A letter sent to every single Perth and Kinross councillor warns that the people of Perth will never forgive the local authority if a £100 million incinerator is constructed close to the town centre.
The communication comes after local authority chiefs controversially urged elected officials not to revoke previously granted outline consent for the facility.
Campaigners including members of Bridgend, Gannochy and Kinnoull Community Council insist revocation is the only way to ensure the hugely contentious proposal is finally killed off.
There was outrage when Grundon Waste Management was granted outline consent for the Shore Road plant, which would feature a 260-foot chimney stack.
It has since been widely accepted that the approval should never have been given and council officials have been battling desperately ever since to ensure the plans do not progress any further.
Councillors have already refused a subsequent detailed application lodged by Grundon and had resolved to discuss revocation at a meeting this week.
Such a move would effectively remove the applicant’s right to appeal to the Scottish Government, a step Grundon has now resolved to take.
Campaigners firmly believed revocation was on the cards and congratulated the council for apparently preparing to accept its mistake. But there was shock when — contrary to the previous speculation — officials revealed such a move is unlikely.
A report states new legal advice suggests the council, as partial landlord of the site, is not obliged to give permission for the incinerator even if an appeal succeeds.
While that may well be enough to appease councillors, campaigners are far from convinced and claim it is a “perilous” situation.
“It seemed that elected members, officers and objectors were committed to revocation of the outline consent for this development,” said Brian Raine, chairman of Bridgend, Gannochy and Kinnoull Community Council.
“This was confirmed to us shortly before Christmas when our representatives were invited to a meeting at council headquarters.
“The assumption was that revocation would be recommended to a meeting of the full council.
“It was a great disappointment to be subsequently told that officers had concluded the case for revocation is not strong.
“The outline consent was issued as a result of gross errors.
“We have asked to see the legal advice which led to the rejection of revocation but our request has been declined.”
Mr Raine is informing councillors that a QC consulted by campaigners remains of the view that outline consent was granted unlawfully and should be revoked.
“Anyone with an appreciation of the city’s character would recognise the special sensitivity of this location and reject it on a ‘this cannot be right’ basis,” he continued in his six-page letter to elected members.
“Throughout this sorry affair we have been keen to work with the council…However, we still see revocation as the surest way to put right perilous mistakes.
“The alternative…is attended by the risk of an outcome which the people of Perth would find hard to forgive.”
In the letter, councillors are urged not to ignore the “unprecedented” level of public opposition to the proposal.