By Jenel Hunt
A bid for the Southern Downs Regional Council to reinstate the Granite Belt Support Services as a not-for-profit (NFP) organisation on the council’s rate book has resulted in an agreement to review the entire policy regarding NFPs and rates.
Councillor Russell Wantling gave a notice of motion for the council’s ordinary meeting on 18 September, saying ‘the exclusion from the rating exemptions in 2024-25 was not part of the eligibility requirements as part of the policy’.
For rating purposes, council should reinstate the organisation’s NFP status, he said.
“The Granite Belt Support Service works to improve the life of people with disabilities and special needs and their families and carers,” he said.
“If we councillors don’t support the services that help those less fortunate, then how can we call ourselves representatives of the community?”
Cr Joel Richters said he was happy to support the motion that the GBSS’s exemption be reinstated even though he acknowledged the information and advice that had been received from the chief financial officer.
“But to jump in seven or eight years down the track and all of a sudden change the practice of council in regards to rating this particular organisation without first having a discussion with us to determine whether we wanted to maintain what had been the status quo or whether we wanted to adopt a different approach, I think, is not in keeping with what the community would expect from us,” he said.
Cr Ross Bartley said as the council already had a policy, he believed it should be reviewed as soon as possible to find some way of including the organisation through the rating concession policy and ‘fixing it up’.
“We really need to review the policy,” he said.
Mayor Cr Melissa Hamilton said the GBSS was not the only organisation where the council might need to review the changes that had occurred since the last rating cycle.
“I think it should be done in conjunction with a review of policy and an overall review rather than [on] an institution-by-institution basis,” she said.
“I do understand there’s some concern. If we don’t do something today and if it comes to the October meeting, people are concerned about the rating period, however I have had discussion with the CEO and I think it’s something we can overcome when we do the review to make sure we have a fair approach to the discounts.”
Cr Richters said the policy hadn’t changed, but staff had made a decision to change a practice that had been based on previous history.
“It’s something that we have just now discovered and brought to the light of day,” he said, criticising that a change had been made ‘without first having a discussion on what should and shouldn’t be a concession as part of the policy’.
But Cr Hamilton said when the application of the policy resulted in such a decision, the only way to fix the problem was to fix the policy.
Cr Bartley moved a procedural motion that the motion lay on the table until the earliest possible opportunity for councillors to review the rate concession policy and rate exemption by resolution policy. The motion was carried unanimously.
Cr Hamilton summed up, saying, “There’s clearly a feeling of wanting to ensure that we review all not-for-profits that may have had unintended effects recently. I think that’s a commitment around this table. Thank you, Cr Wantling, for bringing that motion to the meeting.”
