No one begrudges anyone spending their money however they wish, as long as it’s within the law.

And that’s where Mr Mehajer went wrong – shutting down an entire Auburn street for his marital extravaganza without dotting the “i’s” and crossing the “t’s” he should have.

The fact he’s a local government councillor only made it worse, and it’s triggered a fresh round of debate on who should and shouldn’t be allowed to serve on our local councils.

Labor’s Luke Foley has now called for developers – as Mr Mehajer describes himself – and real estate agents to be excluded from running for council election, arguing they stand to benefit from inside knowledge on local development decisions.

He’s also called for a reversal of a rule that allows councillors to vote on planning controls that could benefit them.

In 2012 a change was made to the local government act that allows a councillor with a pecuniary interest to vote on planning controls that affect all or a substantial part of a local government area as long as they declare the interest.

It seems extreme to rule out someone who is keen to serve their electorate on the basis of their occupation.

Mr Foley’s point is well taken, but there should be enough checks and balances – such as the declaration of an interest when it comes to voting on whether a development is given the green light – in place to ensure no one receives an unfair advantage. 

In saying this, the change to the act in 2012 would seem to muddy the waters and perhaps should be amended to maintain consistency across the board.

But, in terms of the makeup of our local councils, they stand to gain much more from the experience and knowledge of developers and real estate agents than they risk losing from a potentially unscrupulous individual.

The vast majority of those who serve their communities are there for the right reasons and their intentions shouldn’t be judged on the basis of the actions of one man who feels the rules don’t apply to him.