The ramifications of complaints about councillors, are in the hands of a conduct reviewer as established by council's procedural documents.

At the end of last year, Orana Law Society president Andrew Boog confirmed the branch had lodged a formal complaint about Dubbo mayor Mathew Dickerson.

The complaint was in relation to comments made by Cr Dickerson calling for "cold, hard data" on the sentencing regime in Dubbo and greater accountability from magistrates in response to a growing belief sentencing of the city's criminals was too lenient.

The complaint was to include concerns about intimidation of a judicial officer and bringing the office of mayor into disrepute, but Mr Boog said he would not go into details.

Dubbo City Council's acting general manager David Dwyer said the first step during a complaint was for it to be submitted in writing to the general manager.

"Then, depending on the nature of the complaint, they are referred to either the Division of Local Government or to Council's Complaints Coordinator, the Director Organisational Services," Mr Dwyer said.

From there, monetary matters and conflicts of interest are referred to the Division of Local Government and everything else is managed by the complaints coordinator.

"Orana Law Society's complaint is not a pecuniary or conflict of interest matter," Mr Dwyer said.

Next, the complaints co-ordinator refers the complaint to a conduct reviewer.

Mr Dwyer said a panel of 12 conduct reviewers were established during a council meeting in August 2013.

The Procedures for the Administration of the Model Code of Conduct for Local Councils in NSW states during the preliminary assessment the conduct reviewer can: take no action, resolve the complaint by alternative and appropriate strategies, refer the matter back to the general manager, refer the matter to another agency body, investigate the matter or recommend the complaints coordinator convene a conduct review committee to investigate.

If an investigation does occur, a range of criteria are considered before a recommendation is made, including the seriousness of the breach, any previous breaches and the potential to harm the council's reputation.

However, the council is not obliged to adopt the investigators' recommendation.