Water leak leads to ratepayer questioning Hay Shire Council’s transparency

“Delayed responses, withheld documents, closed sessions - they can't be the benchmark,” Brenton Nisbet

By Krista Schade

What started as a query about a water leak has a ratepayer now questioning the transparency within Hay Shire Council.

Brenton Nisbet has owned a Keble Street investment property for the past 11 years. Born and raised in Hay, he now lives in the foothills of the Blue Mountains, but says he still cares about how the town operates.

“I am cognizant of the fact that I don't live in Hay, but I was raised there, I still care deeply about the kind of leadership that defines the town."

In late 2023 Mr Nisbet received his Hay Shire Council water use bill for his Hay property and noticed a large spike in usage. A leak was discovered and repaired, yet the problem continued.

Further investigations led to a second leak being found and fixed, so early this year, in order to check that all leaks had been found, Mr Nisbet contacted Council and requested a meter read.

He says he received no response, so followed up again in March.

Sometime in May, during an inspection the local real estate agent finally discovered the main leak.

“The agent noticed that there was a bubble in the wall, and she tapped it with her foot, and her foot went through the wall,” Mr Nisbet said.

“All of this water inside, all of this water rushed out.

“The leak that we'd been looking for was finally found, and it was in the bathroom wall."

He says if he’d had the meter read in March as requested, the repairs to his investment property could have been made before so much damage occurred.

“My bone of contention is the amount of time that it took to get a response,” Mr Nisbet said.

“So 12 weeks to respond to an email being like, ‘Hey, I think there's a problem. Can we get a meter read?’”

In early May 2025 Hay Shire Council General Manager David Webb contacted Mr Nisbet by email and apologised for the lack of communication, but the dispute continued when Mr Nisbet requested a reduction in his water bill.

Council administration refused to reduce the amount owing, and Mr Nisbet refused to pay. Mr Webb agreed to put the request to the May meeting of Hay Shire Council and Mr Nisbet agreed.

“The big issue for me is that this is not actually about the water bill,” Mr Nisbet said.

“It's more about the transparency and accountability and the process at which it was handled.

“Obviously they have the right to charge for the water that passes through the meter.

“I have absolutely no argument or qualm with that.

“What I don't think they have the right to do is delay a response for 12 weeks, actively obstruct someone trying to identify the leak, then send them a bill for the water that was wasted due to their own inaction, to then hide behind section 10 A, and then try and quietly brush it under the rug.

“From my perspective, that's not good governance.

“It's more damage control, and I think ratepayers deserve a little bit better than that.”

Section 10A(2)(a) that Mr Nisbet refers to is the part of the Local Government Act 1993, which Hay Shire Council operate under.

Local councils in New South Wales are permitted to close parts of their public meetings when discussing sensitive information about their employees, citing Section 10A(2)(a).

This provision allows councils to move into a confidential session when addressing "personnel matters concerning particular individuals (other than councillors)".

After the May meeting of Council, Mr Nisbet said he went looking for details on the outcome.

“I didn't hear anything (from Mr Webb).

“I jumped onto the website and downloaded the minutes, because I wanted to see what had happened, and it had gone into a closed session, which was very odd to me.

“The closed session is the big bone of contention, because when you look up what 10 A is, it's about HR and it's about personnel issues.”

Mr Nisbet says he then requested details about why the decision went into a closed session, however Mr Webb is yet to provide him with answers.

“Slow-walking ratepayers, like myself, then blaming us for following up - It's just kind of classic bureaucratic gaslighting, in my opinion,” Mr Nisbet said.

‘Slow-walking’ is a term used to describe the use of deliberate delaying of information or action.

When contacted by The Riverine Grazier, Mr Webb responded swiftly, saying it was appropriate under the Act for the matter to have been heard in a closed session

“In accordance with Section 10D of the Local Government Act 1993, it is considered that if the matter were discussed in open Council meeting it would on the balance, be contrary to the public interest because it involves, or could involve discussions of matters concerning particular individuals, specifically Council staff and former staff.

“Public disclosure of this information could reasonably be expected to compromise the privacy of the individuals involved (including Mr Nisbet’s own privacy) and may adversely affect Council’s ability to manage staffing matters confidentially and appropriately.

“As such, the matter is appropriately considered in closed session under Section 10A (2) of the Local Government Act 1993.””

He also stated that the resolution remained unchanged from the recommendations provided to Council.

Mr Nisbet disagrees and has lodged formal complaints with both the NSW Ombudsmen and Office of Local Government, which are pending.

“Delayed responses, withheld documents, closed sessions - they can't be the benchmark,” he said.

“I think it's fair for us to ask as Hay ratepayers and residents of Hay, and new people to Hay and visitors to Hay, if that's the kind of standard that we're willing to accept.

“I know for a fact that there are other people in town that have had problems with communication.

“It's not just me as an isolated person. It's a pattern.”