Redland City Council is pressing ahead with efforts to recover costs awarded against former councillor Adelia Berridge, insisting the issue is about accountability rather than money.
The dispute stems from a conduct breach matter decided at the Council’s General Meeting on January 17, 2024, when Ms Berridge refused to leave the chamber after declaring a conflict of interest.
Under section 150K(2)(a) of the Local Government Act, failing to comply with an order from the Chairperson constitutes a conduct breach.
The minutes show Council was not required to notify the Independent Assessor or appoint an external investigator.
Instead, Council sought external legal advice before deciding whether Ms Berridge had engaged in a conduct breach.
Under section 150AG of the Act, councillors were then required to determine if a breach had occurred and, if so, decide on disciplinary action.
Options included a public apology, reprimand, counselling or training, exclusion from meetings, removal from a representative position, or reimbursement of costs arising from the breach.
It was on this basis that councillors resolved Ms Berridge should reimburse ratepayers up to $1500 for some of the costs incurred.
Council later reduced that penalty to $500 after considering mitigating factors.
However, Ms Berridge has refused to pay the reduced sum and instead launched a crowdfunding campaign to bankroll legal challenges, raising thousands of dollars.
Council insiders say she has already spent far more on solicitors than the penalty itself.
One councillor said the standoff was about principle, not the modest amount owed.
“Ratepayers should not be left covering the cost of misconduct in chambers,” they said.
Ms Berridge maintains the matter has been resolved in her favour.
“The case was brought before the Tribunal, where all relevant arguments and evidence were presented,” she said.
“During the hearing, we successfully established that there was no legal basis for the $500 claim.
“As a result, the Tribunal found in our favour and determined that the claim be dismissed.
“This outcome effectively resolves the matter, with the dismissal confirming that there was no valid legal claim to the amount in question.”
In a recent social media post, Ms Berridge said she was “gutted” to be forced to raise a further $3000 for legal representation ahead of a scheduled hearing.
She claimed she had attempted to negotiate with Council but rejected a settlement condition that required her to admit to inappropriate behaviour.
“The complaint was internally resolved that I behaved inappropriately even though the OIA dismissed their complaint, so now Council are forcing me to pay $1,500 through QCAT as part return of their external legal costs which were over $11,000 plus their internal legal costs,” she wrote.
“I paid my own legal costs $2,400 over the matter, but now they want me to pay some of their big losses too.
“I have always stood up against Council bullying and I will keep fighting this, even though it has been nearly two years of our rates money as well as badly affected my health while Council pursue me for $1,500.”
