I am really cranky—no, scratch that—I am livid.Why? Because Kiama Municipal Council has taken it upon themselves to include two of my articles in their report to the Australian Press Council and, as if that wasn’t enough, they’ve demanded that another one be taken down altogether.Let me give you some context.On July 9th, 2024, I wrote an article titled “Toxic times as council discredits dissent.” In it, I addressed what I saw as an ongoing campaign by our council to discredit dissenting voices within the community. The Council’s response? They claimed that my article didn’t provide a “fair and balanced representation of the facts” because they weren’t contacted for comment. As if that’s the real issue here.Then, there’s my July 6th article, “Courage and integrity.” This time, the Council’s beef is that I didn’t reach out to them regarding court costs in a Supreme Court matter involving Cr Renkema-Lang. They conveniently gloss over the fact that this same Council has wasted over hundreds of thousands of dollars of ratepayers’ money trying to silence a dissenting voice—a fact that somehow doesn’t require “balance” in their eyes.This week, my concerns have been verified in the most frustrating way possible.Kiama Councillors Jodi Keast, Kathy Rice, and Karen Renkema-Lang are demanding that Kiama Council release a letter from the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC), which informs the Council that ICAC will not investigate them. You read that right—the ICAC found no grounds to investigate, yet the Council has kept that under wraps, all while keeping a media release on their website proclaiming that these Councillors had been referred to ICAC. This is nothing short of a strategic move to suppress dissent, using the very systems meant to protect democracy to undermine it.This situation is a textbook example of what’s known as a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP)—a tactic where those in power use legal threats, or the burden of potential legal costs, to intimidate and silence critics. It’s not about winning the case; it’s about wearing down the opposition until they have no choice but to back down. The fact that our local Council is engaging in this kind of behaviour is not just disappointing—it’s downright infuriating.SLAPP suits are a plague on democracy. They are used to stifle free speech and quash public discourse, turning the legal system into a weapon against those who dare to speak up. And make no mistake, this isn’t just about me. It’s about every single person in our community who has the courage to stand up and say, “This isn’t right.”This latest episode, where the ICAC referral was quietly dismissed and yet kept from public knowledge, is just another layer of this toxic cake. Councillors Keast, Rice, and Renkema-Lang have every right to demand transparency, and the Council has every obligation to provide it.What we’re seeing here is a clear attempt to silence dissenting voices, to suppress the truth, and to manipulate the narrative to maintain control. It’s not just unethical—it’s dangerous. And it’s exactly why we need to keep fighting, keep writing, and keep speaking out. Because if we don’t, if we let them get away with this, we’re handing over the keys to our democracy to those who would rather keep us in the dark.So, yes, I’m livid. And I won’t be silenced. Not now, not ever.

In every community, there comes a time when the voices of its people rise up to speak truth to power, to defend the values and the environment they hold dear, and to push back against decisions that may not serve the collective good. These voices, often dismissed as dissent, are in fact the heartbeat of democracy, reminding those in power that governance is a responsibility, not a right.But what happens when these voices are systematically silenced? Why do those who hold power and control often fear the very community they are meant to serve? The recent history of community activism, from the Northern Rivers to our own backyards, offers a sobering insight into the lengths some will go to suppress the voices of the people.Take the case of Di Morrissey, the beloved Australian author who took a stand against a controversial development in the Northern Rivers. Morrissey, like many others, recognised the potential harm that large-scale developments could inflict on the environment and the character of the community. She used her platform to rally support and bring attention to an issue that mattered deeply to local residents. But in return, she faced a barrage of legal threats and bureaucratic obstacles that eventually forced her to step back. Her story is not just about one woman's fight against development; it is about the broader struggle to maintain a space for community voices in the face of overwhelming power.Yet, there are stories of communities fighting back and winning, proving that collective action and public support can indeed challenge even the most formidable adversaries. A shining example of this is Crikey’s recent battle with the Murdoch press. In 2022, Crikey published an article implicating Lachlan Murdoch in the dangerous rhetoric surrounding the January 6 Capitol riots. What followed was a defamation lawsuit filed by Murdoch himself, aiming to silence Crikey's critical voice.But instead of backing down, Crikey took the fight to the people. They turned to their readers and the broader community, crowd-sourcing the funds needed for their legal defence. What emerged was not just financial support but a groundswell of public voices rallying behind Crikey's right to free speech and fearless journalism. The power of these combined efforts was undeniable. In the end, Lachlan Murdoch walked away from the lawsuit, a significant victory for independent media and a powerful testament to what communities can achieve when they come together.These examples, from Morrissey's quieted activism to Crikey's triumphant stand, highlight a critical question: Why do those in power fear community voices? Perhaps it’s because these voices represent something uncontrollable and unpredictable. They embody the collective will of the people, a force that can challenge established power structures and demand accountability. They are a fundamental reminder that the community, when united, holds real power.But the efforts to silence us should only strengthen our resolve. For every Di Morrissey who is pressured into silence, there are countless others ready to take up the mantle. For every attempt to suppress our voices, there is an opportunity to come together, louder and stronger than before.The message to those who seek to silence us is clear: the more you try to quiet the community, the more you reveal your fear of its power. And that power, once awakened, is not easily subdued.As we move forward, let us remember the importance of our collective voice. Let us continue to speak out, to organise, and to demand that those in power listen—not because we seek conflict, but because we seek a community that is just, equitable, and sustainable for all.In the end, the question isn't why they fear us, but why we must never stop speaking up. For when the community is silent, power goes unchecked, and the very fabric of our democracy begins to unravel.So, let us continue to raise our voices. Let us continue to fight for what is right. And let us never forget that the power of the community is the foundation upon which all true change is built. 

In a world awash with political slogans and campaign promises, it is worth asking: do we really need the glitz and glamour of catchy phrases to understand who we are voting for? While local elections in Australia often lack the dramatic flair of their international counterparts, does this make it harder for us to feel connected to or informed about the candidates vying for our votes?The contrast with the United States could not be starker. Take the recent Democratic National Convention in Chicago. Outside the venue, a bold sign proclaimed, “A New Way Forward,” echoing Kamala Harris’s campaign trail rhetoric. It was a phrase designed to inspire hope and signal change, reminiscent of the slogans that have defined U.S. presidential campaigns for decades. By the time Barack Obama took the stage, urging the crowd to chant “yes she can,” it was clear the audience felt swept up in the fervour—a reminder of the powerful role that well-crafted messaging can play in shaping political narratives.Meanwhile, back home, the press handles our local elections in a vastly different manner. Coverage tends to be more subdued, focusing on practical, community-based issues rather than the grandiose visions we see splashed across American headlines. But this quieter approach raises an important question: does the lack of intense media scrutiny and political commentary impact our ability to truly get to know the candidates?Without the spectacle and saturation coverage, it can be challenging for voters to form strong impressions of who is standing for office. The issues may be closer to home, but are we as informed about them as we could be? It is a question worth pondering, especially when local elections determine who will be making decisions that directly affect our daily lives.It is not about the catchphrase, but about who is genuinely prepared to represent our best interests.

Opinion piece by Lynne Strong As we approach the upcoming council elections, it's vital that we think about what makes our community not just functional, but truly liveable. Liveability isn't just about having our rubbish collected on time or fixing a parking issue – it's about creating a place where we all thrive, where our environment supports our wellbeing, and where we feel connected and valued.Some groups are focusing on single issues, like waste management or parking, which, while important, only address immediate needs. However, true liveability requires a broader vision. It involves thinking about how our community will evolve over the next decade and ensuring that we’re planning for a future that enhances our quality of life.What we really need are councillors who understand that improving liveability means addressing current issues with a view to the future – ensuring our community remains vibrant, sustainable, and welcoming for years to come.Let’s encourage our candidates to discuss liveability in ways that everyone can understand, and to present plans that aren’t just about today, but about the kind of community we want to live in tomorrow.To kick off, here’s a couple of questions you could ask to cut through the noise and help you sort out the big picture leaders from the small issues fixers. "How do you plan to ensure that our community remains liveable and sustainable over the next 10 to 20 years, beyond addressing immediate concerns like waste management or parking?""How would you approach making decisions that might be unpopular in the short term but are necessary for the long-term liveability of our community?"

It’s a sad day when fear trumps public engagement, and yet that’s exactly what I’ve been hearing from many residents of our community. Over the past few weeks, as the deadline for submissions to the Council's draft Growth and Housing Strategy approached, I had countless conversations with people who wanted to contribute their thoughts and ideas but hesitated. The reason? Fear. Not fear of the Council or fear of change, but fear of backlash—from their friends, neighbours, or, worse yet, the faceless keyboard warriors who have made our public discourse increasingly toxic. This should be a time for open debate, where everyone can share their vision for Kiama’s future. Yet, the rise of online hostility and a divisive culture has silenced too many voices. When people are afraid to speak up, we all lose—the Council misses out on diverse perspectives, and our community loses the chance to shape its future collectively. We must ask ourselves: What kind of community are we building if people feel they can’t participate? The strength of Kiama lies in its diversity, and it’s crucial that our future is shaped by all voices, not just the loudest or most intimidating. It’s easy to say that we should all stand up and be counted, to encourage more people to submit their thoughts and ideas without fear. But it’s much harder to change the culture that has made so many people hesitant to speak up. In the end, our community thrives when all opinions are heard. Let’s not allow fear to silence the very voices that make Kiama unique.

OpinionIn the wake of recent developments where three of our councillors have been reported to the ICAC, it is important to consider integrity in local governance.The ICAC Chief Commissioner’s timely reminder about the perils of ‘weaponising’ former and current electoral contenders, serves as a  warning to all.ICAC investigates genuine instances of corruption and ensures accountability in the public sector. However, if  the Commission is manipulated for political ends, it becomes a tool not of justice, but of electoral strategy.This misuse may damage individual reputations and it risks undermining the democratic process and eroding public trust in our local institutions.It is incumbent upon all candidates and councillors seeking re-election, to uphold the principles of fairness, transparency, and integrity.Our town has long been a strong supporter of good governance, where transparency is not just a goal but a daily practice.We must do more to reaffirm our commitment to these values.For voters, this is a moment to be particularly vigilant. The choice we make at the ballot box should reflect not just our hopes for the future, but our commitment to integrity in public office.Looking ahead, our local government must seize this opportunity to rebuild lost trust. One way to achieve this is through close collaboration with the ICAC to provide comprehensive training for elected officials, so they are well-versed in ethical governance and the importance of maintaining the public’s trust.These measures will not only prevent future missteps but also reinforce Kiama’s reputation as a town that values integrity above all else.While the ICAC remains a vital institution for safeguarding public integrity, it is ultimately up to us, the community, to ensure that its powers are not misappropriated.The strength and legitimacy of our local government, and the trust that we as residents place in it, depends on our commitment to these principles. 

Time is running out to make your voice heard! The Kiama community has a unique chance to influence the future through the Draft Growth and Housing Strategy, but the window for input is closing fast. This plan aims to meet housing targets while ensuring sustainable development. Does it follow best practices in urban planning? The Bugle urges you to act now - consider if our strategy aligns with top urban planning principles and have your say before it’s too late.The Bugle presents thoughtful reflections on our community's future. Does the plan support diverse and affordable housing options? Are we addressing the needs of service workers, couples without children, and our ageing population?Is there a focus on clustering retail and commercial spaces to boost job creation and reduce travel demand? Are local services being planned effectively?Does the strategy incorporate passive solar design, promote active solar energy use, and reduce the heat island effect with light-coloured roofs and street trees? Are green spaces and recreational areas being prioritised?Are we fostering partnerships with State and Federal Governments, community housing providers, developers, and the community to ensure continuous engagement and successful implementation?While the Kiama Draft Growth and Housing Strategy sets a solid foundation, it’s crucial to evaluate whether it truly reflects best practices in sustainable urban planning. Your input is vital in shaping a vibrant and resilient Kiama. Have your say by 16 August here.

Opinion by Lynne StrongThe Kiama Community has a unique opportunity to shape the future of our region through the Kiama Draft Growth and Housing Strategy. This strategy outlines how we plan to meet our housing supply targets and ensure sustainable and responsive delivery of housing for our growing and changing community. But does it reflect best practice in urban planning? The Bugle invites the community to consider whether our strategy aligns with the best principles identified in urban planning.Developing compact, walkable, and diverse mixed-use towns is crucial. This includes grid street layouts, promoting pedestrian linkages, and ensuring streets leading to town centres support walking and active transportation. Does our draft strategy promote the development of neighbourhoods that minimise car dependency and support active transportation? Are we ensuring that new developments are walkable and well-connected?Ensuring housing diversity and affordability is essential. This includes provisions for smaller homes with longer design lifespans, housing options for service workers, and plans for ageing in place. Does our strategy include specific measures to encourage diverse and affordable housing options? Are we catering to the needs of service workers, couples without children and providing options for our growing ageing population?Integrating infrastructure and services is vital. This means clustering retail and commercial uses to maximise job creation and ensuring local availability of essential services to reduce travel demand. Are we planning for the development of local service and trade businesses?Environmental sustainability is key. Incorporating passive solar design principles, encouraging active solar energy production and storage, and reducing the heat island effect with light-coloured roofs and large deciduous street trees are essential steps. Does our strategy incorporate these environmental sustainability measures? Are we planning for green spaces and recreational areas that promote community well-being and environmental health?Successful implementation requires ongoing open conversations and partnerships with State and Federal Governments, community housing providers, private developers, and the community. Are we fostering a collaborative approach that includes all stakeholders? Is there a commitment to continuous engagement and partnership to ensure our actions meet the community's needs?The Kiama Draft Growth and Housing Strategy sets a promising framework for accommodating growth and meeting our housing supply targets. However, it's crucial to reflect on whether it encompasses best practices in sustainable urban planning.Your input is invaluable. As we strive to create a sustainable, vibrant, and resilient Kiama, we need your feedback to ensure our strategy truly reflects best practice in urban planning. Let’s work together to shape the future of Kiama. Have your say here. 

Opinion by Lynne Strong Let’s be honest, statistics can be a bit of a snooze-fest. Percentages, projections, and demographics - these terms aren’t exactly the life of the party. But here’s the thing: without these stats, planning for Kiama’s future is like trying to navigate through a thick fog with no compass. You’re flying blind.Did you know Kiama’s population is projected to grow by 33 percent over the next 20 years? That’s 7,757 new friends, neighbours, and community members. It’s like inviting the entire population of a small town to join us. But without knowing this, how can we plan for enough houses, schools, and services?By 2044, we’ll need 3,456 new homes. That’s about 180 houses a year. Without tracking these needs, we might end up with a housing shortage, skyrocketing prices, and people struggling to find a place to live. We don’t want Kiama to become an exclusive club with an impossible entry fee, right?Our community is getting older, with a median age of 48 years and 36 percent of our population already over 60. In the next two decades, this silver wave will continue to grow. Planning for this isn’t just about more bingo nights (though we love those); it’s about ensuring there are suitable homes and services to support our elderly residents.Currently, 57 percent of our workers commute out of Kiama. That’s a lot of time and money spent on travel. By understanding this, we can push for more local job opportunities, reducing the commute and keeping the community thriving right here at home. But here’s a surprising and somewhat concerning stat that only 0.6 percent of our population uses public transport. This not only increases traffic congestion and greenhouse gas emissions but also highlights the need for better public transport options. Without knowing this, we might miss the chance to advocate for improvements, leaving many reliant on cars.Knowing our vulnerabilities, like flood-prone areas and bushfire risks, isn’t just a detail to skim over. It’s crucial for safe housing development. Imagine building a beautiful home only to find it’s in a high-risk flood zone. Not ideal.With 32 percent of renter households experiencing housing stress, it’s clear we need more affordable rental options. Knowing this helps us push for policies that can alleviate this stress and make Kiama a more inclusive place to live.Sure, tracking these stats might seem tedious, but it’s the key to making informed decisions. It’s like using a GPS instead of wandering aimlessly. By keeping an eye on our progress, we can adjust our course and ensure Kiama continues to grow in a way that benefits everyone.So, next time you hear about housing percentages or population projections, remember - they’re more than just boring numbers. On September 14 when we elect councilors, look for a long history of innovation and real-world experience, so we have a chance to be a leader in growth and housing strategy across the world.

OPINION:Yesterday’s community meeting at the Jamberoo Youth Hall, hosted by the Jamberoo Valley Ratepayers and Residents Association (JVRRA), was a pivotal moment for our town. This event was a testament to what well-organised community groups can achieve. As residents, we had the unique opportunity to engage directly with the key stakeholders involved in the Golden Valley Stage 2 proposal, part of the Kiama Council Draft Growth and Housing Strategy.  This meeting not only provided a platform for information exchange but also demonstrated the power of proactive community involvement. “With the release of the Council’s Draft Growth and Housing Strategy, JVRRA wanted to be on the front foot by assisting our local community to be well-informed of the issues associated with the Draft Growth & Housing Strategy that will have an impact on Jamberoo,” said Stuart Richards, President of JVRRA.The meeting started with a presentation by Ros Neilsen from JVRRA, who provided a summary of the Draft Growth & Housing Strategy, particularly how the strategy will impact Jamberoo in the future. The aim is to assist the local community in making their submissions to the Council on the strategy. This was followed by Jennifer Macquarie from the Fountaindale Group, who explained the concept for the Golden Valley Stage 2 site. She elaborated that the concept plan is based on understanding Jamberoo’s specific needs and constraints, such as limited housing choice, limited sewer capacity, the tenuous viability of local services and businesses, and the critical need for a new preschool. The plan adapts to trends towards lower carbon footprints and energy bills while creating a community that is socially, economically, and environmentally sustainable through a diverse housing mix to match local needs, population numbers to sustain local services, and design principles that encourage passive solar home design.“The Fountaindale Group valued presenting its Golden Valley Stage 2 proposal to the Jamberoo community. The Council's Draft Housing and Growth Strategy identifies suitable properties but lacks detailed plans, usually addressed during rezoning. Our ideas for Stage 2 include diverse housing and significant community benefits like a community garden, green spaces, and land grants for a preschool. Early discussions will help us understand community preferences and convey our constraints, fostering respectful collaboration,” said Jennifer Macquarie from the Fountaindale Group. During the Q & A session, several key points were addressed. The sewer infrastructure improvements required for the new development will primarily be funded by the developer, with potential contributions from Sydney Water. Concerns about the timing and certainty of the preschool relocation were raised, highlighting the need for early action to address flooding risks. The voluntary planning agreement mechanism was explained, ensuring that community benefits are legally secured and transferred with the property. Questions about the impact of smaller lot sizes on the broader community were clarified, emphasising that changes would be specific to the proposed development area. The importance of considering infrastructure contributions from developers for traffic calming measures was discussed, with an explanation of the council's process for assessing and funding these needs. Overall, the community showed interest in the proposed development, particularly the benefits it could bring, while also raising concerns about infrastructure, timing, and maintaining the character of Jamberoo. One Jamberoo resident with small children expressed enthusiasm for the proposal: "I think it looks amazing. I'm excited to be able to drive into Jamberoo and see the new preschool under the fig trees. I'm excited there will be new green spaces, a walking track, that the creek will be revegetated and there will be a park where my children can ride their bikes. I love that there's a variety of different size blocks. I love that there's smaller blocks that potentially some of my friends will be able to afford. I love the community garden and the extra entrance off Allowrie Street will reduce traffic. I'm keen to be a part of this." Stuart Richards from the JVRRA commented that the meeting provided clear affirmation of the community’s role in the planning process. This is significant because it empowered residents by giving them the opportunity to voice their opinions and see their concerns taken seriously, fostering a sense of ownership and responsibility towards community development. Additionally, the presence of developers ensured accountability, as they were able to directly address concerns and clarify plans, which helps build trust and transparency. As I reflected on this meeting, it’s clear that such forums are invaluable for the community. To maintain this momentum, the council should provide regular updates on the proposal’s progress and any agreed-upon changes, keeping the community informed and involved. Organising follow-up meetings will ensure ongoing dialogue and integral community input. By continuing to ask questions, raise concerns, and hold developers and council representatives accountable, we can ensure our voices are heard and acted upon, paving the way for a vibrant and thriving Jamberoo. Trust is also essential and believing that everyone involved wants the best outcomes for the community helps set realistic expectations. Focusing on achievable goals through collaboration, transparency, and informed participation can shape a future that reflects the aspirations and values of Jamberoo residents. By staying informed and engaged, we can continue building momentum, fostering a community where every voice is heard, and every stakeholder is committed to the collective good.

We have seen three censure motions against councillors – one for abuse by Councillor Mark Croxford – with Karen Renkema-Lang defeating her politically motivated censure. Neither The Bugle nor the public knows the name or charge against the third councillor.Councillors Karen Renkema-Lang, Kathy Rice and Jodi Keast, were referred by council to the Independent Commission Against Corruption. They have denied any wrongdoing. The three women fought against the Council’s groupthink and for that, they were punished. Turn clocks back 100 years.As CEO Jane Stroud said, “I hold specific concerns and worry about the worsening functionality of the Council, when in uncertain times and unchartered territory, what is really required is cohesive and collective effort to correct the course of the organisation.”Bravo. It was a shame she sided with the blokes (except Matt Brown who abstained), and in a classic case of shooting the messenger at the 16 July council meeting, the Council referred The Bugle to the Australian Press Council.The Bugle is guilty of reporting the Bonaira fiasco, draft after draft of Council’s corrected accounts, the pros and cons of ocean wind farms, reporting the dodgy Loves Bay development, council’s lack of parking policy and much more.Let us compare the recent tactics of Clr Mark Andrew Croxford with those of Senator Joseph McCarthy, a little-known junior senator from Wisconsin until 1950.McCarthy claimed the US Department of State was riddled with communists as the Cold War raged. Using the same tactics, Croxford has conducted his own witch hunt for the name of the owner of The Bugle.He created a context of mounting fear and paranoia in the council executive demanding – as if this was in the public interest – to know if property developers had inveigled their way into The Bugle.In fact, Council already knew the owner had bought the newspaper more than a year before. The owner is a businesswoman writer, not a property developer.This did not stop Croxford. Are or have you ever been associated with property developers?Croxford’s comments on the Council floor on 16 July, contained the imputation that the owner takes ‘cash for comments’ from developers. This contemptible suggestion goes to the very heart of integrity and reputation. It is libellous and motivated by malice.He has not offered one scintilla of evidence to support his claims. Not then, not now.The owner had a legitimate right to privacy. That’s why we have the Privacy Act. This sort of bullying does not go over well with women. Is this the sort of person you want on the council?To compound the libel, Mr Croxford published a series of Facebook posts which held The Bugle, its owner and staff, up to ridicule and contempt by fair-minded readers.He accused Lynne Strong’s opinion article in The Bugle, "Is Our Council Structure Fit for Purpose?" of being an example of psychological propaganda used in war. Really? I mean, really?Ms Strong was the 2017 Australia Day Ambassador and an Australian of the Year nominee. Her awards and credentials are compelling.Further, at the same council meeting, with his mind on the September council elections, Croxford asked the CEO a raft of politically motivated questions about who was to blame for the Blue Haven Bonaira fiasco.He is fighting for transparency and accountability. He won’t stop until someone is burnt at the stake.Two can play the fear game and you will find this fact grounded in the council’s Long Term Financial Plan 2024-2025 to 2033-2034. In scenario two, which the council downplays, there is the option of a special rate variation of 10 per cent in 2026-2027 on top of the normal rate peg. That’s a rate fee of around 14 per cent.Let me give Croxford a hand because this council has swum from the Titanic to the Marie Celeste and is spent.In a confidential council report of the Director of Finance (21 November 2017), it included the risk profile of building Bonaira.Bonaira build risk assessment, Kiama CouncilIt shows all three tenders were high risk (in red) and the companies seeking to throw risk back on to the Council. What did the successful Tier 1 builder of Bonaira, do in the final stages of the tender to win it?Apparently, according to the document, a meeting was held with council and the awarded contractor  on 7 December 2017 and, “all high risk items raised by Council have since been resolved.”A Council spokesperson said it had, “looked into this and there’s not anything further we can supply, except the information you’ve already sourced that is on the public record.”The builder of Blue Haven Bonaira is now facing legal action by council. Join the queue.The Kiama Council quoted Thomas Jefferson in its 2023 mid-year review who said, “The government you elect is the government you deserve.”On the 14 September council elections, be the Administrator and elect the government you deserve.

Opinion piece The Bugle is committed to maintaining the highest standards of professionalism and respect in the community. In this spirit, I draw attention to recent concerns regarding Councillor Croxford's reported comments on social media. It is my understanding that these remarks have raised questions about adherence to the Kiama Municipal Council Media Policy and the Model Code of Conduct for Local Councils in NSW. This article aims to address the broader issue of professional conduct and respectful communication among our elected officials, rather than targeting any individual personally. In light of recent discussions, concerns have been raised regarding comments made by Clr Croxford on social media. It is my understanding that these comments, which reportedly referred to dissenters as “lazy”, “uninformed” and “insignificant mental pygmies”, have sparked questions about adherence to the Kiama Municipal Council Media Policy and the Model Code of Conduct for Local Councils in NSW.The Kiama Municipal Council Media Policy, endorsed on 19 March 2024, outlines clear principles and standards for media engagement by Council officials. At the heart of the policy are principles such as openness, consistency, accuracy, and timeliness, which are designed to ensure that all communications with the media are conducted in a manner that upholds the Council’s integrity and reputation.Key points of concern regarding these reported comments include:Principles of media engagement:Openness: The policy emphasises the importance of promoting an open exchange of information between the Council and the media. Derogatory language does not support an open or respectful dialogue.Consistency and accuracy: Ensuring consistent and accurate representation in media communications is crucial. Personal attacks and inflammatory language undermine the integrity and reliability of our communications.Standards of conduct when engaging with the media:Defamatory and offensive language: Council officials must not share information or make comments that could be considered defamatory, offensive, humiliating, threatening, or intimidating to other Council officials or members of the public.Harassment and bullying: Comments must not constitute harassment and/or bullying. The use of derogatory remarks could be perceived as bullying.Professionalism and respect: All media engagement by Council officials must be conducted in a professional, timely, and respectful manner.Councillors’ conduct:Reputation: Councillors must not bring the organisation or its employees into disrepute through any form of media commentary.Resolving differences privately: Councillors should endeavour to resolve personal differences privately and must not prosecute them publicly through the media.These guidelines underscore the expectation for Council officials to communicate in a manner that is respectful, professional, and reflective of the Council's values. The use of language perceived as derogatory not only undermines these principles but also damages the trust and confidence that the community places in its elected representatives.As members of the Kiama community, it is imperative that we hold our Council officials accountable to the highest standards of conduct. The Council's commitment to professional and respectful communication is essential in maintaining the integrity and effectiveness of our local government.We urge the Council to review this matter and take appropriate action to ensure adherence to the established Media Policy. By doing so, we can reaffirm our commitment to transparent, respectful, and professional communication that serves the best interests of our community.