Call for overhaul of City of Melbourne’s electoral rules as councillors back review

Melbourne’s councillors have voted to formally request a sweeping review of the City of Melbourne Act 2001, taking a significant first step towards reforming an electoral system long criticised as opaque, outdated and unrepresentative.

At its June 30 meeting, council adopted an amended motion moved by Lord Mayor Nick Reece, directing him to write to Victoria’s Minister for Local Government to ask for a “broad” review of the legislation that governs the city’s unique electoral arrangements.

The motion calls for the state government to consider multiple reforms, including a review of voter entitlements, electoral donation transparency, and improved participation of international students in voting rolls. Notably, it also asks for electoral donation reform in line with recommendation 13 of IBAC’s Operation Sandon report, which found serious corrupt conduct among councillors and property developers in the City of Casey.

The move comes against a backdrop of growing calls from residents, advocates and councillors themselves for fundamental change to Melbourne’s electoral system, which is unlike any other globally.

Under the current model, businesses can get two votes to a resident’s one, a system often described as a gerrymander in favour of property owners and commercial interests. There are no wards, making it difficult for candidates to represent specific neighbourhoods or communities. And while donations must be declared after the election, there’s no requirement for real-time disclosure, making it impossible for voters to know who is bankrolling campaigns before casting their votes.

These issues have come into sharper focus following the Victorian Electoral Commission’s 2024 election report, which the council considered at the June 30 meeting. That report detailed a complex postal voting process with 136,000 ballot packs mailed and around 98,000 returned.

Lord Mayor Nick Reece, whose own Team Reece campaign reportedly raised close to $1 million at the last election – a record for a City of Melbourne ticket – told the meeting that while he held views on issues like developer donations and continuous reporting, the motion itself deliberately didn’t predetermine any outcomes.

“This is not ‘set and forget’. It’s important from time to time to look at the system and ask: is it working? Can it be improved?” Cr Reece said.

It should be reviewed as part of good governance and upholding democracy in the City of Melbourne.

He also noted the City of Melbourne Act hadn’t been comprehensively reviewed since it was first introduced more than 20 years and six Premiers ago.

However, the motion was not without dissent. Liberal councillor Owen Guest voted against it, arguing parts of the motion risked undermining the relationship between voters and those “paying the bills”.

“I don’t think these proposals hit the mark,” Cr Guest said. “I’d like to see a greater connection between voting rights and those who are paying the bills.”

Councillors Gladys Liu and Phil Le Liu also abstained, with the latter describing the proposal to review business voting entitlements as “an attack” on business investment in the city. 

“As noble as it sounds, to ask for a review and question the appropriateness of whether businesses have one more vote than others – I think what we have is quite appropriate,” Cr Le Liu said.

The Lord Mayor pushed back on these concerns, insisting that simply reviewing the system didn’t predetermine taking votes away from business – just that it was time to consider whether the balance was right.

“This letter will be neutral. It won’t make decisions – but it will ask the government to look at the question,” Cr Reece said.

Calls for reform have been growing well beyond Town Hall. The Carlton Residents’ Association has long labelled the city’s voting model “an embarrassment” and has campaigned to end the two-to-one business voting advantage, return to a ward-based structure and introduce real-time donation disclosure.

Advocates argue Melbourne’s current system rewards the biggest war chests. In the last election, Team Reece, Team Wood, Team Kouta and the Liberals all attracted hundreds of thousands in donations. As sibling publication CBD News has previously reported, even with voluntary limits like avoiding City of Melbourne property developers, Cr Reece’s campaign still accepted large donations from developers outside the municipality and donors with links to local projects – raising questions about influence and transparency.

While this new council motion doesn’t itself change anything, it marks a decisive signal that Melbourne’s leadership recognises the need for change.

Whether that change will come – and how far it will go – now depends on how the Victorian Government responds to the City of Melbourne’s invitation to finally open the Act to review after decades without reform.

For residents frustrated with feeling shut out by a system designed for a very different Melbourne, it may be the first step towards a more representative, transparent and accountable city government. •