16 May 2024
by Grahame Lynch
A King’s Counsel has challenged North Sydney Council’s conclusion that it has no choice but to sell a local park to the State government for a controversial bike ramp in Milsons Point. Robert Stitt, who became a Queen’s Counsel in 1983, also criticised the Council for entering negotiations without establishing the land’s value.
A fiery meeting of North Sydney Council on Monday voted 6-4 to enter negotiations for compensation for Bradfield Park North, given the view that it would inevitably be compulsorily acquired for the $39 million linear ramp connecting the Sydney Harbour Bridge to Alfred St South. Despite the active participation of a sizable contingent of opponents in the gallery, the council majority rejected suggestions that it could prevent the transfer, with Mayor Zoe Baker citing legal advice.
Baker told the Council, “The Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act is the source of the power for the government to scandalously override a trust that the council has to care for that land. In the same way that it scandalously overrode the trust that we had as the manager with care and control of Cammeray Park, Anzac Park, and St Leonards Park.”
“We have very strong legal advice. We have it from solicitors, we have it from silks. We have supplementary advice to the original advice.”
But the Sun can reveal that Robert Stitt KC, who chairs the Lavender Bay precinct, wrote a letter to councillors this week stating that since the land was granted to the Council in “trust” by an act of parliament, it could not be acquired under existing just compensation law and would require another act to annul the trust arrangement.
“The resolution passed at the meeting of Council directed that negotiations should be held with Transport for NSW regarding what compensation should be paid to the Council for its consent for the acquisition to proceed. This is clearly a breach of trust and unlawful,” he wrote.
He also said that the motion was flawed because it empowered the council to enter negotiations to sell the land without establishing what a just value would be.
“There has been no assessment by any expert or entity as to what would amount to ‘just terms’ for that consent, which is being given under the Just Terms Compensation Act. No valuation has been obtained by Council from the Valuer General or any independent expert. The Council does not know if ‘just terms’ are $2 million, $10 million, $100 million, $200 million, or any figure in between. What instructions are to be given to the negotiator on behalf of the Council?”
“It is commercially unwise and unprofessional to attempt to engage in such negotiations without determining the amount of terms that are ‘just,’” he wrote.
The controversy over the ramp could have considerable implications for the current council, with local residents who are against the Council’s actions on the ramp hinting privately they may form their own political ticket for the next election. One resident, Ian Lloyd, told the meeting that “North Sydney Council are seen in the community to be negotiating with the devil in the guise of Transport for New South Wales. The voices of the community have not been listened to. There is growing concern why this is so. I remind you all councilors. Councilors who sell green space are not reelected.”
The North Sydney Sun is also aware of an email letter circulating among local residents seeking to raise donations for a legal fund on the issue.
The controversy stems from a Transport for NSW project to build an extended linear cycle ramp across several hundred metres of Bradfield Park. Opponents, some of whom are leading figures in the local community, said this would unnecessarily remove green space and infringe on the heritage values of the area. They have proposed their own ‘community ramp’ design, which would use a smaller footprint of the park area.
Their campaign has been met with suspicion from the cycling community, two of whom spoke at the council meeting and expressed skepticism over the motives of local residents and the arguments being made.
Local councillor MaryAnn Beregi, who moved the motion opening the path for compensation negotiations, lost patience with community activists in the gallery who were heckling her and addressed them directly.
“It (would be) completely reckless not to put this motion forward,” she said.
“We are here to represent the community, which includes you and the commitment to sustainable transport. And yes, everyone is going to have to take the opinions of everybody else, and understand everyone’s coming from different perspectives. Again, it is not our project. We are the ones trying to get in to meet Transport for New South Wales just as you are. However, it is reckless when they are knocking on the door and issuing the acquisition notices, to turn around and not seek compensation at the same time. I know you might like us to fight on and fight on and fight on. But the council is in a lot of debt at the moment. We are carrying over $50 million of debt.”