Wyndham Mayor Suspended Following Misconduct Ruling

Wyndham City Council Mayor Josh Gilligan has been suspended from office for one month after an independent arbiter found he engaged in misconduct over a Facebook post targeting former mayor Kim McAliney.

The suspension, imposed under the Local Government Act 2020, follows an internal arbitration process initiated by Councillor Robert Szatkowski. The determination, handed down by arbiter Simon Heath and dated 13 February 2026, found that Cr Gilligan breached clauses relating to “Behaviours” and “Integrity” under the Model Councillor Code of Conduct.

The decision was tabled at tonight’s Wyndham City Council meeting, Tuesday 24 February. Under the determination, the suspension will take effect the day after it is tabled — meaning Cr Gilligan will be suspended from 25 February 2026 for a period of one month.

At the centre of the case was a Facebook post published on 18 September 2025 in which Cr Gilligan referred to Ms McAliney as a “raging lunatic” and accused her of “sprouting anti-government propaganda you usually see from the sovereign citizen movement”. He also foreshadowed bringing a Notice of Motion to release “confidential minutes” relating to suspected contributory factors in her resignation from council.

Mr Heath determined that describing Ms McAliney in those terms was “belittling, demeaning, abusive and insulting” and constituted a failure to treat a member of the public with “dignity, fairness, objectivity, courtesy and respect”, as required under clause 2 of the Standards.

The arbiter further found that insinuations about confidential council minutes and assertions regarding the reasons for Ms McAliney’s resignation risked diminishing public trust and confidence in local government, amounting to a breach of clause 4 relating to integrity.

While Cr Gilligan argued that his comments formed part of robust public debate and reflected his personal opinion rather than statements made on behalf of the council, the arbiter rejected that submission, concluding the post was clearly made in his capacity as a councillor and therefore subject to the Code.

The post remained publicly accessible for several days and was reported by Wyndham TV, increasing its exposure within the municipality.

As part of the determination, Cr Gilligan has been directed to publish a written apology to Ms McAliney on his “Cr Josh Gilligan” Facebook page within 72 hours after the decision was tabled at tonight’s meeting. The apology must remain online for at least 30 days.

In his response, Cr Gilligan said:

“I respect and will abide by the decision.

It’s important for me to provide the context which isn’t reflected in the decision, noting I have no right by law to seek a review of the merits of the decision.

Over the last five years, I’ve been subjected to behaviours that are unacceptable in any modern workplace, including being physically confronted at a public venue, having colleagues and their allies actively work to remove me from elected office, and being obsessively questioned about my professional integrity. These are not behaviours that should be accepted as something that Councillors should tolerate as part of their role.

The growing demands and constraints on councillors are making the role extraordinarily difficult to perform anymore.

I am deeply disappointed that the O’Neill decision, which concluded that I had been subject to a ‘very significant history of attacks’ on my character, has subsequently been used as a reason to ouster me from the Office of Mayor.

If the standards were applied consistently across all levels of government, many politicians would be clearing out their desks.”

The arbiter noted that a previous internal arbitration process in 2022 had resulted in a misconduct finding against Cr Gilligan for failing to treat another councillor with dignity and respect, although no sanction was imposed at that time. In that earlier decision, the arbiter warned that if such behaviour continued towards residents in future, a sanction would be appropriate.

In imposing a suspension on this occasion, Mr Heath wrote that the respondent “has not tempered his behaviour or language”.

Under council governance arrangements, the Deputy Mayor is expected to assume mayoral responsibilities during the suspension period.

The decision represents one of the more significant sanctions available through the internal arbitration framework and highlights the statutory limits placed on councillors’ conduct — particularly in public commentary directed at private citizens and former officeholders.