The Absolute Cost of Nothing

I’d only been in the house for a few weeks, and knew the neighbor next door had a propensity to sweat the small stuff.  The shared lane-way couldn't be blocked for even a couple of minutes for one of my kids to be dropped off, and the swing I put in the yard was an issue because it attracted visiting children.  It wasn't until I was working at my desk in the dining room and heard shrieking coming from the front of the house that I knew there may be trouble in my little green-sided paradise.  

The tween son of my neighbor had come home, and for all I could see, had the audacity to open his own door.  As he fumbled to put the key in the lock to get away from the tirade, he was barraged with a volley of abuse, apparently for no reason.  As the weeks turned to months I understood that he couldn't play in front of his own house, nor could we, and that it would be better if my kids played in the yard of the retired woman across the street.  I came to understand that although she had only moved in a couple of years previous, she had alienated everyone on the street.

I also recognized that neither the City nor the Police would do anything to prevent the abuse, and indeed that they are instruments of the abuse, responding to a litany of calls over minuscule offences of little or no consequence.  Similarly, facilities personnel are called over and over to correct tiny wrongs, or provide services exclusive to complainers.  We, along with our neighbors, and many other people in this complaints-based system, are the victims of a bully.  

The Serial-Bully as defined by Bully OnLine is someone with a manipulative nature, who is able to use others in order to exercise an immature sense of control on those around them.  Maintaining a sense a superiority, they think of themselves as good people doing the right thing.  The hostility is masked with a feigned sense of being a victim, while their purpose is anything but noble.  Like any other bully they deny any responsibility for their actions, and seldom even recognize that what they do is bullying.

Sure there are rotten neighbors, with their barking dogs, weeknight partying, speeding cars with no muffler, or meth-cooking labs.   We all hope that if this ever happens to us, that the right laws and enforcers will be there to help us out.  Sure, the plumber wading in doo-doo in my basement wasn't parked the full metre required from the end of the driveway to the bumper.  So what?   It would be nice if the city cleared the snow from every single drain in the city when the snow melts.  Sure, the water at the end of the driveway builds up a couple of times a year.  So what?  These things are inconsequential, and most people have the maturity to understand that it’s not important enough for the taxpayer to bear the brunt.  

So what happens when regulations intended for us to get along are used to exert a death of a thousand cuts on good people?  What happens when services are called out for numerous petty reasons?  Sadly, no one knows.  There has never been a study in Canada that estimates the cost to the taxpayer of “inconsequential calls” on Municipal services such as Police, By-law, and Municipal Services.  By inconsequential calls I mean this: calls for which there is no health and safety or suspicion of criminal activity that a reasonable person would consider meets the threshold for requesting services.  

Because governments, however small, are adverse to risk, any call is deemed to deserve action.  What if something happened?  This attitude comes from leaner times, where the cost of going out was seen to be worth it.  Having seen, close up, the exorbitant cost of pandering to the bully, I realise it’s time to start measuring the cost of inconsequential calls.  As they say, “What gets measured, gets managed.”  Knowing the true cost, the risk could then be managed.  Defining such calls within the regulatory paradigm, keeping a database of offenders, levying fines for abusing the system, and ultimately prioritizing Municipal spending to cut the waste is responsible risk management.  

And what of our rights to the enjoyment of our own property?  Some say it’s possible in Ontario to sue for compensation in small claims court, although my research leads me to think that these kinds of claims are more successful in the U.S., where the right to use and enjoy one’s own property is constitutionally entrenched.

Meanwhile, the boy in question is a fine grown man, and my neighbors and I will continue to keep a log, keep a cool head, and hope the neighbor from hell moves along to harass someone else.  Still, the bigger question is, couldn’t all that money and effort be put to better use?