A Poser

28 Apr

If our council answered questions easily and freely, here is one I would like to pose.  Some background is required first though.

ICC are consulting on spending $2.137 million total on changes to Splash Palace.

Café and Foyer $177,000
Changing rooms extension $962,000
Fitness Centre extension $795,000
External works $203,000
The entire project is to be funded via a loan drawn
down in 2015/16, with an annual debt servicing
amount of approximately $200,000 which will be
paid for entirely from the operation of the gym.
The proposal does not require rates funding.
Here is my question.
Does council believe the $200,000 they will get from use of the gym are new users or did they consider that they will be taken from existing businesses?
I will ask it on ICC’s facebook but I’m a realist and they won’t give an actual answer.

5 Responses to “A Poser”

  1. Philip T April 28, 2015 at 9:06 am #

    Isnt it the same for the weddings they propose having at Rugby Park? Is there more people going to get married of will they just undercut the business that pays rates by using the rate take to subsidise the cost

    • Kylie April 28, 2015 at 9:24 am #

      Too true….I don’t know if Rugby Park will take $200K in weddings though but then again I ain’t the marrying kind…lol.
      Council is impacting more and more. I am still flabbergasted that 52% of ICC income is spent on what they define as non-core services!

  2. Realist April 28, 2015 at 11:27 am #

    Spending for the sake of spending and taking away from existing businesses/ratepayers.

    If you truly think it will not come back to bite ratepayers then you’d fall for magic beans as well.

    ask yourself WHY the ICC is so hell bent on increasing it’s non core area, such as ICHL and this lemon, the answer is simple, it adds to their total revenue and wouldn’t you know they have set a limit on rates against total revenue, so lift the revenue (doesn’t need to make a profit) and in turn you have more head room to lift rates for more daydream believer stuff

    • Kylie April 28, 2015 at 12:03 pm #

      Haha, just re read my post….probably shouldn’t have said I’m a realist…people might think I’m you,..(I am realistic in future)

      I think the statement required by the LGA about not having a balanced budget is interesting- have to prove they are prudent lol

      • Realist April 28, 2015 at 1:00 pm #

        It gets worrying when they put off an alternative water source scoping at an estimated cost of $10M, yet blow close on that paying over the odds for the measly addition in Otagonet shares, they would have been better off flogging their portion and saving a huge sum in interest to fire back in dividends.
        Prudent would be consolidating ICHL to save on fees and reduce the number of councilors on boards, 1 board to govern them all with 1 councillor, however that wouldn’t sit well with some of our “dear elected” (Say that fast) officials.

Got something to say?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: