Casey Residents and Ratepayers Association has criticised Casey Council placing mother-of-three Jillian Nambu on “an orchestrated ’resident naughty list’“ after she sent five emails to council managers and councillors in a week .
“(The register) should be reserved for only the most extreme and overly persistent complainants,“ CRRA vice-president Anthony Tassone said.
“On the one hand we have individual councillors inviting residents to contact them directly to hear their concerns and queries, and on the other hand we have Council management demanding residents go through central Customer Service and not contact councillors directly.
“It’s a reasonable expectation that residents can engage with their ward Councillor directly in the appropriate way, and the council’s use of the ’unreasonable complainant’ register appears unreasonable.
“The council should also offer to reach out to residents directly and guide them through the best way to engage with the City of Casey to have queries resolved rather than just red-flagging them and putting them on a list.“
Ms Nambu told Star News last week that she was “just there trying to bring up issues that I think are important, that the community cares about, and I care about“.
“And then it made me feel like I had done something so horrible that I must be put on a register.”
Meanwhile, the neighbouring Greater Dandenong Council has confirmed it does not have any resident complainants on an exclusion list “at the moment“.
Greater Dandenong chief executive Jacqui Weatherill told a council meeting on 11 August that she didn’t want to comment on Casey’s approach.
“It’s fair to say that City of Greater Dandenong being the most multicultural municipality in Australia, we do try really hard with our residents to understand their concerns.
“We do encourage residents with repeated concerns to use the Ombudsman.
“I think the team has done an excellent job because we haven’t had anyone that we’ve had to undertake any restrictions with.”
Under Greater Dandenong’s complaints policy, the council can exclude complainants from having access to staff in “rare instances” of “unreasonable persistence or demands”.
This includes behaviour that’s “inappropriate” and “unacceptable” which raises health, safety, resource and equity issues.
The policy is due for renewal by January 2026.
In a notification letter to Ms Nambu on 20 June, a Casey council officer notified her that her conduct had been found to be “unreasonable” under the following two categories:
• Unreasonable persistence – directly emailing the executive leadership team and councillors on numerous different occasions, rather than directing communication to Customer Service for processing
• Unreasonable demands – making demands for council staff to change processes or expectations around council operations, such as the council meeting registration process or public questions
The council advised her to contact Casey via its customer service department, and not to contact executives and all of the councillors directly.
“Failure to cease these behaviours may result in Council implementing additional measures in line with our Unreasonable Complainant Conduct Policy, such as taking more direct action regarding any further communications you have with Council.”
Casey’s communications and corporate governance manager Chloe Casey said the council’s UCC policy endorsed in 2015 aimed to reduce impact of “unreasonable” behaviour from complainants on staff and resources.
“Each case is looked at carefully. People are told in writing if any restrictions are placed on them, why it’s happening, and how they can ask for a review. Being on the register usually lasts for a year and is reviewed annually.”
When asked how many people are placed under the UCC Register, Casey did not share the number.
