Psychoactive substances advocates may seek to impose a hefty financial burden on Hamilton ratepayers if council won't compromise on its Psychoactive Substances Policy.
The STAR Trust (Social Tonics Advocacy & Research) announced in March that it would seek a High Court judicial review of Hamilton City Council's Psychoactive Substance Policy (Local Approved Products Policy - LAPP). Although selling or possessing synthetic cannabis and party pills are now banned by law, STAR Trust insists it will proceed with its court case.
STAR Trust general manager Grant Hall said they are confident they will win.
"Being able to prove that we can win in the High Court, that means we can go for costs, and impose an unfair burden on the rate payers of Hamilton."
He said the council could be looking at costs of around $200,000. "It would be a waste of ratepayers money, it is not fair that Hamilton City Council should put ratepayers through that, much easier if they had sat down and negotiated with us.
"We've seen all the minutes, we have had full disclosure, so we have all the evidence to show predetermination. That means there was never any goodwill toward the discussion, the public submission process, it was always going to be prohibition."
Mr Hall said the Trust would drop the case against the council if they agreed to review the policy and sought the STAR Trust's approval of it.
"We are now in discussion around having the trial adjourned if the council agrees to review the LAPP on the understanding that if it is not reviewed and accepted by us, we will continue with our prosecution.
"If they don't review it we reserve the right to continue with the case we know we will win, [if] it goes through as it currently stands, we will immediately reopen this judicial review."
Mayor Julie Hardaker said council is confident in its policy and have not been in talks of a compromise.
"This is a court case taken by the STAR Trust on a judicial review basis and the judge has deferred the case because the government is dealing with some legislative matters.
"We are defending the judicial review application. It has always been very clear that we believe we have been through a very robust process throughout that policy and set a policy within that legislation."
She said while the cost to council is still unknown, if the STAR Trust was concerned about the cost to ratepayers, they should have thought about that before bringing a case against council.
"It is their application that will result in a cost to the ratepayer. We are defending our policy.
"The STAR Trust filed the application, we know our policy process and our policy is robust and complies and responds to the community."