Jumping the gun at Nedlands

Under the heading Neds gets hired gun (POST, March 23) it was reported that Nedlands mayor Fiona Argyle wanted “to discover what was happening with $28million received in rates”.

Does that mean the auditorgeneral’s team found that the City could not account for the expenditure of $28million in the 2022/23 financial year?

If that is the case I, as a ratepayer of the City of Nedlands, am very disturbed.

I am equally disturbed by the process followed by the council in appointing the “hired gun” to find a solution.

Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996, regulation 11A, states clearly that “a local government is to prepare or adopt, and is to implement, a purchasing policy in relation to contracts for other persons to supply goods or services”.

The City of Nedlands has such a purchasing policy, adopted by the council. It states that for contracts valued between $10,001 and $50,000 the City is required to seek a minimum of three written quotations from suppliers.

Did the City seek three quotations before the council appointed the “hired gun”? If it did not, in my view, the council has not only ignored the City’s own procurement policy, it has also contravened a statutory requirement – in spite of the administration pointing out this in the agenda papers.

What is the message the council is sending out to its staff? What is the message to the public?

If I break a parking law I will get an infringement notice from the City.

Who is to send the council an infringement notice?

Rajah Senathirajah, FCPA Mountjoy Road, Nedlands

• A contrary legal opinion was accepted by a majority of councillors (POST March 30).