A vocal group of West Aussies is hoping to ban developers from making political donations in a bid to force the State Government to reform what it calls an “unjust and undemocratic” planning system.
More than 300 people have signed a petition calling for “urgent reforms” to the State planning system to ensure Development Assessment Panels do not favour developers when assessing new developments.
Applications for developments worth more than $2 million are put to a DAP meeting to be approved, deferred or refused.
The petition — which will be put to the Legislative Council by South Metropolitan MLC Brad Pettitt in September — also demands the State Government “improve processes” to ensure DAP decisions are made in line with local government schemes and policies, introduce reforms to “better balance” the interests of local residents and establish a third party rights of appeal.
“The clear favouring of developers’ interests over those of local communities is an affront to social justice and democratic principles,” it said.
DAP meetings are led by five DAP members: three specialist members appointed by the Planning Minister and two local government representatives.
And while applicants can appeal DAP decisions to the State Administrative Tribunal, under current legislation local governments cannot.
“There’s been a growing dissatisfaction amongst communities in Perth; the disempowerment felt by locals has become a lot worse in the last few years,” Mr Pettitt said.
“The State Government doesn’t often understand the nuance of these local communities and that often leads to poor decision making.
“Lots of communities want diverse planning and good developments in their area, but not when these are randomly designed and not planned out properly.”
A Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage spokesperson said the State Government was “improving the transparency” of the DAP system and Planning Minister John Carey had “very limited decision-making powers” when compared to other jurisdictions.
“Every DAP application is assessed by the relevant local government and a report with recommendations is presented to the DAP,” the spokesperson said.
“Any interested party, including the local government authority, is also able to apply to make a deputation to the DAP meeting.
“Proceedings are also now live-streamed — a key measure to improve transparency.”
On March 1, changes were made to the DAP system to cut “unnecessary red tape” and make applications more “streamlined and transparent”.
These included the introduction of the Significant Development Pathway, meaning metropolitan projects with a development value of more than $20 million can be lodged with the State Development Assessment Unit.
Full-time DAP members were also appointed, meaning members could not work at another place of employment to avoid conflict of interest.
“These recent reforms provide applicants greater flexibility and choice between different development assessment pathways and decision-makers to suit their needs and circumstances, including the local government pathway,” the DPLH spokesperson said.
![Neil Stacey, Emily Bird and Nicola Burton want changes to planning processes.](https://timesofsydney.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/44b91427d0f8482f49ffa5f050828b92912fda9d.jpg)
North Perth resident and petitioner Neil Stacey said he wanted DAP meetings changed so they were led by six members: three specialist members, two local government representatives and one community member.
“If there is a stalemate (at the DAP meeting), that becomes a renegotiation where there is an appeal where you can go ‘we’re at a stalemate and we need mediation’,” he said.
“That process could be so much better and so much more transparent.”
Petition lead Emily Bird said DAP panels should have an even number of specialist and community representatives.
“If you look at criminal trials there are 12 jurors … equality has got to be part of the process in order for there to be fairness,” she said.
“You can’t just say ‘Oh well, we can’t have that so we’re going to have one person who’s going to make the call’.
“We’re also looking at the fact there are some very powerful, influential and wealthy private developers who pay big party donations.
“I’m not naive, I know the Government is not going to go ‘we better reform the rules now and stop taking those donations’, that’s not going to happen, but the petition gets the ball rolling and it makes people aware.”
Political donations from property developers are already banned in NSW, Queensland and the ACT.
In 2021, the Centre for Public Integrity revealed the property and construction industry to be one of the nation’s largest political donors, pledging $54 million over a 20-year period.
The data also found that between 1999 and 2019, the Coalition and Australian Labor Party received $15 million and $6.5 million in donations from property and construction companies respectively.
Of the $6.5 million, $36,000 of ALP donations were from WA-based developer Satterley Property Group.
But a State Government spokesperson told PerthNow banning political donations was ineffective.
Just this month, the WA Government introduced new laws which will mean any political donations over $2600 will need to be disclosed.
“The Cook Labor Government — as committed at the election — has delivered significant reforms to electoral donations to ensure transparency and accountability for all parties,” they said.
“As was articulated at the time, banning individual sections of the WA economy is not effective — it is transparency of political donations which is needed — and that’s why WA Labor has delivered on these important reforms.”
Last November, the Metro Inner-North Joint DAP approved a mixed use development on the corner of Alma and Fitzgerald Street in North Perth, despite 77 per cent of submissions opposing the development.
And while the City of Vincent’s Built Form Policy restricts the Alma and Fitzgerald Street sites to a respective height limit of four and six storeys, the nine-storey development was approved 3-1.
Vincent councillor Alex Castle was the only panel member — and councillor in attendance — to vote against the application.
![A render of the nine-storey development which will be built on the corner of Alma and Fitzgerald streets in North Perth.](https://timesofsydney.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/5b32db7c1f189dfee7f74ac7f2f2aa03e96c93cd.jpg)
“City of Vincent’s local planning approach has been developed in consultation with community … setting a precedent by giving approval to a development proposal that flouts local government and community opinion … would open the floodgates for more of the same,” Ms Bird said at the time.
Mr Stacey — whose Alma Street house is directly next to the development — said while he wasn’t anti-development, developers should have to follow local planning policies.
“We’re not unhappy with developments, it’s just about the developments being appropriate and the impacts of this one will be so long-lasting,” he said.
“You can build a 25-storey development in the appropriate area and no one objects, but if you build that here when there’s no traffic control, it’s just wrong.
“We’re happy to follow the rules as residents, but it feels like builders and developers don’t have to follow those rules.
“We’re just sitting here eating bad sandwiches, wasting our time trying to be part of our community.”
Vincent mayor Alison Xamon said the Fitzgerald Street development was an example where the imbalance between local government and specialist members led to a decision that was not reflective of the North Perth community.
“The Metro Inner DAP has made decisions that follow the best interests of the community with support from Vincent’s two members on most occasions … but there have been some notable exceptions,” she said.
“There are concerns that the powers of the DAPs are such that the decisions made can be disproportionally weighted towards the interests of developers at the expense of reasonable community expectations.
“As we continue to see the DAPs operating in the planning system, we will keep pushing for equal membership of local government members so that the views of the community have a stronger representation in decision making.
“We believe transparent and accountable decision-making is vital for planning decisions.”
North Perth resident Nicola Burton, who has lived in the area for 24 years, said she wanted “good developments” which matched the amenity of the area.
“We desperately want good developments that help preserve our community and our cosmopolitan town centre,” she said.
“We want good developments and we want improvements in the area but we want it in line with the culture that we have here.”