Why independent candidates are required to publish their family home address on election material, and what I have asked the Government to do about it
Cr Aldo Antolli, Candidate for Mayor | Kingborough | Monday 17 August 2026
Section 311 of the Local Government Act 1993 requires every article relating to an election to carry the true name and address of the person responsible for it. That means every corflute on a fence, every leaflet in a letterbox, every advertisement in the paper. Section 311(4) then rules out the two options an ordinary person would reach for first. A post office box will not satisfy it, and neither will an email address. So the address that goes on the sign has to be a physical one, and for an independent candidate that means the house their family lives in.
There is a second limb, section 311(4)(b), which allows an address at or through which the responsible person may be readily contacted. On paper that sounds like a way out. In practice it is not one. To use it, a business owner or another individual has to agree to have their own premises or home address printed on political material, staked along roadsides across the municipality and letterboxed to thousands of households. You are asking someone else to accept public association with your campaign, the chance their property gets vandalised, and the chance somebody who disagrees with you turns up at their door. Very few people will say yes to that, and in my view nobody should be asked to. An option that only works by shifting the risk onto an uninvolved third party is not a real option.
The burden does not fall evenly either. A candidate endorsed by a party can satisfy section 311 with the party’s registered office. The same legal obligation is discharged at no personal cost and no risk to their family. An independent has no equivalent, so an independent publishes the address of the house their children sleep in. That is a structural inequity, and it lands in the one sphere of government where independent representation has always been the norm.
Other states have already worked this out. Queensland permits a business address or a post office box on council election material. Victoria permits a PO box. South Australia allows an independent candidate to use a PO box with the Electoral Commissioner’s approval, provided the candidate’s suburb is disclosed. Every one of those arrangements keeps the candidate traceable and accountable, which is the whole point of the section, without printing a family home address on a roadside sign.
I have put two requests to the Minister.
In the meantime I will comply with the law as it stands. I will put my home address on my material, under protest, because the alternative is a fine of up to five penalty units for every non compliant article, and across a full sign run that reaches many thousands of dollars.
The same letter was sent on 17 August 2026 to the Minister for Local Government, the Tasmanian Electoral Commission, the Local Government Association of Tasmania and the Office of Local Government.
Sent to the Minister for Local Government on 17 August 2026, and set out below in abridged form. The full signed letter is available as a PDF.
17 August 2026
Hon Kerry Vincent MLC
Minister for Local Government
Level 10, Executive Building, 15 Murray Street, Hobart TAS 7000
Publication of candidates’ home addresses on local government election material: request for interim relief ahead of the October 2026 elections
Dear Minister
I write as an elected Councillor of Kingborough Council and a candidate at the October 2026 local government elections, to raise a matter of candidate and family safety.
Section 311 of the Local Government Act 1993 requires every article relating to an election to carry the true name and address of the responsible person, and section 311(4) excludes post office boxes and electronic addresses.
Section 311(4)(b) permits an address at or through which the responsible person may be readily contacted, which in theory allows premises other than the candidate’s home. In practice it does not. Using that limb requires a business owner or another individual to agree to have their own premises or home address printed on political material, displayed on roadside signage across the municipality and letterboxed to thousands of households. It asks a third party to accept the reputational exposure of public association with a campaign, the risk of vandalism to their property, and the risk of confrontation from members of the public who disagree with the candidate. Very few will accept that, and no one should be asked to. An option that works only by transferring a safety and property risk onto an uninvolved third party is not a genuine option.
The only realistic address available to an independent candidate is therefore the family home.
The burden does not fall evenly. An endorsed party candidate can satisfy section 311 using their party’s registered office. The Tasmanian Greens endorse candidates at Tasmanian local government elections and their candidates have that option. An independent has no equivalent. The same obligation is discharged by a party candidate at no personal cost and no risk to their family, while an independent must publish the address of the house their children live in.
That is a structural inequity, and it operates in the one sphere of government where independent representation has always been the norm.
Other jurisdictions manage this. Queensland permits a business address or a post office box for council election material. Victoria permits a PO box. South Australia allows an independent candidate to use a PO box with the Electoral Commissioner’s approval, provided their suburb is disclosed. Each preserves traceability without publishing a family home address.
Rates of domestic violence and community crime have risen and the tone of public debate has hardened. Councils vote on contentious planning and development matters across a four year term, and Tasmania has activist groups willing to engage in high risk direct action. It is not unreasonable to anticipate that an aggrieved or unstable individual will take a grievance to a councillor’s home rather than to the chamber.
Most people who stand for local office are parents, carers, small business operators and volunteers. Requiring them to publish where their family sleeps deters participation, and it falls hardest on women, on people who have left violent relationships, and on independents.
A breach of section 311 is an advertising offence, not a question of eligibility. I can stand, but I face a fine of up to five penalty units, presently $1,065, for each non compliant article, which across a sign run reaches many thousands of dollars. I have no alternative address and cannot absorb those penalties. Absent any change, I will comply and display my home address, under protest.
Other independent candidates have already written to you on this matter and I support their position. I would welcome the opportunity to discuss it with you or your office.
I provide this letter in my personal capacity as an elected member and as a candidate. It does not represent a resolution or formal position of Kingborough Council.
Yours sincerely
Aldo Antolli
Councillor, Kingborough Council