City of Perth Act 2016

The Act is structured around a set of distinct but interacting concepts: statutory recognition of capital‑city status and attendant objects, statutory entrenchment of municipal boundaries, an intergovernmental committee with State chair and membership, adjusted council composition and electoral modalities, administrative transparency and enforcement for disclosures, and targeted amendments to related legislation (ss 4, 6-9, 12-21, 33-39). Each concept creates particular decision nodes and resource implications.

Objects and non‑justiciability. The Act sets out broad objects at the State level (s 4) and for the City of Perth itself (s 8). Those objects are framed to recognise Perth’s “special social, economic, cultural, environmental and civic role” as capital (s 4(a)(i)-(ii)), and to require the City to “use its best endeavours to strike an appropriate balance” among competing civic considerations (s 8(1)(j)). The Act also expressly disclaims that s 8 creates enforceable legal obligations or confer court‑enforceable rights (s 8(2)(b)-(c)). That means the objects operate as policy guidance for council decision‑making rather than directly enforceable duties.

Entrenched boundaries and consequential treatment. The Act fixes Perth’s boundaries by reference to specific deposited plans for commencement on 1 July 2016 (s 18(1)-(2)) and changes the boundaries of two neighbouring local government districts (s 19). After that date, any future alteration to Perth’s boundaries must be made by an Act of Parliament (s 16). The Act also directs that the Local Government Act 1995 is to be treated as if a section 2.1 order had been made for these boundary and constitution changes (s 21(1)-(2)), thereby invoking the LG Act’s machinery and consequential regulations. Simultaneously, s 21(3) prohibits a section 2.1 order from abolishing, dividing into wards, or changing Perth’s boundaries, which constrains executive/Governor orders under the LG Act in relation to Perth.

Statutory State-City coordination. The City of Perth Committee is a permanent statutory body with the Premier (or nominated Minister) as Chair, the Minister for Local Government, the Lord Mayor and Deputy Lord Mayor, and senior public servants (s 12(2)). Its functions are facilitative: identifying opportunities to integrate planning and development processes, streamlining development application processes, and transitioning State developments to City responsibility (s 13). The Committee’s membership and remit institutionalise a standing coordination channel between State and City.

Democratic and governance design. Council composition is fixed at 1 mayor (the Lord Mayor) and 8 councillors (s 9). The Act prescribes the Lord Mayor’s role including ambassadorial, intergovernmental, ceremonial and leadership duties, and preserves the application of certain LG Act provisions to that office (ss 10-11). The Lord Mayor is elected by electors under the LG Act Part 4 but the LG Act’s ss 2.11-2.14 do not apply to the City of Perth (s 20(1)-(2)); Schedule 4.1A of the LG Act applies to vacancy filling (s 20(3)). These adjustments tailor electoral and vacancy mechanics for Perth.

Transparency, registers and penalties. The Act amends the Local Government Act 1995 to require written disclosures to the CEO within 10 days for gifts and travel contributions (amended ss 5.82 and 5.83), mandates a publicly available register maintained by the CEO (s 5.89A), and creates a criminal offence for non‑disclosure attracting a fine of $10,000 or 2 years’ imprisonment (s 5.89B inserted by s 37). The register must be published on the local government’s website and records removed when a person ceases to be a relevant person but retained for public inspection for at least five years (s 5.89A(4)-(7)).

Targeted land and public health rules. King’s Park is included in Perth’s district boundaries (s 18(1), (3)) but the Act preserves its status as a Class A reserve and the applicability of the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority Act 1998 (s 18(3)). The BGPA Act is amended to give the Executive Director, Public Health powers equivalent to a local government in relation to designated land for public health purposes, including the power to make local laws which prevail over other local laws to the extent of conflict (s 28(2)-(5)). Section 53A then provides that no local law applies to King’s Park, except local laws made by the Executive Director under s 44A(2) (s 29).

Transitional and preservation measures. The Act repeals the earlier 1993 restructuring Act (s 26) but preserves certain superannuation participation obligations for persons covered by previous arrangements, requiring other local governments to continue participation in the City of Perth superannuation scheme for those employees until they elect otherwise (s 23). Transitional regulations may address gaps and take retrospective effect within tight safeguards (s 25).

These concepts create a legal architecture that emphasises State oversight and coordination, statutory insulation of Perth’s boundaries, enhanced transparency for councillor gifts and travel, and a specific public‑health/local‑law regime for designated parkland. The Act defines decision rights (who sits on the Committee and who decides meetings), information obligations (disclosures to CEOs and public registers), and mechanisms for future change (only by Parliament for boundaries), each carrying compliance, administrative, and political implications.

The Act specifies groups and institutional actors whose legal position, duties, or administrative obligations are changed or clarified. The direct affected parties, and how they are affected, are as follows.

• City of Perth body corporate and City of Perth Council. The Act continues the City of Perth as the same corporate body (s 6(1)-(2)) and restates the City’s objects (s 8). The City of Perth Council’s composition, the Lord Mayor’s statutory role, and councillors’ roles are formalised (ss 9-11). The City must comply with the LG Act as modified by this Act (s 5; s 21), and a CEO of the City will have statutory duties around maintaining the gifts and travel register (s 5.89A) and enforcing disclosure obligations (s 5.89B as inserted).
• Electors and residents of the district of Perth. The electorate chooses the Lord Mayor under LG Act Part 4 (s 20(1)). Boundary changes (s 18(1)-2; s 19) shift which local government district some residents, ratepayers and landowners belong to as of 1 July 2016, affecting rates, services, local laws, and electoral enrolment. The Act preserves the previous boundaries until 30 June 2016 (s 17), and directs that the Local Government Act applies as if a section 2.1 order had effected the new constitution and boundaries (s 21(1)-(2)).
• Councillors and Lord Mayor. Councillors’ and the Lord Mayor’s roles are specifically described (ss 10-11). They become “relevant persons” for the amended disclosure provisions in the Local Government Act (ss 5.82-5.83 amendments and s 5.89A-5.89B), and therefore must make written disclosures to the CEO within 10 days of receiving gifts or travel contributions (s 5.82(1A)-(1C); s 5.83(1A)-(1C)).
• Chief executive officers (CEOs) of local governments. CEOs acquire an express statutory duty to receive disclosures, keep a prescribed register of gifts and travel contributions (s 5.89A(1)-(5)), make it available for public inspection and publish it on the local government’s website (s 5.89A(4)-(5)), and retain removed disclosures for five years for inspection (s 5.89A(7)).
• The Premier, Minister for Local Government and senior State officials. The Premier (or nominee) is Chair of the new City of Perth Committee, the Minister for Local Government is a member, and the State chief executive officer responsible for assisting the Minister is a member (s 12(2)). These positions are institutional participants in a forum whose function is State-City collaboration (s 13).
• Other local governments affected by boundary shifts. The Cities of Nedlands and Subiaco are subject to altered boundaries on 1 July 2016 (s 19(1)-(2)), and the City of Subiaco is given a limited period and process to review ward boundaries and councillor numbers to accommodate those changes (s 22). Transitional obligations mean that the Local Government Act procedures apply with necessary modifications to Subiaco’s review (s 22(3)).
• Owners and users of King’s Park and designated lands. King’s Park is included in Perth’s district (s 18(1)) but remains a Class A reserve and subject to the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority Act (s 18(3)). The BGPA Act is amended so that the Executive Director, Public Health has local government powers in relation to designated land for public health (s 28(2)-(3)), and local laws do not apply to King’s Park except those made by that Executive Director (s 29).
• Employees and employers with City of Perth superannuation implications. The Act preserves the City of Perth superannuation scheme rights for persons who, before repeal of the 1993 Act, were covered by arrangements requiring other local governments to participate in the City’s scheme. Those local governments must continue to participate on the same terms for those employees, unless the employee elects to join the industry scheme (s 23(2)-(4)).
• Developers and applicants under planning and development law. The Committee’s functions include identifying opportunities to streamline development application processes and better integrate State and City planning processes (s 13(d)-(e)). Those functions create a standing institutional channel for process reform that will affect applicants interacting with both State and City planning regimes.
• Local government staff, compliance officers and regulators. The amendments create new recordkeeping, publication and enforcement obligations (ss 5.82-5.83; 5.89A-5.89B), which create ongoing administrative tasks for local government staff, and potential referrals to enforcement mechanisms under the Local Government Act as amended (s 39, which amends s 9.25 of the LG Act to include s 5.89B).

Who pays and who decides. The Act does not expressly appropriate funds. Practical costs fall on the City of Perth, neighbouring local governments with boundary changes, and on local government CEOs (administration, register maintenance, public website publication). The State supplies membership and chairing for the Committee, and will therefore supply senior staff time to its members’ attendance (s 12-14). The Premier decides Committee meeting times (s 14(2)). Changes to boundaries that require parliamentary action in the future (s 16) shift the decision point from the Governor under the LG Act to Parliament, making future boundary change a legislative decision rather than an administrative one.

The Act creates and clarifies statutory duties, decision rights, and rights of access to information. It also preserves certain legal statuses and sets non‑justiciable objects. The principal duties and rights, with the statutory source, are described below.

Duties imposed on local elected persons (gifts and travel disclosures). Amendments to the Local Government Act 1995 require a “relevant person” to disclose each gift (s 5.82(1A)-(1C)) and each financial or other contribution to travel (s 5.83(1A)-(1C)) by written notice to the CEO within 10 days of receipt. The disclosure must include prescribed content such as description, donor name and address, date, estimated value and nature of relationship (s 5.82(1); s 5.83(1) paragraphs (a)-(e), (f)-(g)). A failure to disclose is a criminal offence under the new s 5.89B carrying a fine of $10,000 or up to 2 years imprisonment (s 5.89B). Those provisions bring timeliness and specificity requirements together with a significant penalty (s 37 inserting 5.89A and 5.89B).

CEO duties and public access rights. CEOs must keep a register of the disclosures (s 5.89A(1)-(3)), make the register available for public inspection and publish it on the local government’s website (s 5.89A(4)-(5)). When a person ceases to be a relevant person, the CEO must remove records relating to that person from the publicly available register (s 5.89A(6)) but must retain those disclosures for at least five years and make them available for public inspection during that period (s 5.89A(7)). These duties create both an administrative obligation and a public right of access.

Council leadership and representation duties. The Lord Mayor’s statutory duties include ambassadorship for international delegations, ceremonial duties, intergovernmental relationship development, leadership of the council, presiding at meetings under the LG Act and liaison with the CEO on City affairs (s 10(1)(a)-(g)). Councillors’ roles are specified in s 11 and include representing electors, serving community interests, leadership, participation in decision‑making, policy oversight, and ensuring a balance among economic, social, cultural and environmental factors in matters that reflect Perth’s capital status (s 11(2)(a)-(k)). These are framed as roles rather than enforceable private rights (s 8(2)(b)-(c) provides an analogous caveat for the City’s objects).

Committee functions and meeting duties. The City of Perth Committee is under a statutory duty to meet at least twice a year (s 14(1)). The Premier decides meeting times (s 14(2)). The Committee’s functions are facilitative and advisory: to facilitate State-City collaboration (s 13(a)), identify and promote opportunities for economic and cultural development (s 13(b)), promote integration of planning and development processes (s 13(c)), simplify development application processes (s 13(d)), and develop transition arrangements for State developments that become City responsibilities (s 13(e)). The Committee may regulate its own procedure (s 15).

Boundary entrenchment rights and limitations. Perth’s boundaries are fixed by reference to a deposited plan as from 1 July 2016 (s 18(1)-(2)), and any future alteration to Perth’s district boundaries must be made by an Act of Parliament (s 16). The Governor cannot make a section 2.1 order that abolishes, divides into wards or changes Perth’s boundaries (s 21(3)(a)-(c)). The Local Government Act is to be treated as if the Governor had made a section 2.1 order for constitution and boundary changes (s 21(1)-(2)), so statutory rights and duties under the LG Act apply as if a section 2.1 order had happened, but with the s 21(3) carve outs.

Preservation of status and public‑health decision rights. King’s Park remains a Class A reserve and is still subject to the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority Act (s 18(3)). The Executive Director, Public Health is given all the powers and authority of a local government under the LG Act in relation to designated land for public health purposes (s 28(2)-(3)); that includes power to make and enforce local laws under the LG Act (s 28(3)). Local laws made by the Executive Director prevail over conflicting local laws (s 28(5)). Section 53A then removes the application of local laws to King’s Park except for those made by the Executive Director under s 44A(2) (s 29). Those provisions reallocate certain local‑law making powers and create decision rights for a State public health official in respect of designated land.

Preservation of superannuation participation. For employees affected by previous restructuring arrangements, other local governments are required to continue to participate in the City of Perth superannuation scheme as if the employee were still under the City’s employment (s 23(3)). This duty ceases if the employee elects to join the industry scheme (s 23(4)).

Regulatory powers and transitional rule‑making. The Governor may make regulations for matters required or permitted by the Act or necessary to achieve its objects (s 24). If transitional matters are not sufficiently covered, regulations may provide specified saving or application provisions, including retrospective effects within limits, but not to the prejudice of persons other than the State (s 25(2)-(5)). These sections give the executive capacity to fill gaps and manage the transition.

Rights that are disclaimed. The Act explicitly states that certain objects do not impose enforceable obligations on the City or confer enforceable legal rights (s 8(2)(b)-(c)). That limits private party remedies based directly on the objects language.

In short: the Act institutes mandatory disclosure and publication duties (with a criminal sanction), prescribes leadership roles and intergovernmental forum duties, entrenches Perth’s boundaries except by Act, reallocates certain local‑law and public‑health powers in relation to designated land, and preserves earlier superannuation participation rights for specified employees. The mechanisms for enforcement and compliance are statutory and administrative, with oversight functions distributed between local government CEOs, the LG Act frameworks, and State ministers and officials.

The Act itself inserts explicit criminal liability for failure to comply with certain disclosure requirements and depends elsewhere on the enforcement mechanisms of the Local Government Act 1995. The core elements are described below, with statutory references.

Criminal offence for failure to disclose gifts and travel contributions. The Act inserts s 5.89B into the Local Government Act 1995 which makes it an offence for a relevant person to fail to comply with the disclosure obligations in ss 5.82 and 5.83, as amended (s 37). The penalty is a fine of $10,000 or imprisonment for two years (s 5.89B). The offence is a strict statutory penalty: it attaches to the failure to disclose as required by the new provisions (s 5.82(1A)-(1C); s 5.83(1A)-(1C)).

Administrative enforcement through CEO registers and publication. CEOs must keep a register of disclosures (s 5.89A(1)-(3)), make it available for public inspection and publish it on the local government’s official website (s 5.89A(4)-(5)). CEOs must remove records from the publicly available register when a person ceases to be a relevant person, but must retain removed disclosures for at least five years and make them available for inspection (s 5.89A(6)-(7)). Those duties create administrative disclosure and transparency obligations that create reputational and procedural enforcement mechanisms via public scrutiny.

Integration with LG Act enforcement regime. The Act amends s 9.25 of the Local Government Act 1995 to include s 5.89B among matters in relation to which complaints or enforcement steps can be taken (s 39 amending s 9.25(1)). While the City of Perth Act does not itself specify processes for investigating and prosecuting offences, the amendment signals that the LG Act’s investigative and enforcement procedures apply. Practitioners should therefore look to the LG Act’s Part 9 mechanisms for procedures and sanctions in administrative contexts. The City of Perth Act also contains a prevailing‑law clause for conflicts with the Local Government Act 1995 (s 5), so the inserted disclosure offence and register duties prevail as crafted.

Agency powers for public‑health local laws. Under the amended Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority Act 1998, the Executive Director, Public Health is given the powers and authority of a local government under the Local Government Act 1995 for designated land (s 44A(2)). That authority “includes the power to make and enforce local laws under the Local Government Act 1995” (s 44A(3)). The amendment also alters the usual local‑law making procedures by excluding certain procedural requirements of the LG Act Part 3 Division 2 Subdivision 2, except for specified sections (s 44A(4)). Where local laws are made by the Executive Director and conflict with local laws made by local governments, the Executive Director’s local laws prevail to the extent of inconsistency (s 44A(5)). Enforcement of those local laws would follow the powers conferred on the Executive Director and the LG Act’s enforcement framework as applied.

Administrative and prosecutorial actors. The Act does not create new prosecutorial bodies but relies on existing administrative and criminal enforcement channels. Prosecutions for s 5.89B would run in the criminal courts; administrative enforcement and compliance action would be handled through LG Act procedures (s 9.25 amendments). CEOs have duties to keep and publish registers (s 5.89A), and failure to do so could generate administrative consequences under the LG Act or other applicable law, although the Act does not itself create a specific penalty for CEOs who fail to make the register available.

Sanctions and collateral effects. The criminal sanction,$10,000 fine or two years’ imprisonment,creates a significant personal risk for councillors and other relevant persons who do not make the required written disclosures within 10 days of receipt (s 5.82(1A)-(1C); s 5.83(1A)-(1C); s 5.89B). The publicity of the register creates reputational enforcement and may trigger secondary investigative or political responses. CEOs and local government administrations will face ongoing compliance costs to record, publish and store disclosures, and may become the first line of scrutiny on whether councillors meet statutory obligations.

Limitations and safeguards. Transitional regulations are permitted to address matters not sufficiently provided for by the Act (s 25(2)-(3)), and regulations providing for retrospective application are constrained so as not to prejudice private rights before publication (s 25(4)-(5)). For public‑health local laws by the Executive Director, certain LG Act procedural provisions do not apply (s 44A(4)), but the Executive Director must consult with the Authority and consider its advice before making local laws (s 44A(4)(b)). Those internal constraints are statutory safeguards against arbitrary exercise of newly allocated powers.

In practice, the effectiveness of enforcement depends on operationalising the LG Act’s investigative processes, the willingness of prosecutorial authorities to pursue alleged offences, CEOs’ diligence in maintaining the public registers, and public and political scrutiny. The Act centralises some enforcement risk by making non‑disclosure a criminal offence, but leaves much of the procedural detail to existing law and to regulations.

The Act deliberately operates in close relation to, and by amendment of, other statutes. It creates explicit precedence over the Local Government Act 1995 where inconsistent, modifies the operation of the LG Act for Perth in numerous respects, amends the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority Act 1998, alters references in the Local Government Act 1960 Part VIA regarding superannuation, and inserts new offences and administrative regimes into the LG Act. The principal interactions are listed below with statutory cross‑references and their legal mechanics.

Primacy over Local Government Act 1995. Section 5 provides that if a provision of this Act conflicts or is inconsistent with the Local Government Act 1995 (LG Act), this Act prevails to the extent of the conflict. Many of the Act’s operational effects are achieved either by explicit amendments to the LG Act (ss 33-39) or by a statutory treatment of the constitution and boundary changes as if effected by a Governor’s section 2.1 order under the LG Act (s 21(1)-(2)). The drafting therefore integrates Perth-specific rules within the LG Act framework while reserving the Act’s primacy.

Section 2.1 order fiction and limits on Governor orders. Section 21(1) directs that the constitution of Perth (ss 17-18) and the boundary changes (s 19) are to be taken as if made by a Governor’s section 2.1 order, and that the LG Act applies accordingly (s 21(2)). That invokes the LG Act’s consequential machinery, such as Schedule 2.1 clause 11 and regulations providing for matters to give effect to section 2.1 orders (s 21(2)(a)-(b)). However, s 21(3) then prevents an order under the LG Act from abolishing Perth, dividing it into wards, or changing the boundaries. That effectively transfers some matters from administrative amendment to legislative amendment, altering the legal pathway for future boundary or structural change for Perth.

Amendments to Local Government Act 1995 (gifts, travel, registers, offences). The Act amends the LG Act to raise disclosure timing and form requirements for gifts (s 5.82) and travel contributions (s 5.83), to replace return‑based disclosures with written disclosures to the CEO within 10 days (s 35-36), to insert a CEO‑maintained and publicly accessible register (s 37 inserting s 5.89A), and to create a criminal offence for non‑disclosure (s 37 inserting s 5.89B). It also amends cross‑references in ss 5.78 and 5.89 to accommodate the new provisions (ss 34, 38). The Act ties these new offences into the LG Act’s enforcement route by amending s 9.25 to include s 5.89B (s 39). Practitioners must therefore read these sections together and consult the LG Act for procedural enforcement detail.

Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority Act 1998 adjustments. Division 2 inserts s 44A into the BGPA Act, which gives the Executive Director, Public Health the powers of a local government under the LG Act in relation to designated land for public health purposes, including making and enforcing local laws (s 44A(2)-(3)). It excludes application of certain LG Act procedural provisions to those local laws (s 44A(4)(a)), but requires consultation with the Authority (s 44A(4)(b)), and gives the Executive Director’s local laws primacy over conflicting local laws (s 44A(5)). Section 53A then provides that no local law applies to King’s Park except local laws made by the Executive Director under s 44A(2) (s 29). These amendments reallocate local‑law making and enforcement authority in narrow circumstances to a State public health official.

Local Government Act 1960 Part VIA references. Sections 31-32 amend cross‑references in the Local Government Act 1960 Part VIA (as continued by the LG Act) to replace a reference to the repealed 1993 Act with a reference to the City of Perth Act 2016 s 23, preserving the intended superannuation references (ss 31-32).

Repeal of City of Perth Restructuring Act 1993 and transitional continuity. Section 26 repeals the 1993 Act. Section 23 preserves superannuation scheme participation rights for particular employees that were governed by the repealed Act (s 23(2)-(4)). Transitional regulations (s 25) may modify other written laws for transitional matters and may be given retrospective effect within secure limits (s 25(4)-(5)).

Interplay with planning and development law. The Committee’s functions include assisting to identify an alignment between the State’s planning and development processes and those of the City of Perth, and streamlining development application processes under the Planning and Development Act 2005 (s 13(c)-(d)). While the Act does not directly amend the Planning and Development Act, it establishes an institutional vehicle for process changes or harmonisation that may later lead to legislative or regulatory changes affecting developers and applicants.

Statutory hierarchy in cases of inconsistency. Where local laws conflict, the Act provides a specific primacy rule for the Executive Director, Public Health’s local laws over other local laws (s 44A(5)). Elsewhere the Act’s s 5 states that where it conflicts with the LG Act, this Act prevails. These clauses create an internal statutory hierarchy for handling inconsistencies.

In practice, users and practitioners must read the City of Perth Act alongside the Local Government Act 1995 (as amended), the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority Act 1998 (as amended), the Planning and Development Act 2005 where relevant, and the Local Government Act 1960 Part VIA provisions preserved by cross‑reference. The Act both draws on and constrains the administrative flexibility otherwise available under the LG Act by prescribing legislative rather than administrative routes for future boundary change, while embedding new disclosure and public‑health local‑law rules into existing administrative frameworks.

The Act’s compilation table at the end records subsequent statutory amendments and commencement dates. The Act itself was enacted in 2016 and has been amended since; the compilation provides the authoritative chronology included with the Act. The key recorded amendments in the compilation table and within the body of the Act are as follows.

• Original enactment: City of Perth Act 2016 No. 2 of 2016, assented 3 March 2016. Part 1 (preliminary) commenced on the day of Royal Assent; the rest of the Act commenced the day after (s 2; compilation table).
• Local Government Amendment Act 2023 Pt 3 Div 1: recorded in the compilation table as No. 11 of 2023, assent 18 May 2023, commencement 1 July 2023. The Act notes that section 20 was amended by No. 11 of 2023 s 101. The insertion amends the operation of s 20 (election of Lord Mayor) though the compilation note should be consulted for precise textual changes (compilation table; s 20 note).
• Statutes (Repeals and Minor Amendments) Act 2025: recorded as No. 14 of 2025, assent 25 September 2025, commencement 26 September 2025; the table notes an amendment to s 23 by No. 14 of 2025 s 15(2). Section 23 contains a footnote indicating it was amended in 2025 (s 23 amended: No. 14 of 2025 s. 15(2)). The specific effect recorded in the Act is the preservation of rights of City of Perth superannuation scheme members and the cross‑references in the Local Government Act 1960 Part VIA were updated (ss 31-32).
• Textual amendments made on the face of the Act: The Act contains a number of inserted and amended provisions to other Acts (Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority Act 1998, Local Government Act 1960 Part VIA, Local Government Act 1995). These are all contained in Part 4 (Divisions 2-4) of the Act and represent the Act’s built‑in amendments; they were effective on the Act’s operative commencement unless later modified by subsequent amending Acts as shown in the compilation table.

Practical consequences of the amendment history. The compilation and amendment notes are the statutory record that practitioners must check to determine the current text and commencement dates. For example, the 2023 amendment to s 20 (see compilation table) indicates a change to the election rules for the Lord Mayor; when advising on electoral mechanics, practitioners must use the post‑2023 text. The 2025 amendment to s 23 was a consequential preservation of superannuation rights and updated cross‑references in Part VIA of the Local Government Act 1960 (ss 31-32).

Regulatory instruments and delegated details. The Act delegates significant detail to regulations (s 24, s 25). Regulations may prescribe the form of the gifts and travel register (s 5.89A(3)), transitional matters (s 25(2)-(4)), and other matters necessary to achieve the Act’s objects (s 24). The Act’s amendment history therefore includes not only parliamentary amendments but also the potential for material regulatory changes that affect implementation; practitioners must monitor not only primary legislation amendments but also subordinate instruments made under s 24 and s 25.

How to track amendments. Use the official statutory compilation available from the State’s legislation website and consult the compilation table in the Act for the high‑level chronology. For operational compliance with disclosure regimes, consult the current Local Government Act 1995 text as amended by this Act and any regulations prescribing the register form or related processes.

The Act’s text and the compilation included with it do not list any judicial decisions or litigation arising under the City of Perth Act 2016. The Act itself names no cases and does not reproduce any judicial interpretation (the source materials provided contain no litigation history). Therefore at the time of this compilation the Act’s judicial development is not recorded within the statute.

Potential litigation‑bearing issues identifiable from the Act. The Act creates several legal flashpoints that could generate future litigation or judicial review, although no cases are recorded in the source text. Those potential areas include the following, each grounded in the statute’s mechanics and therefore plausible sites for legal challenge or interpretation disputes.

• Scope and justiciability of the City’s objects. The Act states that certain objects do not give rise to enforceable legal obligations or confer enforceable rights (s 8(2)(b)-(c)). Future disputes might arise where claimants attempt to rely on the objects, and courts would be asked to construe the intended legal effect of the objects language in relation to council actions. The Act’s explicit non‑enforceability language reduces the likelihood of successful rights‑based litigation based directly on the objects, but indirect claims against administrative decisions under other statutory powers could still be litigated.
• Boundary entrenchment and constitutional or administrative law challenges. The Act requires any future alteration to Perth’s boundaries to be made by an Act of Parliament (s 16) and prevents Governor orders under the LG Act from changing Perth’s boundaries (s 21(3)). Disputes could arise about the interplay between the Governor’s powers under the LG Act and this Act’s limitations, or about whether particular changes are ministerial/administrative or legislative in character. Courts may be asked to decide whether certain measures are prohibited executive actions or permitted under other statutory heads, but no judicial rulings are recorded in the source.
• Executive Director, Public Health local‑law primacy and procedural exclusions. The BGPA Act amendments give the Executive Director local‑law making powers with limited application of LG Act procedural provisions (s 44A(4)). There is scope for contested decisions over the lawfulness of local laws made by the Executive Director, including consultation requirements with the Authority (s 44A(4)(b)), and the effect of s 53A’s ban on other local laws applying to King’s Park except ED’s laws (s 29). Litigation could involve questions of overreach, procedural fairness, or conflict between local laws if and when the Executive Director exercises these powers.
• Enforcement of disclosure offences and due process. Criminalisation of non‑disclosure (s 5.89B) could give rise to contested prosecutions where defendants assert defences related to the meaning of “relevant person”, timeliness, or factual disputes about receipt of gifts or travel contributions. Prosecutorial discretion and evidentiary standards would be central if prosecutions occur. No cases are recorded in the Act.
• Administrative discretion of the Committee. The Committee has broad “facilitation” functions (s 13) and can regulate its own procedure (s 15). Litigation might challenge committee action only if it were alleged to exceed statutory functions or to undermine procedural fairness in a way that engages judicial review principles; the Act’s text does not itself create appeal rights or judicial‑review exclusions.

Because the source contains no reported cases or judicial history, practitioners must rely on future monitoring for caselaw. The Act’s potential litigation vectors are structural and procedural rather than doctrinally novel, and will often intersect with the Local Government Act 1995, the Planning and Development Act 2005, and administrative law principles.

This section flags textual features, drafting choices, and operational frictions in the Act that are easy to overlook and that may have outsized legal or administrative consequences. Each “gotcha” is tied to a specific provision.

1. Objects are expressly non‑justiciable in part. Section 8 sets wide policy objects for the City but s 8(2)(b)-(c) states the objects do not impose an enforceable court‑enforceable obligation or confer enforceable rights. Practitioners seeking to litigate decisions on the basis of the objects will face an express statutory barrier, meaning strategies should rely on other statutory duties, administrative law, or local laws rather than the objects clause alone.

2. Boundary changes are fixed and require Parliamentary action. After 1 July 2016 any future alteration to Perth’s boundaries must be done by Act, not by Governor order under the LG Act (s 16). Paragraphs s 21(3) then explicitly prevent a section 2.1 order from abolishing, dividing the district into wards, or changing Perth’s boundaries. That changes the usual administrative flexibility for boundary adjustments and places the decision in the parliamentary domain. Local governments, ratepayers and developers should not expect future boundary changes to be achievable by the usual LG Act order processes.

3. The “section 2.1 order fiction” triggers LG Act machinery but with caveats. Section 21(1) directs that certain constitution and boundary changes are to be taken as if made by a section 2.1 order and that the LG Act applies accordingly (s 21(2)). However, s 21(3) carves out the Governor’s power to change Perth’s boundaries. This mixed approach can cause confusion: many LG Act transitional provisions and regulations apply, but not the Governor’s powers in relation to Perth’s boundaries, so advice must reference both Acts and the deposited plan to define the district (s 18(1)).

4. Deposited plans determine the boundary; Schedule map is “indicative only”. Section 18(1) fixes the district by reference to Deposited Plan 404450, and s 18(2) says Schedule 1 is indicative only and that subsection (1) prevails in any inconsistency. Practitioners must rely on the deposited plans lodged with the Authority (see definition of Deposited Plan in s 3) rather than on the Schedule map. That means checking the Authority’s records for the precise cadastral detail.

5. CEO registers create retention and privacy tensions. CEOs must remove records from the public register when a person ceases to be a relevant person, but they must keep disclosures for at least five years and make them available for public inspection (s 5.89A(6)-(7)). This twofold obligation creates a practical handling requirement and potential privacy questions about how retained records are accessed, who may inspect them, and how long limited identifiers are stored. Regulations may specify form, but the Act itself leaves operational details to CEOs and to prescribed regulations (s 5.89A(3)).

6. Tight disclosure timing and criminal sanction. Disclosures must be made in writing to the CEO within 10 days of receipt (s 5.82(1B); s 5.83(1B)). The criminal penalty for non‑disclosure (s 5.89B) is sizeable ($10,000 or two years imprisonment). Practitioners advising councillors need to emphasise the narrow deadline and the need for prompt recordkeeping. There is no “reasonable excuse” clause in the text; any defences would be those available under criminal law generally.

7. King’s Park exceptionalism. King’s Park is included in Perth’s district (s 18(1)), remains a Class A reserve and remains subject to the BGPA Act (s 18(3)), but s 53A (inserted) provides that no local law applies to King’s Park except local laws made by the Executive Director, Public Health under s 44A(2) (s 29). That means municipal local laws will not apply to the park as usual and any regulatory regime for activities within King’s Park depends on a State official’s exercise of local‑law powers. Local governments and event organisers must account for this exceptional regulatory regime.

8. Committee membership and control. The Committee is chaired by the Premier or the Premier’s nominee who decides meeting times (ss 12(2), 14(2)). The Committee includes State ministers and senior public servants (s 12(2)), which gives the State formal control over timing and at least chairing. Local government participants (Lord Mayor, Deputy Lord Mayor, CEO) are outnumbered by State presence in some respects. Practitioners advising City officials should note the membership and the Committee’s broad facilitative remit (s 13) without clear binding decision powers; the Committee’s procedural autonomy (s 15) may also surprise those expecting formal protocols.

9. Delegation of local‑law powers to a State official with procedural exclusions. The amended BGPA Act gives the Executive Director, Public Health the powers of a local government under the LG Act for designated land (s 44A(2)-(3)), but exempts many LG Act procedural provisions from applying (s 44A(4)(a)), while requiring consultation with the Authority (s 44A(4)(b)). The combination of administrative power, procedural carve‑outs and primacy over other local laws (s 44A(5)) means that the usual local‑law checks and balances are altered for designated land.

10. Transitional regulations may operate retrospectively subject to constraints. Section 25 allows regulations to have retrospective effect to a day not earlier than the day s 25 comes into operation, but with protections against prejudicing private rights (s 25(4)-(5)). Practitioners must be alert to any regulations made under s 25 with retrospective effect and check the Gazette and the legislation database for such instruments.

Each of these “gotchas” stems directly from the text and structure of the Act and will create practical implications for local governance, compliance, litigation risk, and administrative design.

This section converts statutory duties into practical compliance steps for the principal actors: councillors and Lord Mayor, local government CEOs and administrative staff, the City of Perth Council, State officials on the Committee, and neighbouring local governments affected by boundary changes. Steps are grounded in the Act’s prescriptions and the interactions described earlier.

Councillors and Lord Mayor (disclosure compliance)

• Establish an internal receipt procedure for any gift or travel contribution to capture the mandatory disclosure fields specified in ss 5.82 and 5.83: description, donor name and address, date received, estimated value, nature of relationship, and for travel contributions a description and date of travel (s 5.82(1); s 5.83(1) paragraphs (a)-(g)). Use a standard form to ensure completeness.
• Make disclosures in writing to the CEO within 10 days of receipt. Create a document or email template that timestamps receipt and submission to the CEO to evidence compliance with the 10‑day rule (s 5.82(1B); s 5.83(1B)).
• Keep internal copies and logs of the written disclosures and supporting documents (invoices, donor correspondence) so that the CEO’s register can be populated accurately and promptly, and to provide evidence should any alleged failure to disclose arise (s 5.89A; s 5.89B).
• Seek immediate legal advice if a disclosure is not made within 10 days or if there is uncertainty about whether an item is a “gift” or “contribution”. The offence in s 5.89B carries significant penalties; early corrective steps may be relevant to prosecutorial or disciplinary decisions.

Chief Executive Officers (register, publication and recordkeeping)

• Implement an electronic register system that captures all fields required by ss 5.82 and 5.83 and that is capable of publishing records on the local government’s official website in compliance with s 5.89A(4)-(5). Ensure the format meets any regulations on form (s 5.89A(3)).
• Develop standard operating procedures to receive written disclosures, to enter them into the register promptly, and to confirm receipt with the disclosing person. Time‑stamping features are important for establishing compliance with the 10‑day window.
• Create a retention and removal protocol for records: when a person ceases to be a “relevant person,” remove their records from the public register (s 5.89A(6)) but retain the removed disclosures for at least five years and make them available for public inspection during that period (s 5.89A(7)). Document the date a person ceases to be relevant and the date records were removed and archived.
• Configure website publication to allow public inspection but protect sensitive personal data in compliance with privacy law. The Act mandates public access; nonetheless, consider privacy impact assessments for the forms of publication.
• Provide training to elected members and senior staff on disclosure obligations, the 10‑day timeline, the form of disclosures, and the legal consequences of non‑compliance (s 5.82-5.83; s 5.89B). Training materials should include FAQs and hypothetical scenarios relevant to local contexts.

City of Perth Council and City administration (governance and boundary matters)

• Ensure council governance documents and code of conduct integrate the Act’s role descriptions for the Lord Mayor and councillors (ss 10-11). Even though some objects are non‑justiciable (s 8(2)), the council should reflect the statutory roles in its policies and delegations.
• Confirm the City’s internal mapping and rate rolls are reconciled with Deposited Plan 404450 (s 18(1)) and coordinate with the Western Australian Land Information Authority to verify cadastral detail (definition of Deposited Plan, s 3).
• Prepare administrative plans for any services, rates and bylaws affected by boundary changes to or from neighbouring LGAs in accordance with the LG Act application to the constitution and boundary changes (s 21(1)-(2)). Use the LG Act machinery for transitional arrangements where provided.
• Participate proactively in the City of Perth Committee, providing the CEO and Lord Mayor with briefings on issues the Committee’s functions are designed to address, such as integration of planning processes and transition arrangements for State developments (s 13).

City of Subiaco and other affected local governments (ward reviews and transitions)

• City of Subiaco should consider carrying out the optional review of ward boundaries and councillor numbers between the Act’s commencement and 31 March 2016 (or other transitional dates as set in regulations), following the special procedure set out in s 22. The Local Government Act 1995 applies with necessary changes for that review and the local public notice must state the review is for taking account of the constitution and boundary changes and explain the basis of the review (s 22(3)(a)-(c)).
• Coordinate data transfers, rateable property lists, asset management and service delivery plans with neighbouring LGAs and the City of Perth so that responsibilities are clear on 1 July 2016 when boundaries changed (s 18(1); s 21(2)). Use the LG Act’s transitional provisions and any regulations made under s 25 to manage staffing, contracts and service arrangements.

State officials and the City of Perth Committee (meetings and functions)

• The Premier (or nominee) should schedule Committee meetings at least twice a year (s 14(1)-(2)) and set agendas that reflect the statutory functions: facilitating collaboration, aligning planning and development processes, streamlining development applications, and arranging transitions for State developments (s 13).
• Prepare briefs that document opportunities to streamline processes and list concrete procedural barriers that the Committee can sponsor for reform. The Committee has broad facilitative functions but no express binding decision power; it should therefore focus on actionable recommendations and protocols for City-State coordination.
• Keep written records of Committee meetings and ensure any recommended procedural changes are supported by legal advice on how they interact with the LG Act and Planning and Development Act.

Legal and compliance teams

• Update compliance manuals, council codes of conduct, and induction materials to reflect the amended disclosure rules and new offence (s 5.89B). Ensure consistent internal procedures for receiving, validating and recording disclosures.
• Monitor regulations made under s 24 and s 25 for any prescription of the register form, transitional arrangements, or other matters affecting implementation. Regulations may specify mandatory forms or detail operational aspects that alter compliance processes.
• Conduct periodic audits (annual or more frequent) of disclosure registers to confirm timely entries, conformity with prescribed content, appropriate retention after cessation, and website publication. Document audit findings and corrective actions.

Event organisers and users of King’s Park and designated lands

• Recognise that King’s Park is subject to an altered local‑law regime: municipal local laws do not apply to King’s Park except local laws made by the Executive Director, Public Health under s 44A(2) and s 53A (s 29). Before planning activities in King’s Park, seek confirmation of applicable local laws and any public health local laws in force.
• Engage early with the BGPA and, where appropriate, the Executive Director, Public Health to ensure permitted activities are compatible with designated local laws and public health requirements (s 44A(4)(b)).

Records and archival practice

• For all impacted local governments: implement records policies matching s 5.89A(6)-(7) for removal of former persons’ records from the public register and five‑year retention. Ensure records management systems can segregate public register content from archived records and provide controlled access for inspection.

In every case, compliance must be documented. Given the criminal penalty for non‑disclosure and the public nature of the register, the emphasis should be on rapid, documented reporting to the CEO and robust internal controls that support timely, accurate publication. Monitor both primary law (amendments to the LG Act and the City of Perth Act) and subordinate instruments for procedural details.