the Dalkeith's residents feelings towards the draft concept plan for Dalkeith.

As you are aware the concept plan that was discussed at the PADD meeting is at a very early stage of community consultation. I do not agree with the concept plan, this I have stated from the outset. I was one of the many Dalkeith residents at the PADD meeting who voted to scrap the existing plan.

The Local Government Act 1995 outlines a clear procedure for a councillor who is in my position. The councillor must declare a financial interest, and leave the room for the discussion and voting on the matter. An exemption from this provision allowing a member to vote after disclosing a financial interest can be granted, if allowed by the meeting or the Minister for local government. I would not seek this exemption with out a mandate to do so.

Having declared my interest and intension not to vote, leaves you with 11 councillors representing you.

All of our councillors are good people, they all have Dalkeith's and the City of Nedlands best interests at heart. Our councillors sometimes have different views on matters, however the council forum works well in establishing a consensus opinion. This is an example of our democracy working at its best.

By attacking the merits of individual councillors, I believe you are sending the wrong message to the very people that are working for you.

Thank you for your views, in direct response to your "grounds" please find my responses below,

1. You were elected unopposed to Council. Your obligation as a Councillor is to represent the best interests of The City of Nedlands and its residents and ratepayers and secondarily to look after the interests of the residents and ratepayers of the Dalkeith Ward.

I am 4 months into a 4 year term, after having been elected unopposed. It would be irresponsible not to complete my term without good reason.

2. You have made your personal views on the redevelopment of area 18 well known through both written representation to Council and verbal representation to many.

The fact that I have submitted feedback as requested to a proposal that directly effects my property is not justifiable grounds.

3. Your views are diametrically opposed to the views of the people that you are supposed to be representing. This is clearly evident from the submissions to Council and from the vote that was taken last night.

I do not agree with the concept plan, this I have stated from the outset. I was one of the many Dalkeith residents at the PADD meeting who voted to scrap the existing plan.

4. Dalkeith is supposed to have 3 Ward Councillors. With the resignation of Cranston after 2 years just 1 month before the handing down of the draft plan (very interesting timing) we were left with you and Cr Argyle. You have been conflicted out of the process and can take no further part. Dalkeith is therefore left with 1 Councillor until the bi-election has been finalised.
I can not be held responsible for another councillor resigning to spend more time with his mother after his father passed away.
The fact I have a conflict in one of eleven development precincts within the city is not justifiable grounds.
5. This redevelopment plan is the single most important issue to EVER come before Council in relation to Dalkeith and has the potential to change the very fabric of the suburb forever. We need full, unconflicted representation on Council at this time as a matter of extreme urgency.
The eleven precincts the city is about to review in conjunction with the new town planning scheme all have the potential to change the fabric of our city, I have been elected unopposed to work with my fellow councillors and administration on these issues.
I hope this response puts my position into perspective for you.
Have a great day
Regards

Matt Negus

From: Joe Porter
To: mnegus@bigpond.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2008 1:26 PM
Subject: Dalkeith

Dear Matthew

You have probably heard by now that there were nearly 500 people at the public meeting last night at the Dalkeith Hall. PADD now has more than 50% of the households in Dalkeith as registered members.

Aside from a few developers, there was a unanimous view that the whole draft plan should be thrown in the bin. From speaking with most of the Councillors over the past couple of weeks I think it unlikely that this will occur.

What it highlights though is your untenable position on Council.

I request that you give consideration to immediately resigning your position on Council on the following grounds:

1. You were elected unopposed to Council. Your obligation as a Councillor is to represent the best interests of The City of Nedlands and its residents and ratepayers and secondarily to look after the interests of the residents and ratepayers of the Dalkeith Ward.

2. You have made your personal views on the redevelopment of area 18 well known through both written representation to Council and verbal representation to many.

3. Your views are diametrically opposed to the views of the people that you are supposed to be representing. This is clearly evident from the submissions to Council and from the vote that was taken last night.

4. Dalkeith is supposed to have 3 Ward Councillors. With the resignation of Cranston after 2 years just 1 month before the handing down of the draft plan (very interesting timing) we were left with you and Cr Argyle. You have been conflicted out of the process and can take no further part. Dalkeith is therefore left with 1 Councillor until the bi-election has been finalised.

5. This redevelopment plan is the single most important issue to EVER come before Council in relation to Dalkeith and has the potential to change the very fabric of the suburb forever. We need full, unconflicted representation on Council at this time as a matter of extreme urgency.

Matthew, this is not personal, I have never even met you. It is simply that I have a belief that you are not the right person to be occupying a seat on Council as a Dalkeith Ward councillor for the reasons stated above.

Please give my request careful consideration at this time.

Yours sincerely
Simon (Joe ) Porter
3 Philip Rd Dalkeith