Cr Walls: Some "extra-ordinary" calculations of costs in stadium blogs


### ODT Online Tue, 12 May 2009
DCC promises answers on stadium submissions
By David Loughrey

A reply to residents who presented submissions to the council opposing the Awatea St stadium has become “half the size of The Forsyte Saga”, as the council tries to clear up what Mayor Peter Chin says are factual errors and wrong assumptions.
Read more

The budget will not be finalised until approved at a full Dunedin City Council meeting next month…

### ODT Online Tue, 12 May 2009
DCC trims probable rates rise
By Chris Morris

Ratepayers could be spared a proposed 7.8% rates increase, after Dunedin City Council staff yesterday announced they had shaved nearly $1.3 million off roading budgets.
Read more

Linked story…
Council delegation to meet opponents


### ODT Online Tue, 12/05/2009 – 11:49am.
Comment by Baxter on The DCC’s time…

The DCC’s time would be better spent actually listening to what we want; not writing “detailed reports” telling us what they want us to want.


### ODT Online Tue, 12/05/2009 – 3:03pm.
Submitted by ro1 on de-confusing

By “de-confusing” Mr Harland clearly means “reasserting the spin”. People who oppose the stadium aren’t confused; they are simply not comforted by the spin.
Read more

### Channel 9 News May 12, 2009 – 8:04pm
Annual Plan Still Under Deliberation

Today’s main topic was the Stadium, and given the number of responses it prompted, everyone who put forward a submission will receive the same rebuttal from Council.
Video Link


Filed under Economics, Geography, Hot air, Media, Politics, Stadiums

11 responses to “Cr Walls: Some "extra-ordinary" calculations of costs in stadium blogs

  1. David

    I have to agree with the headline – it’s extraordinary that you can service a $105m loan (approx payments of $10m per year, with just $5m or ratepayers’ money).

    Where does the other $5m per year come from, and the $3m per year for depreciation?

  2. Elizabeth

    “It’s their [ratepayers] money”, Cr Cull said, and if it was not spent on the stadium, it could be spent on other things. ODT Link

    ### ODT Online Tue, 12/05/2009 – 8:43am.
    Comment by murrayg on Cull is exactly right

    That is it in a nutshell. The stadium was never the actual issue, for many of us. We simply looked ahead, and saw what was appropriate. It wasn’t.

  3. Richard

    You have missed the point. It has nothing to do with whether you are pro or anti-stadium. The Council must respond to the matters submitters raise in regard to the draft Community Plan and given the various (and numerous) points raised, it was agreed that an ‘omnibus’ response covering everything raised was appropriate.

    Whether you accept them or not is, of course, entirely up to you.

  4. Richard Walls recently described a citizen/ submitter as a “liar and a thief.” He subsequently recanted and apologised. This raises the question, why would he protest this, when there are those similarly described sitting around the council table with him?

  5. KGB

    Richard has become awfully quiet.I wonder why?

  6. It wouldn’t be because he has other things to do, like get through the long term plan submissions, or other council business would it?

    The bloody outrage.

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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