The Clarence Valley Council has decided to release a previously undisclosed Concerns Notice following a comprehensive review of legal documents and a public interest assessment. This decision comes after Mr. McNeill submitted a Government Information Public Access (GIPA) application seeking access to the Concerns Notice and related records in 2024.
Initially, when responding to the McNeill v Clarence Valley Council matter in 2024, the Council could not locate the Concerns Notice. According to records, Mr. McNeill’s GIPA application prompted an extensive search of the Council’s Electronic Content Management (ECM) system and consultations with staff, which yielded no relevant documents. The situation escalated to the New South Wales Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NCAT), which upheld the Council’s decision on 7 November 2024. However, following a subsequent appeal, which was granted leave, the earlier decision was set aside.
In compliance with the appeal orders issued on 5 August 2025, the Council undertook a detailed review of emails, particularly those involving Ms. Laura Black and Mr. Julien Castaldi of Sparke Helmore Lawyers. This review identified several emails containing legal advice, some of which qualified as Council records, while others were deemed personal communications under the GIPA Act.
Ms. Black, in her capacity as a legal advisor, confirmed she would not waive her legal professional privilege concerning these emails. Notably, the Concerns Notice mentioned in the GIPA/NCAT proceedings was eventually found within personal correspondence. Ms. Black subsequently agreed to treat this document as a Council record, allowing it to be evaluated for potential public release.
The Council applied the public interest test outlined in section 13 of the GIPA Act to determine the appropriateness of releasing the Concerns Notice. The review identified that portions of the document had already been disclosed by the recipient and that Mr. McNeill possessed a copy. Furthermore, given that the matter is over two years old, any potential risk to current Council operations was considered minimal. The Council concluded that the benefits of transparency and accountability outweighed concerns related to legal privilege and personal privacy.
As a result, the Council decided to release the Concerns Notice with certain personal details redacted, aligning with the GIPA Act and the public interest assessment. This resolution was discussed during the meeting on Monday 3 November 2025, during which many council members expressed their desire to shift focus towards more pressing community issues.
During the discussion, it was noted that Ms. Black’s legal team had indicated a strong case for defamation, recommending legal action. Despite this, Ms. Black opted not to pursue a defamation claim, a decision that has drawn some criticism regarding the lack of reciprocal goodwill in the ongoing situation. The Mayor, in a minute presented on the same day, reiterated support for Ms. Black, emphasizing significant achievements during her tenure and the need for the Council to prioritize pressing matters for residents.
The unfolding events highlight the complexities involved in navigating transparency, legal privileges, and community expectations within local government, setting a precedent for how similar cases may be handled in the future.
