Such a decision should never be taken lightly, as going against the advice of staff almost guarantees the matter will end up in the Land and Environment Court.

And if things go badly there, ratepayers can be lumped with legal bills amounting to tens of thousands of dollars, and councillors can have some tough questions to answer when the next elections roll around.

On the other hand, councillors who blindly accept staff recommendations on all matters before them face even harsher criticism that they are not doing their job – that is, acting as a voice for the community.

So it’s hard to condemn the actions of any councillors in the contentious development application for a kennel and cattery at Dunkeld.

History will show a majority of councillors voted on Wednesday night to knock back the DA, with several particularly concerned that the 28 conditions attached to the recommended approval of the kennel simply meant there were too many unanswered questions.

It’s now up to the applicant to decide if he wants to take the matter further, as he has previously indicated he would.

And it’s quite likely he would win the case if he decided to take that action.

As this newspaper has said previously, though, dissent between staff and councillors does not necessarily equate to right and wrong – rather, it is simply the process playing out the way it should.

Whether we have arrived at the right decision, though, might yet be left up to a judge to decide.