Tasmanian Labor faces a decision on whether to respond to or disregard a payment request from Hobart City Council for the removal of election-related stickers from public infrastructure.
At a council meeting on Monday night, members discussed recovering between $4,000 and $5,000 for the cost of a three-person crew tasked with cleaning up “TassieDoc” stickers found on city assets across Hobart’s CBD, Sandy Bay, and New Town. These stickers, promoting a Labor campaign promise, appeared ahead of the snap state election held on July 19.
In a letter dated July 17, then-acting CEO Michael Reynolds criticized the use of city property for political messaging, stating that several poles, bins, and bus stops were damaged during sticker removal. However, the council acknowledged uncertainty over Labor’s direct involvement.
“There is no clear evidence that Tasmanian Labor authorized or supported the placement of the stickers,” said Councillor Louise Elliot, who introduced the motion. “Still, several volunteers affiliated with Labor were seen applying the campaign material.”
Under the Tasmanian Planning Scheme, campaign signage must be removed within seven days of an election. Although the council opted not to issue a formal invoice—since no goods or services were exchanged—it will send a payment request instead, leaving Labor the option to refuse.
“It’s entirely Labor’s call to say, ‘No, we’re not paying,’” Cr Elliot remarked. “But if I were Mr. Winter, I’d consider settling this as a goodwill gesture.”
The original proposal recommended invoicing Labor, but council legal advice clarified that this wasn’t procedurally appropriate. As an alternative, the council could investigate individuals responsible and potentially pursue recovery through the magistrates’ court—though Cr Elliot warned this would cost ratepayers even more.
The motion passed 8–3, with support from Lord Mayor Anna Reynolds, who emphasized the need to deter future misuse of public spaces. “If we don’t address it, the city starts to look messy,” she said.
Cr Louise Bloomfield added that the Labor Party had benefited from the exposure and that this case should set a precedent. “It sends a clear message to future candidates—this kind of conduct isn’t acceptable,” she stated. “Unfortunately, it’s not the first time we’ve had to deal with this.”
