Skip to content

Clover Hill Diaries – Join Me and Be the Change

#Strongwomen. "I write about the power of trying, because I want to be okay with failing. I write about generosity because I battle selfishness. I write about joy because I know sorrow. I write about faith because I almost lost mine, and I know what it is to be broken and in need of redemption. I write about gratitude because I am thankful – for all of it." Kristin Armstrong

  • Home
  • Empowering Sustainable and Just Futures
  • SynergyScape Solutions – Embracing the Grey – My Journey in Values and Communication
Clover Hill Diaries – Join Me and Be the Change

Category: Community Advocacy and Governance

Modern farming fails when councils do not understand the industry they regulate

Old planning rules and new farming realities do not match

During the last rewrite of Kiama Council’s Local Environmental Plan, I sat on the Economic Development Committee as the rural advisory representative. A local lawyer who regularly worked with farmers joined me. Our task was to examine how the LEP treated agriculture and to ensure the rules reflected the reality of farming in this region.

What we found was simple and concerning.
Most farming land had been zoned RU2 Rural Landscape, a zone intended for grazing and low intensity agriculture. Modern dairy farming across NSW sits in RU1 Primary Production, where planning frameworks recognise the infrastructure, inputs and animal welfare systems that contemporary operations require.

Modern agriculture cannot thrive under a planning system designed in 2011

On paper, existing dairy farmers in Kiama were protected by existing use rights. They could continue operating at their current scale. That protection ended the moment they wanted to expand, modernise or introduce infrastructure that improves environmental outcomes. Any new feed pad, shade structure or covered system was treated as a shift from extensive to intensive agriculture, triggering a development application process that can take years.

This is where planning rules collide with reality.

Kiama’s rural zoning was written for yesterday’s agriculture and we are living with the consequences

Ten years ago, setting up a modern dairy farm cost around ten thousand dollars per cow, and this figure did not include land purchase. I am aware of a local farmer who has since been offered twenty eight million dollars for their property, which shows how dramatically the landscape has changed and how high the stakes have become. No farmer can commit to this scale of investment while facing delays, conditions and uncertainty created by a council that does not understand modern agriculture. The risk is too great, the cost too high and the process too unreliable.

Recent discussions about local farming ventures show how easily these patterns repeat. My previous story highlighted one example, where a simple diversification effort took more than one hundred days to process and ultimately came back with conditions that made the project unviable. It was a textbook case of how agricultural misunderstanding inside councils translates into poor outcomes on the ground.

The real issue is not the zoning alone.
The issue is the people interpreting and applying the zoning, without real agricultural competence.

Modern agriculture depends on a planning system that understands the industry it regulates. Kiama has reached the point where the gap between intention and reality is harming farms, blocking innovation and pushing families away from the land. As the next LEP review approaches, this needs to be acknowledged and fixed. The region’s farming future depends on it.

There is a deeper problem sitting underneath all of this. We have non experts inside council making decisions that directly affect other people’s livelihoods. Modern agriculture is a technical field. It relies on science, engineering, animal welfare knowledge and environmental management. When the people applying the rules do not understand the industry they are regulating, the result is predictable. Projects stall, costs blow out and families are pushed into impossible positions. Planning should not be guesswork. It should not come down to personal preference or a fear of getting something wrong. Rural communities deserve decisions grounded in competence, not caution.

#KiamaCouncil #KiamaLEP #ModernAgriculture #NSWPlanning #RuralZoning #FarmInvestment #AgriculturalCompetence #RegionalPolicy #DairyFarming #CommunityImpact #PlanningReform #LocalGovernmentAccountability

Author Lynne StrongPosted on December 9, 2025December 9, 2025Categories Behind the Byline, Citizen Journalism, Community Advocacy and GovernanceTags agriculture misunderstood in council systems, farms facing unnecessary hurdles, modern farming blocked by poor decisions, outdated planning rules, planning that harms investment, rural communities carrying the cost, the gap between policy and practice, zoning that no longer fits reality

Essential Media Tools for Community Groups

Media can give you the edge you need. This guide shows you how to use it well.

For community groups seeking impact, clarity and control, these principles are non negotiable.

These tools give you influence. They sharpen your message, protect your credibility and keep you in control of your story, even when power sits on the other side of the table.

This is the same thorough list you would be taught in an intensive media training course, adapted for community groups who are dealing with Council, navigating power imbalances or trying to communicate clearly under pressure. u.

The five principles every community group needs to understand

(Each point is explained fully in the sections below.)

1. Power imbalance and what it does to communities

When Council holds all the information and controls the process, communities can feel powerless, dismissed or silenced.
People sense the imbalance long before they can name it.
This is the foundation for every other challenge they face.
See below for full explanation.

2. The empowerment path – what you can control

When formal pathways fail, the only things people can rely on are their principles:
• how they act
• how they respond
• their character
• how they treat others
This shifts people out of the victim triangle and into agency.
See below for full explanation.

Source 

3. The danger of negative framing

If you slip into the trap of using negative framing this gives Council an escape route, weakens your credibility, and frightens supporters who prefer to stay unseen.
It is one of the fastest ways a community can lose control of its message.
See below for full explanation.

4. The 10-second and 30-second grabs

Prepare, Prepare, Prepare

If you don’t prepare them, journalists will pull whatever you say and compress it for you.
This is how groups lose control of their story.
Short, calm, factual grabs are your protection.
See below for full explanation.

5. The risk of reinforcing someone else’s frame

Correcting a claim by repeating it – even with “not” – strengthens it.
If the media are listening, that negative phrase can become your 10-second grab.
This is why reframing is essential.
See below for full explanation.

Full article with explanations and example

Why this matters now

This statement shows, in real time, the dangers of negative framing (a frame is the automatic story people’s minds jump to when they hear specific words)  and the risk of repeating someone else’s message.

Hope is not soft, it is strategic, and positive framing is the doorway that lets people walk toward it.


So when Council responded with a lengthy statement accusing the article of containing “numerous false facts and misleading information,” the very first thing they did was repeat the headline and repeat the claims they wanted people to forget.

This is the first mistake in crisis communication.
And it’s the perfect example to help community groups understand the key principles that will protect them when dealing with a powerful organisation.

Positive framing:. “Everything I wrote in my original article on developer contributions involved six months of research. I stand by every word.”

Below is what the Council statement teaches us, and what communities can learn from it.

1. Power imbalance and what it does to communities

See key point above.

A power imbalance exists when one side controls:
• the information
• the process
• the timeline
• the definition of what “counts”

Council’s statement is a textbook illustration. It speaks inwards, to its team, its acronyms, its internal processes, not to the community. It positions the organisation as the sole interpreter of truth.

When people feel that dynamic, even if they can’t articulate it, they experience:
• frustration
• confusion
• fatigue
• self-doubt

Understanding the imbalance is the first step in shifting it.

2. The empowerment path – what you can control

See key point above.

Communities do not control Council’s behaviour.
But they do control:
• how they act
• how they respond
• their character
• how they treat others

The Council example shows why this matters. Their reaction was defensive, rigid and power-protective.
Make the pathway is different. Be grounded, factual and principled.
This is how communities shift themselves out of the victim triangle.
Agency comes from calm, deliberate choices, not from emotion or escalation.

3. The danger of negative framing

As George Lakoff explains with “Don’t think of an elephant,” the moment you answer inside someone else’s mental picture – their frame –  you strengthen it. Once the frame is activated, even denial reinforces it. That is exactly what happened here.

See key point above.

Council’s response is built almost entirely on negative framing:
“false facts”, “misleading”, “incorrect”, repeated over and over.
The result is predictable:
• they sound combative
• they appear threatened
• they close off community empathy

Negative framing repels the very people who might otherwise support them.
For community groups, the lesson is simple:
negative language might feel satisfying in the moment, but it weakens your long-term position.

The safer choice is principled framing:
• “We followed every step of the process and still have no explanation.”
• “We want clarity, fairness and transparency.”
This invites the public into the story rather than pushing them away.

4. The 10-second and 30-second grabs

See key point above.

If a journalist needed a quote from Council’s statement, the most likely 10-second grab would have been:

“The Bugle claims Council failed to renew its developer contribution plans on time.”

That one sentence would have become the public message.

This is why community groups must prepare their own:
• 10-second grab: the one clear sentence that sums up the issue
• 30-second grab: the calm, factual explanation that adds context

If you do not prepare them, the media will pull whatever stands out.
And often the loudest or most emotional line becomes the quote – even if it is not what you wanted to emphasise.

Practice, Practice Practice

5. The risk of reinforcing someone else’s frame

See key point above.

The most important lesson from Council’s statement is this:
they repeated the issue they wanted to erase.

By restating the concerns in the article, line by line, they cemented the association in the public mind:
Council + governance failures + developer contributions + missed renewal deadlines.

Repeating a criticism strengthens it.
Especially when you say “incorrect.”

Communities must avoid this trap at all costs.
Do not repeat the negative claim.
Step into your own frame (a frame is the mental picture people form the moment certain words are used):

• “Here is what happened, what should have happened, and what it means for the community.”
• “Our concern is transparency and process.”
• “We want clear answers and fair treatment.”

This protects you.
It prevents the negative claim becoming your quote.
And it keeps your voice grounded and credible

Rider on choosing the right spokesperson

I have had extensive media training and I can recognise strong communication as easily as I can spot poor media practice. That does not mean I should be the voice of any organisation. Every group needs to choose the person best suited to speak on its behalf, and that choice should be intentional.

A good spokesperson is someone who:
• stays calm under pressure, even when the questions are sharp
• can hold the key messages without drifting into emotion or frustration
• speaks clearly, briefly and without jargon
• understands the issue well enough to answer safely, but not so personally that they sound defensive
• sounds grounded, respectful and consistent across every interview
• remembers they are representing the group, not themselves

This person might be:
• someone with a calm, measured voice who doesn’t get rattled
• a committee member who is trusted internally and externally
• a community advocate who can explain complex issues in simple language
• a member who isn’t directly harmed by visibility, unlike others who may rely on Council approvals or services
• someone who naturally projects confidence without aggression

This spokesperson does not need to be the most senior person, the person with the most knowledge or the person who did the most work. They simply need to be the person who helps the group’s message land in a clear, credible and constructive way.

#Kiama #KiamaCouncil #CouncilAccountability #CommunityAdvocacy #MediaSkills #Framing #PublicCommunication #CommunityVoice #GovernanceMatters #Transparency #MessagingMatters #MediaTraining #OLG #CommunityRights #SpeakUpSafe

Author Lynne StrongPosted on December 7, 2025December 11, 2025Categories Behind the Byline, Citizen Journalism, Community Advocacy and GovernanceTags community advocacy tools, community rights and process, community voice and credibility, developer contributions transparency, essential media tools, evidence based advocacy, framing explained, how to talk to media, Kiama Council accountability, media skills for communities, negative framing risks, OLG complaints guidance, power imbalance and communication, Public Interest Journalism, staying in control of your story

What to say when Council stops listening and OLG needs to step in

Over the past few days a lot of people have contacted me asking the same question:


What is the best way to raise a concern with the Office of Local Government when Council will not resolve an issue?

Read the original blog post  for the pathway below

When residents need a guidebook to deal with their own Council

Here’s a simple guide to help you write a clear, effective complaint that the OLG can act on.

The most important thing

OLG cannot intervene just because something feels unfair. They step in when there’s evidence that Council has not followed its own policies or the NSW Local Government Act.
Your letter needs to show this plainly.

What to include

• A short summary of the issue, including the timeline
• What you asked Council to do and when
• Council’s response or lack of response
• The specific policy, procedure or legislation you believe Council has not followed. If you don’t know try Google
• Any documents, emails or screenshots that support your claim
• The outcome you are seeking
• Your contact details

Keep it factual, calm and organised.
This helps OLG assess whether the matter sits within their responsibilities.

Contact details for OLG

Email: olg@olg.nsw.gov.au
Phone: 02 4428 4100
Postal: Office of Local Government, Locked Bag 3015, Nowra NSW 2541

My suggestion is you email them, send them a snail mail copy and also send an email copy to your MP – in the case of Kiama that is Katelin McInerney

Kiama Electorate Office
A Ms Katelin McInerney, MP
102 Terralong Street
KIAMA NSW 2533
P (02) 4232 1082
F (02) 4232 3577
E kiama@parliament.nsw.gov.au

Why this matters

When the community follows a clear process, it is harder for any organisation to dismiss concerns or pretend the issue is complicated.
A well-written complaint demonstrates that residents know their rights and expect the standards set out in the Act to be upheld.

#OLG #LocalGovernment #CommunityRights #CouncilAccountability #Transparency #GoodGovernance #NSWOLG #CivicEngagement #KnowYourRights #CommunityAdvocacy

Author Lynne StrongPosted on December 7, 2025December 6, 2025Categories Behind the Byline, Citizen Journalism, Community Advocacy and GovernanceTags community advocacy, community rights, council accountability, governance matters, how to lodge a complaint, local government conduct, OLG complaints, resolve council issues

Councils rely on silence until a community remembers its voice

The three arrows represent the choices communities face when they encounter a council that holds all the authority and none of the curiosity. The left and right paths symbolise the familiar reactions that come with frustration, blame or fatigue. The path labelled Forward shows something different. It marks the moment a community steps out of the noise and moves with clarity and principle. Forward is the empowerment choice. It is the reminder that while we cannot control council’s behaviour, we can control how we act, how we respond, our character and how we treat others. It is the road that stays true to who we are.

When council forgets who the power belongs to

Power imbalance appears when a council begins to behave as if authority is ownership.
Information becomes selective. Access becomes conditional. The community is treated as an audience rather than the owner.

People feel the shift long before they name it. Straightforward questions turn into complicated pathways. Residents are managed instead of respected. Accountability starts to look optional.

How people get pushed toward the victim triangle

When the field is uneven, communities can slide into powerless roles. They feel dismissed or stonewalled and begin reacting from frustration, fatigue, or blame.
This is a predictable response to a system that holds all the levers.


The moment a community shifts from powerless to unstoppable

The way back is the empowerment triangle

Communities regain their footing when they centre the only things they control:
• how they act
• how they respond
• their character
• how they treat others

This is where agency settles in.
People organise. They ask precise questions. They document facts. They refuse drama. They stand in clarity rather than reaction.
The power imbalance may still exist, but it no longer defines the community’s stance.

 The simple principles that turn frustration into power

The shift that matters

Once people anchor themselves in principle, the dynamic changes.
Council can still try to shape the story or slow the process, but they cannot control a community that knows its rights, its voice, and its values.

The forward road belongs to all of us  –  if we make courage a shared act 
And even though some people cannot speak openly because they depend on Council, the community can still walk that road together. Forward is not the loudest choice, it is the principled one. It is how we hold our ground, protect each other and keep insisting on the standards our local government was meant to uphold.

#Kiama #CommunityVoice #GoodGovernance #Transparency #Empowerment #CivicEngagement #Accountability #LocalGovernment #PowerImbalance

I also acknowledge advocating/truth-telling at this level is easier for me. Once their actions forced me to leave a job I loved, I don’t rely on Council for anything, and I know many people who want to speak up but worry they will be punished for it. We all know examples of that happening in our community.

 

Author Lynne StrongPosted on December 6, 2025May 22, 2026Categories Abuse of Power, Behind the Byline, Citizen Journalism, Community Advocacy and Governance, Inspirational peopleTags civic agency, community empowerment, community rights, Council Transparency, empowerment model, governance matters, power imbalance, victim triangle

When residents need a guidebook to deal with their own Council

I am now getting at least one message a day from community members asking if I can help them raise concerns with Council because their own attempts have gone nowhere. Different people, different issues, the same story. Long silences. No clear answers. Doors closing instead of opening.

This is not how community engagement is meant to work.

And it should never have reached this point.

This pathway exists for difficult, complex issues.
It exists for serious failures of governance.
It exists for situations where the facts are unclear or the stakes are high.

It should not be necessary for something as simple as a community group asking what happened to their property.
It should not be necessary when the evidence is clear, the police report exists and the matter could have been resolved with one respectful conversation.

And yet here we are, building a guide for the community because a straightforward mistake became a maze.

Yes, it is sad that this is necessary.
But sunlight is a powerful thing.
The more people understand the system, the less the system can ignore them.

Where the community can go when Council will not resolve an issue

When a matter cannot be resolved directly with Council, there are proper pathways available.
The order matters because each agency plays a different role.

1. Office of Local Government (OLG)

This is always the first step.

OLG oversees how councils operate. They look at:
• governance
• fairness
• use of confidentiality
• whether councillors received accurate information
• whether proper process was followed
• whether the community was shut out

They must receive the complaint before any other body, because they decide whether the matter needs referral or review.

2. NSW Ombudsman

The Ombudsman becomes involved only after OLG has assessed the matter.

They examine administrative fairness, including:
• was the decision reasonable
• was the process appropriate
• did the community have a fair opportunity to be heard
• were decisions based on correct information

The Ombudsman does not overturn decisions.
They assess whether the system worked the way it was meant to.

3. Your local Member of Parliament

An MP cannot change a Council vote, but they can:
• ask questions
• seek clarification from the Minister
• request updates from OLG
• support community groups who feel excluded

Sometimes a single enquiry from an MP changes the tone completely.

4. NSW Police (when relevant)

Police involvement is appropriate only when:
• property has been lost
• facts are unclear
• a timeline needs to be confirmed

Police do not decide compensation or policy.
They clarify what happened so other processes can function.

5. Community Legal Centres NSW

For people needing independent advice on their rights, Community Legal Centres NSW and their local member centres remain a strong option. They offer free or low cost support and can help residents understand which laws or policies apply to their situation.

6. Media and community advocacy

Not the first choice for most groups, but a necessary one when all formal pathways lead to silence.

Media is effective when:
• the facts are clear
• the documentation is strong
• the group has acted in good faith

Community advocacy helps residents understand their rights and supports groups who feel dismissed.

See Essential Media Tools for Community Groups here

Why the order matters

Many people go straight to the Ombudsman.
The Ombudsman will send them back to OLG.

The correct sequence is:
Council → OLG → Ombudsman (if OLG decides it is appropriate)

Following the proper order avoids delays and gives the issue the best chance of being handled properly.

Rider

This information is based on my research and on the publicly available guidance for residents navigating unresolved Council matters.
If anyone has further insights, corrections or additional information that could help the community understand this pathway more clearly, please contact me.
My goal is accuracy, clarity and support for anyone who feels their issue has stalled.

#Kiama #KiamaCouncil #CommunityRights #LocalGovernmentNSW
#CouncilAccountability #GovernanceMatters #CommunityAdvocacy
#Transparency #PublicInterest #HaveYourSay #CivicEngagement

Author Lynne StrongPosted on December 5, 2025December 7, 2025Categories Behind the Byline, Citizen Journalism, Community Advocacy and GovernanceTags community accountability, know your rights, navigating council systems, power in knowledge, Share tags community roadmap, when council won’t act2 Comments on When residents need a guidebook to deal with their own Council

Posts pagination

Previous page Page 1 … Page 4 Page 5

SEARCH

Recent Posts

  • Devastated Cathy Wilcox fangirl is grieving because she is leaving
  • Before we explain One Nation voters, perhaps we should listen to them
  • Want to understand Pauline Hanson? Try Leadership 101
  • Agriculture wanted better storytellers. Then we blew up the model that made them
  • When democracy means more than Council making the decisions

Follow Blog via Email

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 1,391 other subscribers

Categories

Archives

  • Home
  • Empowering Sustainable and Just Futures
  • SynergyScape Solutions – Embracing the Grey – My Journey in Values and Communication
Clover Hill Diaries – Join Me and Be the Change Powered by WordPress.com.
Loading Comments...