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

Tag: public record

Kiama locals have a chance to make Council listen, use it

The Kiama Municipal Council  Draft Delivery Program and Operational Plan 2026 to 27 is open for submissions. Here’s why this one needs your voice and how five minutes of your time can make it harder for our council to pretend nobody cared.

You have until 24 May 2026 to be on record. After that, you handed your say to someone else.

Every four years, a newly elected council makes promises to the community. The Delivery Program is where those promises get written down, funded and turned into actual actions. The Operational Plan is the year by year version, spelling out exactly what gets done, when, and what it costs.

This is not a planning document for planners. This is the document that decides whether the footpath outside your house gets fixed, whether the community program your kids rely on keeps running, whether council is actually spending your rates on what it said it would.

The NSW Office of Local Government sets out what a Delivery Program must contain. It must demonstrate commitment to the community. It must show how services will be prioritised and measured. It must address ongoing improvements to efficiency, financial management and governance. It must identify services council will review during its term.

This draft falls short of those requirements. This is a question of whether the document meets the standard it is legally required to meet.

“If your accountant handed you a budget this vague, you would find a new accountant. Kiama deserves better than this.”

This is your moment. Your name belongs on this. Get in the room

Maybe you’ve submitted before. Maybe you’ve spoken at meetings, written letters, shown up. And maybe it felt like your words went nowhere.

Submissions that name specific items, in your own words, from real residents, create a paper trail that cannot be buried. They go on the public record. They get read aloud at meetings. They become evidence.

And if you’ve never done it before and don’t know where to start, that’s exactly why this post exists. We’ll walk you through it, step by step. It’s simpler than you think.

Look at the draft sitting on the council website right now. See that word: UPDATED.

That happened because people spoke up, council listened, and the plan changed. This is exactly how it is supposed to work. And it worked here, in Kiama, because residents chose to show up.

So when you submit this time, you are adding your name to something that is already moving. You are part of a community that has already proved it can shift things.

And there is a second reason, just as important. Every submission goes on the public record. If any decision in this plan is later challenged, reviewed, or examined by the Office of Local Government, by a journalist, or by a future council, your submission is proof that the community was paying attention. That the people of Kiama saw this, understood it, and said something about it.

That record belongs to all of us. Make sure your name is in it.

Check  yoursay.kiama.nsw.gov.au for confirmed dates as these can shift.

What to write

You don’t need to be a planner, a lawyer, or a political scientist. You need to be a resident who has noticed something.

Here’s a simple submission template (adapt freely)

  1. Who you are. Your name and suburb. If you want to remain anonymous to the public but not council, say so. You can request your name be withheld from published submissions.
  2.  What you’re responding to. Name the specific item, project, or section of the plan you’re commenting on. Vague submissions are easier to dismiss.
  3.  What you want changed or protected. Are you asking for something to be added? Removed? Better resourced? More transparent in its reporting? Be specific.
  4.  Why it counts. One or two sentences. This is your voice. Use everyday language. 
  5.  What you’d like council to do. End with a clear ask. “I ask council to…” is a sentence that’s hard to ignore in a formal process.

Things worth asking about

When council says it will improve community wellbeing, how will anyone know if that actually happened? What does success look like in a way a normal person can check?

When a commitment in this plan is not delivered, what happens? Who is responsible and what does the community get told about it?

When plans change mid year, how do residents find out? Is there a phone call, a letter, a post on Facebook? Or does it just get dropped without a word?

The plan talks about financial recovery. But is this council on track for long term financial sustainability, or just a one year result that looks good on paper? A single year back in the black is not a strategy. The community deserves to know the difference.

What does the executive leadership of this council cost, and how is that performance measured and reported to residents?

Is the community engagement in this plan genuine, or is it a checklist? What changes when the community says something council does not want to hear?

If those questions don’t have clear answers in the plan, that’s your submission.

The plan doesn’t just describe what council will do. It describes what council thinks the community will accept.

Should this plan go back to the drawing board?

Yes. And you are allowed to say so.

The NSW Office of Local Government sets out what a Delivery Program must contain. It must demonstrate commitment to the community. It must show how services will be prioritised and measured. It must address ongoing improvements to efficiency, financial management and governance. It must identify services council will review during its term. This draft falls short of those requirements.

Councillors have the power to send this back for a rewrite before it is adopted. This is exactly what the process exists for. If you believe this plan is not good enough, tell council this. Tell your councillors this. Use these words:

“I ask council to defer adoption of this plan and rewrite it to meet the requirements set out by the NSW Office of Local Government.”

More voices, harder to ignore

Individual submissions are powerful. Collective submissions are formidable. Both count.

If you have neighbours, friends, or a local group who share your concerns, coordinate. Not to copy each other (unique submissions carry more weight), to ensure the same theme appears multiple times from multiple people. That volume is hard to dismiss as a fringe view.

Share this post. Print it. Leave it where people will see it.  The consultation period is short. The plan is long. But you don’t need to read all of it. You just need to find the part that affects your street, your family, your community, and say something about it.

That’s democracy. And it works best when people actually use it.

How to submit

1. Visit yoursay.kiama.nsw.gov.auand find the Draft Delivery Program 2026 to 27 listing.
2. Download the draft plan. You don’t need to read all of it. Use the search function to find topics relevant to you.
3. Submit via the online form, or by email to council@kiama.nsw.gov.au AND councillors@kiama.nsw.gov.au.
4. Keep a copy of your submission so you can to refer to it later.
Your name on the record is harder to ignore than your opinion on Facebook
UPDATE – a great deal has happened since I wrote this post. A week can make a big diference to the political landcape. Get the lowdown here
Author Lynne StrongPosted on May 12, 2026May 22, 2026Categories Abuse of Power, Behind the Byline, Citizen Journalism, Community Advocacy and GovernanceTags civic participation, community consultation, community voice, council accountability, democracy starts local, five minutes for democracy, Kiama Council, Kiama locals, local democracy, local government transparency, Performance Improvement Order, public record, public submissions, residents on the record, silence is consent, Your Say Kiama

Respect is not selective. Accountability applies to everyone

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

Source  

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

Author Lynne StrongPosted on November 17, 2025November 22, 2025Categories Abuse of Power, Behind the Byline, Citizen JournalismTags Accountability, Akuna Street, CBD disruption, Code of Conduct, community discussion, community voice, Kiama Council, Leadership, Neil Reilly Kiama, public record2 Comments on Respect is not selective. Accountability applies to everyone

SEARCH

Recent Posts

  • Daily News Roundup – 4 June 2026
  • The Paddock That Grew Nothing
  • Daily News Round Up – 24 May 2026
  • The Building Is the Thing
  • A Little Shout-Out to Kiama Library

Follow Blog via Email

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

Join 1,387 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...