As a writer who covers CIVICS and a local resident, I’ve been asking questions about Kiama Council’s approach to community engagement, especially when residents offer practical solutions and receive polite obstruction in return.
Last week, I wrote a blog highlighting two examples. Both were factual, and supported by publicly available correspondence between Council and a local advocacy group. The blog asked a simple question: why does it feel like some responses are more about ending conversations than opening them?
Apparently, it resonated so much that I’ve now received a formal request from Council asking me to remove the blog’s links to two staff emails. Emails sent to a local community group raising infrastructure and safety concerns on behalf of residents.
In other words, Council has responded to a blog about shutting down dialogue… by asking me to shut down the dialogue.
Let that settle in.
It’s hard not to be struck by the irony. If your first instinct is to send a takedown request in response to a piece about bureaucratic defensiveness, you’re not disproving the point. You’re living it.
I’m not sharing confidential HR matters. I’m not making personal attacks. I’m quoting Council’s own words – words sent to community members seeking answers.
So what’s the problem?
Transparency is not a threat.
It’s a responsibility.
The deeper concern is not the legal letter, it’s what the letter reveals. A culture more concerned with narrative control than community collaboration. A pattern where criticism is met not with curiosity, but with consequence.
You’d think someone would pause and say, ‘Hang on… does sending this legal letter prove their point?’ But that’s the problem. When power becomes about protecting ego, not serving people, logic leaves the room. And fear takes the pen.
That’s not how trust is built.
It’s how it’s broken.
The emails in question were sent to an advocacy group representing residents. They are part of a public conversation about public infrastructure. That Council is now reading and responding to these blogs is encouraging.
But if that response is to silence instead of engage, it raises a bigger question:
What kind of leadership sees transparency as a problem to be managed?
This isn’t about one person or one decision. It’s about the choices we all make when we’re in a position of influence.
To the Councillors and staff reading this:
You don’t need to agree with every word I write. But you do have a choice about how you respond.
You can react with fear.
Or you can reflect with courage.You can defend the optics.
Or you can start fixing the culture.
The door remains open. Not because I’m obliged to hold it, but because I believe in the community on the other side.
BTW Great article by Peter Hartcher
Narrative is all – Democracy, they believe, dies amid induced dementia.
#KiamaCouncil #LocalDemocracy #CivicCourage #AccountabilityMatters #TransparencyNow #CouncilWatch #FreeSpeech #CommunityVoice #PublicParticipation #StandUpSpeakOut