Among its objectives was paying particular attention to the costs of “major projects required for the shire’s prosperity”.

Additionally, they would focus on “getting business and government investment moving again in the shire” as well as seeking improvements to the “building approval processes”.

It comes after the ERA in 2012 campaigned on a platform of progressing the shire and encouraging development to help it prosper.

“We are dedicated to creating a ‘can do’ council,” ERA Narooma candidate, April Creed said at the time.

Why then would four ERA councillors, dedicated to progress, vote against a strategy which allows key development in the shire - not just one, but several?

Rescinding the Broulee Biodiversity Strategy would not just ruin the lives of the Fraser family.

It would prevent Broulee itself growing – and the businesses and schools within it - as well as the Moruya Airport, the speedway and the racecourse, to name a few.

Yes, the state government has unfairly shifted increasing costs onto local government – we’ve seen it in sea-level rise planning, in land zoning, in management of assets.

But is putting residents’ livelihoods and progress of the shire at stake, really worth simply sending the state government a message?

The ERA’s own website states one of its aims and objectives is to represent the “interest of ratepayers and residents in matters and issues relating to local government”. Its position on the strategy blatantly goes against this commitment, as this strategy is the only way forward for residents.

These councillors could have taken a range of much less damaging steps to get their point across – actually lobbying the state government would be a start. They could have amended the motion to include a recommendation to also write to the Planning Minister and take a stance against the process.

Instead, internal politics were prioritised, with the ERA now likely hopeful their colleagues will not attend Tuesday’s extraordinary meeting when the rescission motion is considered.

Councillor Rob Pollock said the ERA’s opposition of the strategy was the “lowest act” he had seen in all his 30 years in local government.

I have seen worse, but it still beggars belief.