The special meeting of electors was held on May 19 and there were two items on the agenda. While two trees on Claymore Close earmarked for the chop were the first item, the second was related to the processes, transparency and accountability of the council, its meetings and councillors.
Residents urged the council to make meeting times later in the evening, so those who work in the city can attend as the 5.30pm starts are too early for many commuters.
The issue of the trees was deferred until June 18.
Guildford resident Ian Johnson said councillors should not assume that silence equalled consent on issues.
‘Silence can mean many things,’ Mr Johnson said.
‘In the principles of common law it doesn’t mean we agree with what council is adopting.’
He moved a motion to ask councillors to consider in future that silence does not equal consent and all councillors supported the motion.
Cr Mel Congerton said he did not support the trees being removed and supported the arborist’s report.
He was one of six councillors who felt the trees should stay on Claymore Close and not be chopped down.
No residents of Claymore Close attended the special meeting of council, despite representatives of 11 households signing the petition to have the two trees removed.
The petitioners had sought permission to replant other trees in the Close as replacements for the rose gum and the Illawarra flame tree but one Guildford resident opposed the idea.
‘They suggested replacing the trees with jacarandas but jacarandas are native to Brazil,’ the woman said.