The refusal by a state watchdog to sack a shire councillor who publicly blamed fatal crash victims for local noise complaints has ignited a broader political issue, with the town's mayor warning that new local government "free speech" guidelines go too far.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
or signup to continue reading
In January, Oberon councillor Helen Hayden took to her public social media account on Facebook only hours after a fatal crash at Black Springs, suggesting the victims were responsible for noise complaints in Black Springs and their deaths resolved this issue.
"Accident today around lunch time, yes some of us are aware of the individuals and Black Springs will be far quieter without constant roaring engines at all hours throughout the village," she wrote on January 20.
Her post was met with widespread backlash, with Cr Hayden, who was first elected to Oberon Council in December 2021, doubling down on her post later that evening in the comments, before the post was deleted.
In April, Oberon Council said it would refer the matter to the Office of Local Government with a recommendation that Cr Hayden be removed as a councillor immediately and be barred for nominating for council for a period of five years.
In July 2026, the Office of Local Government advised Oberon Council it would not progress the matter further.
In a statement, Oberon mayor Andrew McKibbin said while council respects the decision of the Office of Local Government, it understands that "this outcome may not align with the expectations of all those who participated in the process".
"Community members can be assured that those concerns were taken seriously, commissioned an independent investigation, carefully considered the findings and pursued all avenues available to it under the current legislative framework," he said.
"Council also encourages community members to continue raising concerns and participating in established complaint and Code of Conduct processes."
Concerns about changes
The Minister for Local Government does not have the power to remove a councillor from public office following allegations of misconduct.
However, the OLG's Chief Executive may suspend a councillor in certain circumstances for a maximum of three months where serious misconduct is found, and only where the OLG is empowered to act under the Local Government Act 1993 (s 440H).
Cr McKibbin said while council acknowledges the OLG's decision, he said there is concern about the broader implications for councils seeking avenues to "address serious conduct that undermines public confidence in local government".
"At the same time, the OLG released a revised draft Model Code of Conduct for consultation, to be read alongside the Free Speech Guidelines for Councillors issued in 2025," he said.
"Council is concerned these documents place greater emphasis on freedom of expression and may reduce the scope for regulatory intervention in matters of councillor conduct.
"Council is particularly concerned by the proposed removal of the existing provision relating to conduct that brings a council or councillors into disrepute. In council's view, this may reduce the ability of the regulatory framework to respond to conduct that causes significant community concern or undermines public confidence in local government."
The NSW Government is reforming the Councillor Conduct Framework and submissions on the Policy Statement: Improving Councillor Accountability closed on Friday, August 7.
The new framework proposes definitions for unsatisfactory councillor behaviour, to be determined by a panel of mayors and councillors with more than two terms.
The new framework also proposes a definition of serious misconduct, which would be subject to investigation by the Office of Local Government based on a breach of legislative requirements such as conflicts of interest.
Hayden responds
In a response released on her social media, Cr Hayden said she respects the mayor's right to express his views, but said it is important that the "process is represented accurately".
"The independent external reviewer's recommendation was for censure," Cr Hayden disputed.
"The reviewer did not recommend referral to the Office of Local Government, removal from office or a five-year disqualification. That distinction was also acknowledged in the correspondence subsequently received from the Office of Local Government.
"The further action referred to in the Mayor's media release arose from a motion moved by the Mayor, which included removing me from my Section 355 committees and requesting that the Office of Local Government remove me from office and disqualify me from standing as a councillor for five years.
"That motion was carried five votes to three. I was not present in the chamber for the debate or vote. When I returned, I listened to the outcome and accepted Council's decision because the motion had been carried."
Cr Hayden said she has reflected on her actions and said she was disappointed with what she posted back in January.
"I don't want to re-litigate the matter through the media or engage in hostility towards the mayor or my fellow councillors. The process has run its course," she said.
"My focus is on continuing to represent the community, listening to residents and carrying out the responsibilities I was elected to undertake."
OLG's reasoning
In a response provide to ACM, the OLG said it does not comment on specific matters it may have investigated or reviewed.
"Councillors should uphold the standards their community expects of them as elected representatives and are ultimately accountable to the community at the ballot box," an OLG spokesperson said.
"Anyone who has concerns about the conduct of councillors or believes a conduct breach has occurred should raise their concerns in writing with the general manager as part of the formal code of conduct complaint process."
