A KEY skill in enforcing any rules is knowing when to relax them. And the best leaders are those who appreciate tones of grey rather than seeing everything in black and white.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
These might be the salient lessons Bathurst Regional Council can take from its current dispute with an 85-year-old woman over the failure to pay council rates.
No doubt council has a process in place that dictates how many warning letters are sent to a ratepayer before legal action commences.
And no doubt council staff have followed those procedures to the letter in this case.
But that does not put council in the right.
Instead, what we have is the unedifying prospect of a bully-boy council dragging an elderly lady through the courts.
And that’s exactly how we would expect the public to view it.
The case of Juliana O’Connor is not one where she has simply refused to pay her rates – indeed, her nephew John says she has not previously missed a rates payment in her whole life of living in Bathurst.
Rather it is a case where Ms O’Connor is seeking a grace period from council until financial difficulties caused by the failure of council’s own water network are resolved.
A property on Suttor Street belonging to Ms O’Connor was flooded by a burst council main in August last year, causing $30,000 damage.
Council has admitted as such and accepted responsibility.
The home is currently vacant, awaiting repairs, so there is no rental income coming in. At the same time, Ms O’Connor is still waiting for insurance money to be paid.
None of this is the fault of Ms O’Connor.
Under the circumstances, it would seem wholly reasonable that council should accept a request to delay – not waive – the payment of rates until the situation is sorted out.
But not according to council’s rules it would seem, as Ms O’Connor has been served court papers for the payment of $1274.73, plus fees. What a disgrace.
This situation is obviously not one covered by council’s rule book but that is a fault of the rule book, not Ms O’Connor.
Council must have the flexibility to recognise right from wrong, as opposed to black from white, to ensure ratepayers are treated fairly and with respect.
Council now owes Ms O’Connor two apologies – first, for flooding her property and then for treating her like a criminal.
