Thanks for the story

Dear Echo News,

Thank you so much for running the article on our time capsule event and the celebration of David Hughes’ 50-year milestone as a volunteer firefighter in a recent issue of your paper (Echo News, May 30).

I really appreciate the time and effort you and your team put in to getting our story out there.

We are grateful once again for the Echo’s support of the Darlington Volunteer Bush Fire Brigade.

R Harvey

Darlington Volunteer Bush Fire Brigade

Resident happy to help budget

Dear Echo News,

I own my house at Coral Road, Kalamunda and  rural land at  Forrest Road, Pickering Brook.

The cost of living is well documented, with so many families struggling for food bills, and yet the management of the City of Kalamunda are totally oblivious to the hardship experienced by so many families.

Inflation is 2.4  per cent, yet residential  rates are projected at 5 per cent which is well over double above inflation, and commercial at 7 per cent is 168 per cent above inflation.

How can you justify such massive increases?

You as administrators, seem to have no concept for taking into account the basis of how to construct a budget, based on the real world.

A consistency of your budgets is that increases seem to be well above inflation rates, and why is this so?

To me it indicates that management at the City of Kalamunda have demonstrated almost unbelievable incompetence in the composition of budgets.

But then us rate payers are at your mercy, because the city has a monopoly, and therefore can do as they please, which disgusts me, as it is a blunt abuse of power.

While studying marketing one of my lecturers commented the difference between wants and needs.

I need a car, I want a BMW, reality is that I can only afford a Kia.

You as a city should look at this basic principle.

You as a city should do  preliminary budgets based on estimated turnover, equal or less  the inflation rate, then work out your total expenditure.

I am happy to help set up such a draft budget free of charge.

R Furfaro

Kalamunda

Cr Knight resigns position

Dear Echo News,

Last week I resigned my position as a councillor in the City of Swan and I would like to clarify the question of disqualification as it has been applied to me.

Section 2.19 of the Local Government Act (LGA) 1995 lists three qualifications for election to council, one of them being an elector of the district under the heading Qualifications for election to council. The operative word being “to”.

I was lawfully elected and this is not disputed.

I am no longer an elector of the district as I have moved. But the way the law is written, this does not disqualify me from retaining membership of the council.

According to that reading, if a councillor is validly elected, they can serve out  their term but cannot stand for re-election.

Under section 2.27 of the LGA 1995, under the heading Qualifications to retain membership of a council there is no provision to disqualify a councillor for not being an elector of the district if they were validly elected. They can only be disqualified if their election to council was not valid (2.19(1)(b).

This is my legal advice and remains my view.

If it were otherwise, it would be stated with the other disqualification provisions which are: election to a legislative assembly or another council; convictions; misapplication of funds or property; failure to attend meetings.

Leaving the district is not included and is hardly an unusual or unforeseeable circumstance.

The counter argument is that for a councillor to be eligible, they must satisfy all three requirements of section 2.19 for the entirety of their term.

The test for this would be if an election were held today, would they qualify? But these words, or a provision to that effect is not written anywhere in the LGA 1995.

The law is ambiguous and as yet, not been tested in court, so could go either way. The legal cost of mounting an argument to SAT is in excess of  $30,000.

I don’t believe anything I have said (or could have said) to the CEO would have changed his view on my eligibility.

I maintain that I was not disqualified and I have acted in good faith.

But my situation was untenable: in legal jeopardy;  no support from the CEO and faced with fighting an ambiguous law, I had no choice but to resign my position.

I wish the City of Swan all the best for the future.

Former City of Swan councillor Dave Knight