Every community conversation reveals patterns. Some are constructive. Some are revealing. And sometimes the contrast between past behaviour and present claims becomes impossible to ignore.
Recently, on Facebook, former Kiama mayor Neil Reilly responded to one of my posts in a way that questioned my integrity. His comments were the only personal remarks made in the entire thread. All other community members stayed focused on the issue at hand, which was the impact the Akuna Street development will have on Kiama’s CBD.
What makes this notable is not the comment itself, but the context.
Several readers have reminded me of something important. In 2019, Kiama Council formally censured Councillor Neil Reilly under the Code of Conduct. This is a matter of public record. The investigation substantiated multiple allegations, including social media comments that were disparaging of Councillors and disparaging of Council staff.
The relevant report is found in the Council agenda of 22 October 2019.
It documents:
• social media comments that were disparaging of Council
• comments that were disparaging of other Councillors
• comments that were disrespectful to staff
• conduct that brought Council into disrepute
These findings make his comments to me in 2025 all the more striking.
On one hand, the public record shows he was formally censured for disparaging comments about Councillors and staff. On the other hand, years later, he is telling the community that questioning Council decisions is “disrespectful” and that raising concerns is inappropriate.
The Bugle’s December 2023 article also raised serious concerns about the way Mayor Neil Reilly publicly characterised Councillor Karen Renkema Lang’s comments to ABC Radio. The article shows he initiated the complaint that led to her censure, despite her simply raising community concerns about the Blue Haven reclassification and incomplete or unclear information provided to Councillors. His public statements criticised her personally, yet the ABC audio makes clear she neither blamed staff nor claimed to speak for Council. This pattern of misrepresenting legitimate scrutiny sits uncomfortably beside what happened next, when the Supreme Court found her censure to be invalid and Kiama Council was ordered to pay more than two hundred thousand dollars in legal costs, as reported by the ABC.
and lets not forget As reported in the Sydney Morning Herald
So a clear pattern emerges.
- 2016 “inappropriate” text messages
- In 2019 he was formally censured for disparaging remarks about fellow Councillors and staff.
- In 2023 he pursued a censure of Councillor Karen Renkema Lang that was later found to be invalid, costing ratepayers more than two hundred thousand dollars in legal fees.
- And in 2025 he chose to question my integrity rather than answer a straightforward planning question about parking and CBD disruption.
This is not about personalities.
It is not about revisiting old grievances.
It is about consistency and credibility.
When someone with a history of breaching Council’s Code of Conduct for disparaging comments, and someone whose actions have cost the community hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees, publicly accuses others of disrespect, it raises a reasonable question.
What standard is being applied, and why does it only seem to apply when the questions are directed at them?
For me, the issue remains the same as it always has been.
The community has the right to ask questions.
The community has the right to expect answers.
And the community has the right to be treated with respect by anyone who has held public office.
Accountability is not a one way street.
Respect is not selective.
And the public record matters.
Please see my blog post responding to former Mayor Neil Reilly’s Facebook comments here
#KiamaCommunity #Accountability #PublicRecord #LeadershipMatters #CommunityFirst #AkunaStreet #KiamaCBD #RespectInPublicLife