A KINGSTON councillor has taken an extended leave of absence after her push for a review into the Dingley Village Kingswood golf course redevelopment failed.
Developer Satterley received state government approval late last year to divide the Dingley Village site into 941 residential lots. Kingston Council filed a review of the decision with the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal four days after the required deadline, and will not have its objections heard.
At last week’s public meeting, Cr Caroline White proposed that council receive a report on the merits of “an independent review into Kingswood Golf Course, to identify any areas for improvement, process inefficiencies, systemic issues and determine accountabilities throughout the planning process for the site undertaken to date.” That proposal was not supported by any of the other councillors in the chamber.
Cr White has consistently criticised the golf course plans throughout this council term. After last week’s meeting, she took to social media to announce she would be temporarily stepping away from council.
“The events that unfolded at last night’s council meeting were disappointing to say the least and I will provide further updates to our community over the coming week to keep everyone informed. After months of bullying, intimidation, threats and harassment in the workplace with no protection or apparent slowing down, I have decided to take leave and will return on 4 May 2026,” Cr White said. “I still remain committed as a leader in our community and will continue work on Kingswood. I will push for an independent investigation of the Kingswood file and the VCAT debacle.”
Cr White is the third Kingston councillor to miss an extended period of this council term. Cr Tess Law has recently returned from a three month period of leave, and separately Cr Jane Agirtan was stood down for roughly three months after she was charged with breaching a personal safety intervention order. Two state government-appointed monitors have been tasked with overseeing council at ratepayers’ expense until 30 June.
Kingston Council confirmed that Cr White had taken leave, but did not comment further.
Cr White’s proposed independent external review would “comprehensively evaluate the entire lifecycle of the Kingswood file and ongoing operations, and the minister’s approval process,” her notice of motion read. “Council is committed to resolving complaints in a manner that is fair, transparent, timely and consistent, and complaints concerning council decisions and administrative actions must be appropriately investigated and documented.”
The independent review would have been inclusive of “meetings and correspondence with developers, Melbourne Water, and Labor state government ministers”. It also would have included “all legal advice received and any correspondence with said legal firms” and “the handling of complaints relating to Kingston City Council’s administrative failures.”
The first report would have been due back by 16 February. The report would have evaluated “the formation of a sub-committee to be led and chaired by councillors as a governance structure to coordinate the independent external review to assess the integrity of the Kingswood Golf Course file, with the review to be made independent of council.”
“The sub-committee [is] to be comprised of five elected councillors to provide further objectivity and independence; these councillors being: Cr White, Cr Oxley, Cr O’Donnell, Cr Agirtan and Cr Erevnidis,” Cr White’s motion read. “[Council will] receive the Independent Review report via submission to the sub-committee, with a public version of the report suitably redacted to protect sensitive information made available to the public as expeditiously as possible and no later than 29 June, 2026.”
A response to the notice of motion prepared by Kingston Council officers read “if the intention of an independent review is to examine the ‘actual decisions made’, to do this task robustly, it is likely that a reviewer would be heavily reliant on information which is not retained by council.”
“As reinforced in the background material, the council has not performed the role of Planning Authority or Responsible Authority in ‘making decisions’ under the Planning and Environment Act 1987, relating to the subject land,” officers wrote. “If the council were minded to further consider conducting an ‘independent review’, advice would be required on the potential constraints on the council to compel participation, and/or obtain information, not in the possession of council.”
First published in the Chelsea Mordialloc Mentone News – 11 February 2026