I wonder if Mayor Tim will be attending? Then again the organisation of it seems to be a massive failure so he may not have even got an invite (not that that would stop him).
I get the feeling Mayor Tim is ready to vote yes on taking over Rugby Park.
Mr Shadbolt said stadiums never made money, but like other facilities around the city that the council owned and did not make money from, it was about providing a community facility.
“I have a feeling at the end of the day we are the only powerful and economically viable strength in terms of sustaining a stadium.
“I think in the long term we should lump all these venues together and just accept that they will run at a loss.”
“It will be back on council’s agenda.”
Given the non-compliance of the organisation and the fact that Rugby Southland have been the primary users, why should we (the ratepayers) cover Rugby Southland’s bad decisions?
While several options were discussed for the home of the Southland Stags, the favoured option would involve the Community Trust of Southland forfeiting the $750,000 loan owed by the stadium trust and the licensing trust covering the debt owed to Pacific Dawn Ltd, which is just over $100,000.
The city council would then look at footing the bill to Rugby Southland for about $600,000 before taking over the Tweed St facility and running it as part of its asset portfolio.
ILT (with a legal requirement to give away money) get away with $100,000 and the ratepayers are expected to cover the advances Rugby Southland made to the stadium trust. Rugby Southland chose to advance that money (because they are the main beneficiaries of Rugby Park). It was in effect an unsecured loan. It is not up to the ratepayers to help them out because they made bad decisions. I have already given a possible solution and what is happening is pretty close to that. As I said then, I’m not happy with it. If it does go ahead, Rugby Southland ‘debt’ should NOT be repaid. They made the informed decision at the time to advance it.
I don’t care about the ‘sex scandal’ but this is directly related to his role as an elected member. Bylines like this won’t win over people
Mayor Brown refuses to supply budget information, as pledge to tighten belt in his second term is broken.
Nor do I believe this will be seen as acceptable by anyone
Mr Brown is proposing an overall increase in debt this year of $74 million.
This is largely thanks to the unbudgeted purchase of Colin Maiden Park for $60.7 million, approved weeks after he copped flak on the election hustings for soaring debt and hefty rate increases.
Consider how low the increase would have been without the park.
Mr Brown is proposing an overall rates increase of 2.4 per cent this year, but nowhere in any of his or the council’s information is there mention that the average household increase is 3.6 per cent.
The 3.6 per cent average increase for about 450,000 ratepayers has come about as a result of shifting $11.1 million of rates from business to household ratepayers. The average effect on business ratepayers is no increase.
While I appreciate the need to retain the park as a park, I would love to know why there were fears it would become housing and how the university came to the $60.7 million dollar price tag. Not very community spirited of them. I can see me googling this issue and wasting far too much time on it.
I’ve been clearing out my computer. Housekeeping is not my forte (in the real or virtual world). Anyway, my PC is crying out for some TLC and in preparation I have been deciding what can go. I have come across my son’s stash of JPG’s. Some parents may be concerned. I have realised how similar we are (don’t tell him though)