The Local Government Act 2020 establishes a councillor conduct framework that provides a clear hierarchy for the management of councillor conduct issues.
Under the councillor conduct framework:
- complaints of misconduct by a councillor are heard and determined under the council’s internal arbitration process by an independent arbiter
- complaints of serious misconduct by a councillor are heard and determined by councillor conduct panels
- allegations of gross misconduct are dealt with by the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT).
The framework is designed to establish clear standards of conduct expected to be observed by councillors and to provide timely, fair and proportionate intervention in relation to councillor conduct issues.
Local Government Victoria, in consultation with the principal councillor conduct registrar, has developed a series of Fact Sheets to provide general guidance to councils and councillors about the councillor conduct framework processes.
Fact Sheet: Councillor Conduct Framework Overview [PDF]
Councillor Conduct Framework Summary [PDF]
On this page:
Council Internal Arbitration Process
The internal arbitration process is designed to provide for early intervention in response to less serious types of misconduct by councillors. Under this process, applications for internal arbitration are heard by independent arbiters appointed to the relevant council by the principal councillor conduct registrar.
Misconduct is defined as any breach by a councillor of the Model Councillor Code of Conduct (Model Code of Conduct). The Model Code of Conduct is prescribed in Schedule 1 to the Local Government (Governance and Integrity) Regulations 2020.
Councillors must ensure that they have read and understood the Model Code of Conduct.
Model Councillor Code of Conduct [PDF]
Model Councillor Code of Conduct [Word]
Guidance has also been developed to support councillors in performing their role in a manner consistent with the Model Code of Conduct.
Guidance on the Model Councillor Code of Conduct [PDF]
Guidance on the Model Councillor Code of Conduct [Word]
Internal arbitration application and hearing process
If a council, a councillor, or a group of councillors consider that another councillor’s actions or activities breach the Model Code of Conduct, they can apply to the principal councillor conduct registrar for an arbiter to make a finding of misconduct in relation to these actions or activities.
An application for a finding of misconduct must be made to the principal councillor conduct registrar within 3 months of the alleged misconduct occurring.
The Local Government Act 2020 and the Local Government (Governance and Integrity) Regulations 2020 set out certain requirements in respect of making an application for an internal arbitration process and the conduct of internal arbitration processes.
A Fact Sheet about the internal arbitration process has been developed which includes information about the requirements for making an application and the conduct of internal arbitration processes.
Fact Sheet: Internal Arbitration Processes
An Application for Internal Arbitration Process Form is also available to assist councillors with making a valid application. The form includes information about how to lodge an application with the principal councillor conduct registrar.
The arbiter panel list is established under section 142 of the Act by the Secretary of the Department of Government Services.
The panel list comprises the following members:
- Ms Jo-Anne Mazzeo
- Mr Matthew Evans
- Mr Simon Heath
- Dr Lily O'Neill
- Ms Diana Price
- Mr Joel Silver
- Mr Yehudi Blacher PSM
- Mr Noel Harvey OAM
The costs associated with council’s internal arbitration process, including the arbiter’s fee, must met by the council.
The registrar has set the fees to be paid to arbiters at $1,076 per day.
Superannuation is payable on arbiters’ fees.
After conducting a hearing, the arbiter must make a determination. If the arbiter determines that a councillor has failed to comply with the Model Code of Conduct, the arbiter may make a finding of misconduct against the councillor.
If an arbiter has made a finding of misconduct against a councillor, the arbiter may impose a range of sanctions, including suspending the councillor for a period of up to 3 months.
At the completion of the internal arbitration process, the arbiter must give a copy of the determination and reasons for their decision to:
- the Council
- the parties to the matter
- the principal councillor conduct registrar.
A copy of the arbiter’s decision and statement of reasons must be tabled at the next council meeting after the decision and recorded in the minutes of the meeting. The principal councillor conduct registrar must also publish the determination and the reasons for decision.
Further information about arbiter determinations is set out in the Fact Sheet: Internal Arbitration Processes.
| Council | Matter | Decision tabled at Council meeting |
|---|---|---|
| 2025 | ||
| Baw Baw Shire Council | McCabe and Others & Goss (IAP 2024-30) | Decision tabled at Council meeting on 14 May 2025 |
| 2024 | ||
| Merri-bek City Council | Riley & Yildiz (IAP 2024-34) | Decision tabled at Council meeting on 11 September 2024 |
| Moonee Valley City Council | Isa & Byrne (IAP 2024-33) | Decision tabled at Council meeting on 10 September 2024 |
| Hobsons Bay City Council | Briffa & Hemphill (IAP 2024-28 and IAP 2024-31) | Decision tabled at Council meeting on 10 September 2024 |
| Merri-bek City Council | Davidson & Conlan (IAP 2024-18) | Decision tabled at Council meeting on 14 August 2024 |
| Port Phillip City Council | Sirakoff and Another & Nyaguy (IAP 2024-23) | Decision tabled at Council meeting on 17 July 2024 |
| Brimbank City Council | Rasic and Others & Tachos (IAP 2024-5) | Decision tabled at Council meeting on 18 June 2024 |
| Brimbank City Council | Rasic and Others & Kerr (IAP 2024-4) | Decision tabled at Council meeting on 18 June 2024 |
| Greater Geelong City Council | Hathway and Others & Aitken (IAP 2023-28) | Decision tabled at Council meeting on 28 May 2024 |
| Melton City Council | Shannon and Others & Vandenberg (IAP 2023-11) | Decision tabled at Council meeting on 22 April 2024 (Due to legal reasons, a redacted version of the arbiter decision has been published) |
| Hobsons Bay City Council | Briffa & Kellander (IAP 2023-20) | Decision tabled at Council meeting on 12 March 2024 |
| Mornington Peninsula Shire Council | Holland and Others & Bissinger (IAP 2023-19 and IAP 2023-25) | Decision tabled at Council meeting on 5 March 2024 |
| Hobsons Bay City Council | Briffa & Kellander (IAP 2023-14) | Decision tabled at Council meeting on 13 February 2024 |
| Hobsons Bay City Council | Kellander & Briffa (IAP 2023-7) | Decision tabled at Council meeting on 13 February 2024 |
| Darebin City Council | Newton & Dimitriadis (IAP 2023-18) | Decision tabled at Council meeting on 1 February 2024 |
| 2023 | ||
| Nillumbik Shire Council | Ramcharan & Duffy (IAP 2023-12) | Decision tabled at Council meeting on 28 November 2023 |
| Horsham Rural City Council | Ross & Gulline (IAP 2023-9) | Decision tabled at Council meeting on 27 November 2023 |
| Mitchell Shire Council | Goble & Lowe (IAP 2023-10) | Decision tabled at Council meeting on 16 October 2023 |
| Latrobe City Council | Lund & Ferguson (IAP 2023-8) | Decision tabled at Council meeting on 4 September 2023 |
| Golden Plains Shire Council | Cunningham & Rowe (IAP 2023-4) | Decision tabled at Council meeting on 25 July 2023 |
| Glenelg Shire Council | Smith and Others & Martin (IAP 2023-3) | Decision tabled at Council meeting on 25 July 2023 |
| Golden Plains Shire Council | Gamble & Rowe (IAP 2022-32) | Decision tabled at Council meeting on 23 May 2023 |
| Gannawarra Shire Council | Gannawarra Shire Council & Smith (IAP 2022-29) | Decision tabled at Council meeting on 19 April 2023 |
| Darebin City Council | Newton & Laurence (IAP 2022-22) | Decision tabled at Council meeting on 27 February 2023 |
| East Gippsland Shire Council | Buckley and Another & Allen Others (IAP 2022-14, IAP 2022-25 and IAP 2022-26) | Decision tabled at Council meeting on 7 February 2023 |
| Frankston City Council | Frankston City Council & Hughes (IAP 2022-21) | Decision tabled at Council meeting on 30 January 2023 |
| Glenelg Shire Council | Wilson & Martin (IAP 2022-27) | Decision tabled at Council meeting on 24 January 2023 |
| 2022 | ||
| East Gippsland Shire Council | Allen and Others & Buckley (IAP 2022-13) | Decision tabled at Council meeting on 13 December 2022 |
| Darebin City Council | Newton & Laurence (IAP 2022-5 and IAP 2022-6) | Decision tabled at Council meeting on 14 November 2022 |
| Darebin City Council | Laurence v Newton (IAP 2022-18) | Decision tabled at Council meeting on 24 October 2022 |
| Wyndham City Council | Maynard & Gilligan (IAP 2022-10) | Decision tabled at Council meeting on 27 September 2022 |
| Wyndham City Council | Ramesh & Gilligan (IAP 2022-2, IAP 2022-3) | Decision tabled at Council meeting on 23 August 2022 |
| Stonnington City Council | Scott & Lew (IAP 2021-42) | Minutes of Council meeting held on Monday 25 July 2022 |
The respondent applied to the Victorian Supreme Court (VSC) for a review of the Arbiter's decision. The VSC quashed the decision of the Arbiter. The VSC's judgement is available on the Australasian Legal Information Institute website: https://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/vic/VSC//2023/477.html | ||
| Stonnington City Council | Morgan & Lew (IAP 2021-19 and IAP 2021-23) | Minutes of Council meeting held on Monday 2 May 2022 (decision at page 8.12.1 at page 766) |
| Latrobe City Council | Clancey and Others & Gibson (IAP 2021-25) | Minutes of Council meeting held on Monday 2 May 2022 (decision at page 13) |
| Hume City Council | Dance & Bell (IAP 2021-31) | Minutes of Council meeting held on Tuesday 26 April 2022 (decision at page 11) |
| Hume City Council | Dance & Medcraft (IAP 2021-8) | Minutes of Council meeting held on Monday 28 February 2022 (decision at page 5) |
| Stonnington City Council | Batagol & Lew (IAP 2021-20) | Minutes of Council meeting held on Monday 7 February 2022 (decision at Attachment 8.2.1 at page 57) |
| 2021 | ||
| Mansfield Shire Council | Sladdin & Rabie (IAP 2021-24) | Minutes of Council meeting held on Tuesday 21 December 2021 (decision at attachment 13.3.4) |
| Glenelg Shire Council | Rank and Others & Wilson (IAP 2021-18) | Minutes of Council meeting held on Tuesday 14 December 2021 |
| Southern Grampians Shire Council | Brown and Another & Rainsford (IAP 2021-15) | Minutes of Council meeting held on Wednesday 8 December 2021 |
| Wyndham City Council | Shaw & Szatkowski (IAP 2021-13) | |
| Wyndham City Council | Hegedich & Maynard (IAP 2021-11) | Minutes of Council meeting held on 28 September 2021 (decision at page 196) |
| Frankston City Council | Frankston City Council & Hughes (IAP 2021-3) | Minutes of Council meeting held on Monday 30 August 2021 (decision at page 22) |
| Hume City Council | Dance & Medcraft (IAP 2021-5) | Minutes of Council meeting held on Monday 12 July 2021 |
| Wyndham City Council | Szatkowski & Gilligan (IAP 2021-4) | Minutes of Council meeting held on Tuesday 29 July 2021 (decision at page 250) |
Note: From 26 October 2024, councillors are required to observe the Model Councillor Code of Conduct. Prior to 26 October 2024 matters were heard and determined in relation to the standards of conduct that were in force at the time under Schedule 1 to the Local Government (Governance and Integrity) Regulations 2020.
Councillor Conduct Panels
The independent Councillor Conduct Panel process is designed to deliver a comprehensive and thorough assessment of allegations of serious misconduct.
Under the framework, complaints of serious misconduct by councillors are heard and determined by councillor conduct panels. The kinds of behaviour that constitute serious misconduct are set out in the definitions provided in section 3 of the Local Government Act 2020.
Serious misconduct includes the failure to comply with the council’s internal arbitration process or with a direction given to the councillor by an arbiter, and failure to attend a councillor conduct panel hearing or to comply with a direction of a panel. It also includes continued or repeated misconduct after a finding against a councillor by an arbiter or a panel. These provisions reinforce the authority of the council internal resolution and councillor conduct panel processes and determinations.
Bullying another councillor or a member of council staff is serious misconduct. Bullying is defined as repeated unreasonable behaviour by a councillor towards another councillor or member of council staff that creates a risk to the health and safety of the councillor or member of staff.
Sexual harassment of a councillor or member of council staff is also serious misconduct.
The remaining grounds of serious misconduct are attempting to direct council staff, releasing confidential council information, or failing to disclose a conflict of interest (and exclude themselves from the decision making) where required to do so.
Councillor conduct panel process
If a council, a councillor, a group of councillors or the Chief Municipal Inspector consider that a councillor’s actions or activities amount to misconduct or serious misconduct, they can apply to the principal councillor conduct registrar for a councillor conduct panel to be formed to make a finding in relation to these actions or activities.
An application for a finding of serious misconduct must be made to the principal councillor conduct registrar within 12 months of the alleged serious misconduct occurring.
The Local Government Act 2020 sets out certain requirements in respect of making an application for a councillor conduct panel and the conduct of councillor conduct panel hearings.
A Fact Sheet about councillor conduct panels has been developed which includes information about the requirements for making an application and the conduct of councillor conduct panel hearings.
Fact Sheet: Councillor Conduct Panels
Application for formation of Councillor Conduct Panel Forms are available to assist councillors with making a valid application. The forms includes information about how to lodge an application with the principal councillor conduct registrar.
Application for formation of Councillor Conduct Panel Form 1
Application for formation of Councillor Conduct Panel Form 2
The Councillor Conduct Panel List is established under section 153 of the Act by the Minister for Local Government. The panel list comprises the following legal and non-legal members:
- Ms Jo-Anne Mazzeo (legal)
- Mr Matthew Evans
- Ms Diana Price (legal)
- Dr Lily O'Neill (legal)
- Mr Thomas Lynch (legal)
The costs associated with councillor conduct panel hearings are met by the council for which the hearing is conducted.
The registrar has set the fees for panel list members when acting as chairperson of a Councillor Conduct Panel at $1,345 per day, and for panel list members when acting as a member of a Councillor Conduct Panel at $1,216 per day.
Superannuation is payable on panel members’ sitting fees.
After conducting a hearing, a councillor conduct panel must make a determination. A determination can include a finding of misconduct or serious misconduct against the councillor, a finding that remedial action is required by the councillor, or the dismissal of the application. The panel must also give written reasons for its decision within 28 days of making the determination.
If a councillor conduct panel has made a finding of serious misconduct against a councillor, the panel may impose a range of sanctions, including suspending the councillor for a period of up to 12 months.
At the completion of the councillor conduct panel process, the panel must give a copy of the determination and reasons for its decision to:
- the council
- the parties to the matter
- the Minister for Local Government
- the principal councillor conduct registrar.
The principal councillor conduct registrar must publish the determination and the reasons for decision.
Further information about councillor conduct panel determinations is set out in the Fact Sheet: Councillor Conduct Panels.
| Council | Matter | Published Panel Decision |
|---|---|---|
| 2024 | ||
| Latrobe City Council | Lund & Ferguson (CCP 2023-9) | Determination & Statement of Reasons for Decision (29 May 2024) |
| 2023 | ||
| Wyndham City Council | Gilligan & Hill (CCP 2022-15) | Determination & Statement of Reasons for Decision (7 December 2023) |
| Frankston City Council | Frankston City Council & Hughes (CCP 2022-14) | Determination & Statement of Reasons for Decision (31 August 2023) |
| Benalla Rural City Council | Gunaratne & Davis (CCP 2022-6) | Determination & Statement of Reasons for Decision (14 August 2023) |
| Benalla Rural City Council | Gunaratne & Claridge (CCP 2022-5) | Determination & Statement of Reasons for Decision (3 March 2023) |
| Moyne Shire Council | Doukas & Gleeson (CCP 2022-13) | Determination & Statement of Reasons for Decision (1 March 2023) |
| Mildura Rural City Council | Chief Municipal Inspector & Modica (CCP 2022-4) | Determination & Statement of Reasons for Decision (14 February 2023) |
| 2022 | ||
| Frankston City Council | Hughes & Bolam (CCP 2021-7) | Determination & Statement of Reasons for Decision (29 July 2022) |
| Stonnington City Council | Hely & Lew (CCP 2021-3) | Determination & Statement of Reasons for Decision (15 July 2022) |
| Hume City Council | Hume City Council & Dance (CCP 2022-1) | Determination & Statement of Reasons for Decision (29 April 2022) |
The respondent applied to the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) for a review of the Councillor Conduct Panel’s decision. VCAT set aside the decision of the Panel. VCAT's decision is available on the Australasian Legal Information Institute website: Dance v Hume CC (Review and Regulation) [2022] VCAT 1415 (8 December 2022) | ||
| 2021 | ||
| Latrobe City Council | Howe and Others & Ferguson (CCP 2021-2) | Determination & Statement of Reasons for Decision (31 March 2021) |
| 2019 | ||
| West Wimmera Shire Council | West Wimmera Shire Council & Houlihan (CCP 2019-4) | Determination & Statement of Reasons for Decision (19 December 2019) |
| Frankston City Council | O'Reilly & Toms (CCP 2019-1) | Determination & Statement of Reasons for Decision (5 September 2019) |
| Surf Coast Shire Council | Wellington & Bell (CCP 2018-3) | Determination & Statement of Reasons for Decision (4 July 2019) |
| Brimbank City Council | Lancashire & Hedditch (CCP 2018-1) | Determination & Statement of Reasons for Decision (13 February 2019) |
| 2017 | ||
| East Gippsland Shire Council | Chief Municipal Inspector & Buckley (CCP 2017-1) | Decision & Statement of Reasons for Decision (28 August 2017) The respondent applied to the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) for a review of the Councillor Conduct Panel’s decision. VCAT affirmed the decision of the Panel. VCAT's decision is available on the Australasian Legal Information Institute website: Buckley v Councillor Conduct Panel (Review and Regulation) [2018] VCAT 1244 (23 August 2018) |
The framework also requires each council to appoint a councillor conduct officer who is responsible for assisting the council to implement and conduct its council’s internal arbitration process and to support the principal councillor conduct registrar in relation to councillor conduct panel hearings.
The principal councillor conduct registrar administers councillor conduct panel processes under the councillor conduct framework.
The registrar is also responsible for appointing an arbiter to a council where an application alleging misconduct is made under the council’s internal arbitration process. Before appointing an arbiter, the registrar must be satisfied that the application is not frivolous, vexatious, misconceived or lacking in substance, and that there is sufficient evidence to support the allegation. The registrar must also be satisfied that the council has taken sufficient or appropriate steps to resolve the matter, or that the reason for not taking any steps to resolve the matter is adequate.
Where an application alleging serious misconduct is received, the registrar is responsible for determining if a councillor conduct panel should be formed. In deciding whether to form a panel the registrar must be satisfied that the following requirements (set out in section 155 of the Act) are met:
- the application is not frivolous, vexatious, misconceived or lacking in substance
- there is sufficient evidence to support an allegation of misconduct or serious misconduct
- the council has taken sufficient or appropriate steps to resolve the matter or has provided satisfactory reasons for not taking these steps (in accordance with the internal resolution procedure specified in the council’s councillor code of conduct).
Where the section 155 requirements are met the registrar must form a councillor conduct panel, made up by two members selected from the panel list, to hear the application. The panel must include one legal member (who is the chairperson of the panel) and one non-legal member.
The Registrar may be contacted by email at pcc.registrar@ecodev.vic.gov.au
Complaint resolution bodies
There are a number of independent organisations that can consider complaints relating to a council. In the first instance, complaints should be raised with the relevant council.
As a general rule, a complaint should be in writing and should include the following:
- brief statement about your issue
- brief history of the case, including important dates or events
- decision or action taken by the council
- preferred outcome for this case going forward
- copies of all correspondence to and from the council or any other material that records the contact made between parties involved.
Local Government Inspectorate
In 2009, the Victorian Government established the Local Government Inspectorate as a separate administrative office of the Department of Premier and Cabinet.
The Local Government Inspectorate is responsible for investigating alleged breaches of the Local Government Act 2020, including failure by a councillor to declare a conflict of interest, disclosure of confidential information and misuse of position, and administering a Compliance Audit program at councils across Victoria.
The Chief Municipal Inspector, the head of the Local Government Inspectorate, is also responsible for investigating and making applications to VCAT for findings of gross misconduct against councillors and has power to investigate and initiate applications for councillor conduct panels to be established to determine allegations of serious misconduct by councillors.
Further information about the Chief Municipal Inspector and the Local Government Inspectorate is available here.
Complaints to the Local Government Inspectorate can be submitted online or by contacting the office.
Website
Street address
Local Government Inspectorate
Level 27, 1 Spring Street
Melbourne Victoria 3000
Post address
Local Government Inspectorate
GPO Box 2392
Melbourne Victoria 3001
Complaints hotline
1800 469 359
inspectorate@lgi.vic.gov.au
The Victorian Ombudsman
The Victorian Ombudsman is an independent officer of the Victorian Parliament responsible for handling complaints concerning the administrative actions of a council and decisions of council officers. The Ombudsman cannot investigate the actions of an individual councillor, except when investigating a protected disclosure complaint under the Protected Disclosure Act 2012.
Complaints to the Victorian Ombudsman can be submitted online or by contacting the office.
Address
Level 2, 570 Bourke Street
Melbourne VIC 3000
Phone
(03) 9613 6222, or toll free (regional areas only) on 1800 806 314
Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission (IBAC)
IBAC is Victoria’s anti-corruption agency responsible for preventing and exposing public sector corruption and police misconduct. IBAC accepts complaints about suspected corruption and misconduct in the public sector including the local government sector.
Information can be provided or a complaint can be made to IBAC online.
Website
Postal Address
GPO Box 24234, Melbourne Victoria, 3001
Phone
1300 735 135