Councillors will vote on whether to support or oppose the company’s application to remain on the former White Hills tip site, currently before the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal.

The Bendigo Advertiser understands Peter Cox, Elise Chapman and Helen Leach are the only councillors of the nine to support Hopley Recycling since the dispute started in 2013.

Company owner Ken Hopley sent a four-page letter to all councillors on Tuesday night outlining the history of the dispute from the company’s point of view and its reasons for using the site.

The letter also refutes claims from council officers that there is no conclusive evidence that the site is suitable for use.

The council has attempted to remove Hopley Recycling from the site to allow testing to take place on the former tip, maintaining the company does not have permission to use the land.

Mr Hopley said he would welcome the councillors to inspect the operation and make up their own mind on whether he should be required to move.

In the letter, Mr Hopley implores councillors not to “blindly accept that testing cannot occur while it relocates from the tip land”.

“It should seek the independent advice from the relevant consultants upon which such an assertion is premised,” the letter reads.

“While council has not provided any evidence to support its assertion, Hopley can undertake to move material on the tip land as requested to enable the testing to continue.”

Mr Hopley believes the City of Greater Bendigo had full knowledge of the company’s intentions, having issued a planning permit in 2008 allowing it to expand to the former tip site.

A permit issued in June 2008 – after the company was forced to move from its Eaglehawk site – includes the parcel of land covering the former tip.

Hopley Recycling was also granted permission to install a water pipe through 500 metres of the disputed parcel of land in 2013, which has since been constructed.

City of Greater Bendigo officers have maintained that the company does not have the required permits to use the site.

The council has cited the need for studies into the suitability of the land to be concluded before the company be allowed to remain.

In a report to council, to be presented at Wednesday’s meeting, council director planning and development Prue Mansfield said the assessments might not be complete until May next year.

In his letter to the nine councillors, Mr Hopley disputed that claim and believed neither the Environmental Protection Authority or the Department of Environment Land Water and Planning objected to the application.

“The EPA and DELWP have stated in writing that they do not oppose the permit application,” he wrote.

“Of the 39 nearby owners and occupiers notified, not one single objection was raised.”

Hopley Recycling accepts industrial waste from across Victoria and converts it into material for use on roads and other projects.

It converted the former Kerang Hospital into reusable material and regularly accepts industrial waste from Melbourne.

The company started storing its recycled material on the former tip site, and claims no industrial waste is on the land at the moment.

Hopley Recycling was given until June 1 by VCAT to remove its material from the land, but missed the deadline, which has now been extended until October.

The hearing considering its application to remain on the site temporarily will be considered in October.

In the letter, Mr Hopley wrote it would be difficult for the business to relocate in the short-term.

“Relocation is not an action that Hopley retreats from, however its implementation is complex,” he wrote.

“It is well and good for officers to seek immediate relocation or vacation from the site – but a practical and commercial perspective must be brought to this analysis.

“None of the sites that the council officers claim to have put to Hopley have been suitable for a crushing and materials recycling operation. That said, Hopley accepts that it must remove its operations from the land and it has taken steps to bring this about.”

The City of Greater Bendigo report stated it did not believe VCAT would issue a temporary permit to the company.

Mr Hopley said he would need about two years to clear the site and was prepared to take the action further if he did not get a favourable outcome at VCAT.