A NOTICE of motion was set to be discussed last night at Mitchell Shire Council’s July meeting discussing the elimination of the office of Mayor and Deputy Mayor in favour of a rotational Mayoral system.
The notice was proposed by Councillor Nathan Clark, saying that he wanted to see a distributed, ‘Swiss-style canton model’ structure.
The motion states ‘That Council officers prepare a report for consideration for adoption prior to the next Statutory meeting outlining the regulatory pathways, necessary amendments to the Mitchell Shire Council Governance Rules, potential legislative advocacy required to eliminate the positions of Mayor and Deputy Mayor, replacing them with a model of distributed leadership where the chairing of meetings and traditional civic duties are performed on a rotating basis among all elected councillors.”
Cr Clark made comment on the meeting agenda about his view on how he would like to see reform in the Council structure.
“The current concentration of civic leadership within a single mayoral position has inadvertently fostered an environment of structural complacency. Over the past two years, the development and capacity of the councillor cohort have not progressed equally. This disparity stems from an institutional reliance on a single individual to carry out the primary leadership functions of the municipality, leaving other elected representatives underutilised and less equipped to navigate complex governance challenges,” he wrote.
“Moving to a distributed, rotating system ensures that every councillor shares equal responsibility, builds identical capability, remains actively accountable for the stewardship of the entire Shire while being the prime representative of their ward.
“If the number of councillors remains at nine, and accounting for caretaker period, each councillor will be Acting Mayor for at least 5 months of the 47 months of each term. This rapid, regular rotation ensures that no single individual or geographic faction can monopolise the executive face of the council, while simultaneously accelerating the professional development and institutional knowledge of the entire cohort through immediate, hands-on experience.
“This reform is urgently required ahead of the upcoming structural transitions towards single-member wards. Under a traditional model, single-member wards create an environment where the population-dense southern corridors of Mitchell Shire could easily dominate the mayoral office by sheer weight of numbers. This dynamic risks fuelling intense parochialism, effectively punishing the more regional parts of the municipality and leaving them without a meaningful voice at the executive level. A mandated rotation of chairpersonship and civic responsibilities completely neutralises this risk, ensuring that regional towns maintain absolute parity of representation and influence regardless of demographic shifts.
“At a broader level, this initiative should serve as the genesis for structural change across the wider system of government in Australia. Local government is the tier closest to the people, making it the ideal crucible to demonstrate that centralised, bureaucratic state structures are no longer necessary. By successfully implementing a model of distributed local governance, Mitchell Shire can pioneer a pathway toward a Swiss-style canton model.”
Cr Clark said there were benefits and pitfalls but saw more positives out of a proposed model, saying roads and infrastructure could benefit.
“The benefits of this shift are profound, establishing a highly agile, versatile, and collaborative group of representatives who possess equal institutional knowledge and public presence. It removes the adversarial politics often associated with annual mayoral elections and fosters true collective leadership. However, the potential pitfalls of such a model include a risk of inconsistent meeting management, potential confusion among external stakeholders regarding who speaks for the municipality, and varying levels of administrative execution depending on the individual chairperson of the day,” he said.
“Instead of funding higher administrative allowances for a centralised leadership role, these municipal funds can be immediately injected into the local road network to repair persistent potholes and expand the regional footpath network to improve pedestrian safety across our townships, meaningful ongoing investment into the shire libraries, safeguarding community hubs and enhancing local services. By decentralising leadership, the council can shift hundreds of thousands of dollars away from internal political roles and straight into the foundational assets that local communities rely on every single day.
“To fully eliminate these operational risks, the requested officer report should investigate the implementation of rigorous, mandatory professional development in procedure for all councillors to ensure meeting standards remain high. Furthermore, the risk of fragmented external advocacy can be mitigated by establishing strict corporate communications protocols, ensuring that whoever holds the rotating chair speaks from a unified council position.”
An officer comment said under the Local Government Act 2020, Council had to elect a Mayor.
“The Local Government Act 2020 determines that Council must elect a Mayor and may elect a Deputy Mayor for up to a two-year term. It also determines that Council must adopt Governance Rules that among other matters details the process for the election of the Mayor and the Deputy Mayor,” they said.
“Whilst officers cannot amend the legislation nor the requirement in the current Governance Rules to elect a Mayor and Deputy Mayor, they can advocate for legislative change.”
