New Mosgiel Pool trust declared —(ready to r**t)

Profiles and mugshots of the worthies that you will blame anon.

Fundraising: Are the charitable and pokie trusts mobilised yet, through Sydney Brown’s Old Boy (racing/rugby) connections?! God knows, the Poolers might hire Neville Frost (ex ORFU) now he’s deposed from DVML.

Yep, raising capital according to the Malcolm Farry (CST) principle.

Who We Are | Pooling Together [click image to enlarge, Ctrl +]

Mosgiel Pool people []

█ Website:

The old chestnut Lucas (drear), COC’s wife Christie (hmm), and the rest….
ALL keen to help wet the heads of Professional Rugby and Other High Performance Sportsters, because as yet they can’t quite build the desired new pool at Logan Park (see PR nightmare after the stadium build, given the massive public debt created). Watch this space.

Meanwhile, the Poolers are lined up to encourage urban sprawl at Mosgiel, so the likes of developer Sydney Brown and friends get richer. Every new residential subdivision (on high-class soils) needs a heated pool and spa for speculator ‘life style’ values to be set.

And that folks, is the GAME at DUD. The sideways shift to Mosgiel.

[Note: ODT has stepped up Mosgiel Taieri ‘news’ on Wednesdays to support Real Estate, Property Developers, Local Groups, Businesses, and Clan of the Otago Chamber of Commerce what live on the Taieri.]

Related Posts and Comments:
23.7.14 Mosgiel Pool: Taieri Times, ODT…. mmm #mates
16.7.14 Stadium: Exploiting CST model for new Mosgiel Pool #GOBs
4.2.14 DCC: Mosgiel Pool, closed-door parallels with stadium project…
30.1.14 DCC broke → More PPPs to line private pockets and stuff ratepayers
20.1.14 DCC Draft Annual Plan 2014/15 [see this comment & ff]
16.11.13 Community board (Mosgiel-Taieri) clandestine meetings
25.1.12 Waipori Fund – inane thinkings from a councillor
19.5.10 DScene – Public libraries, Hillside Workshops, stadium, pools
12.4.10 High-performance training pool at stadium?

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr


Filed under Business, Construction, DCC, Economics, Enterprise Dunedin, Hot air, Name, New Zealand, NZRU, ORFU, People, Pics, Politics, Project management, Property, Site, Sport, Stadiums, Town planning, Urban design, What stadium

50 responses to “New Mosgiel Pool trust declared —(ready to r**t)

  1. Rodney

    I see the Mosgiel Whale is on the trust. always trying to make a big splash. Hasn’t quite succeeded yet.

  2. Jacob

    I see someone on this trust that was at the great town hall meeting opposed to the way that the stadium issue was being manipulated. Now appears to have snout in the pool trough that is being run on the same lines as the stadium trust.

  3. Elizabeth

    ### ODT Online Wed, 22 Oct 2014
    Call for community ideas on new pool
    By Jonathan Chilton-Towle
    Advocates for a new pool in Mosgiel have gone online to gauge the level of support in the community for the pool. Three weeks ago, the Taieri Community Facilities Trust launched a website, Pooling Together, which allows people to take a survey on whether they want a new aquatic centre in Mosgiel. Trust deputy chairwoman Cherry Lucas said, since Pooling Together was launched, 840 people had completed the survey.
    Read more

    McPravda very rarely supplies a website address within its news stories, or usually has to be begged to add one later. But oh no, today we see “Pooling Together” has an inside line.

  4. Jacob

    $20 million plus to build, and all the costs to be met once it is up and running $2 million plus a year. Sounds like another stadium ripoff, and with the Mosgiel Whale on the trust. The costs will land at the feet of the ratepayers, and not the whale’s mates who hope to profit from the pool at the expense of the ratepayers.

  5. Elizabeth

    Cr Wilson is in her make-it-work mood again. Dog loves a trier. And Mr Reece, hasn’t he retired already. ODT provides the Trust’s weblink a second time – NO-ONE BUT NO-ONE ELSE gets this preferential treatment. GOB Alert.


    ### ODT Online Wed, 26 Nov 2014
    Pool proposal off to council
    By Shawn McAvinue
    A plan for a $15 million Taieri Aquatic Facility at Memorial Park in Mosgiel will be handed to Dunedin City Council staff on Monday .
    Taieri Community Facilities Trust chairman Michael Stedman said a draft proposal included results from more than 2300 online surveys from the trust’s website
    The data revealed the public wanted four pools – a toddler pool, learner pool, 25m lap pool and hydrotherapy pool.
    Read more + Graphics

    █ The trust will provide a public update on the proposal at Coronation Hall on December 16 at 7.30pm.

    • Elizabeth

      At about this point we must refresh on the speech of Michael Stedman to the public meeting hosted by Stop the Stadium (STS) at the Dunedin Town Hall back in 2009. Mr Stedman seems to have changed his views since then – as can happen when your own pet project surfaces and you’re made the ‘pooling together’ Taieri Community Facilities Trust presidente importantes !!

      Michael Stedman – STS Town Hall meeting 29.3.09

      • What a difference a project can make. If it catches your heart it’s all go, if not, you bring logic and largely common sense to the table. In the stadium issue Mr Stedman brought the latter, in this case he brings his heart only leaving the logic and common sense at the door. I am reminded of the occasion when the ODT Editor Robin Charteris, in an interview for a northern magazine on the proposed stadium brought his logic and common sense to the interview, thinking probably few if any Dunedin citizens would read it. Next he writes an editorial for the ODT extolling the prospect of the stadium becoming a reality. I wrote an opinion piece covering that about face, asking if the real Robin Charteris would please stand up. He never did. My point being, that people need to do what they need to do, when they need to do it, sometimes making an absolute prat of themselves in the process. Mr Stedman and the Mosgiel Pool fall into that category absolutely.

        • Peter

          It never ceases to amaze me how people can so readily trash their integrity, and reputations, by doing abrupt about faces on even the same issue….particularly, as you say, where they lose any logical arguments they previously held.
          Sometimes this might be excused for reasons of being enlightened by new information, but with the stadium the arguments against have never changed. Yet, we have people on the council who swore black and blue why the stadium could never work and then, lo and behold, it suddenly can!
          Of course, these same people are sometimes held hostage, once they obtain office, by ‘something’ held over them, by powerful people, with the threat of being exposed if they don’t toe the line. They have to wear the humiliation.
          In other cases, their previous beliefs and promises were never genuinely held, but were just a convenient route to getting what they wanted for themselves.
          We come to our own conclusions from what we observe, and hear, about the backgrounds of these people as to where they probably fit in.

  6. Anonymous

    Ain’t it cute how they continue to push what the public wants versus what it would pay for. There’s quite a difference between a survey that asks “Do you want a new pool?” compared to “Are you prepared to pay for a new pool?”.

  7. Oops
    Don’t quibble, Anonymous. It worked for the Fubar. Remember how often CST trotted out the “statistic” that umpty-tump percent of Dunedin people wanted a new stadium?

  8. Jacob

    Why is the trust only looking at building a new pool with an estimated cost of up to $20 million, that could be 10 / 15 years before it is available, and not making available for the community, the choice of upgrading the old pool for year round availability, that has been estimated at only $2.5 million, and 6 months to complete ?

    • Jacob, this is a case of people who learn from past experience – and people who don’t.

      Spot similarities –
      Why is the trust
      only looking at building a new pool
      …….rugby venue……
      with an estimated cost of up to $20 million
      ………yes, well, you get the picture?

      This “trust” (talk about ironic title!) has already notched up its first win, getting council to hand over ratepayers’ money to pay for “investigating” the scheme. That’s like getting the first deposit on a lounge suite on layby. Don’t pay it off: lose the lot. So they’ve set up emotional >< financial buy-in. From here on it's only a matter of ratchetting up the "must-have" features till they achieve their wildest ambitions.

  9. Rob Hamlin

    As a resident of Mosgiel, I have just sent this e-mail to the Trust. Let’s see if they are prepared to engage with me as a member of the community!


    I note the claim made in the ODT today that: “Compton Fundraising Group consultants interviewed 30 groups across the Taieri and calculated the communities were willing to contribute $7.5 million for a new facility.”

    Now as a professional market researcher and market feasibility research educator I am fascinated by this remarkable calculation. By the simple expedient of dividing the $7.5 million by the number of rateable residences in the catchment I discover that my expected contribution would be between one and two thousand dollars. I am assuming residents will be the primary source of money as the area is not exactly flush with the large businesses that might otherwise stump up this money.

    As you are asking the community to make a major decision here, I would expect this Compton report to be available in its entirety with its calculations explicit. This is all the more relevant as the Carisbrook Stadium Trust made a less ambitious donation claim within this same community, but on a less ambitious per capita basis for the Stadium. They eventually ended up delivering pretty much nothing, with the donation shortfall eventually being made up fully by the ratepayer.

    If a similar shortfall occurs this time round, it is not beyond the realm of possibility that the ratepayers may be asked to stump up again to cover it, and it’s not unfair to predict that this might be funded by a specific targeted rate on the pool’s catchment. In which case the projected $1-2,000 voluntary donation becomes a non-discretionary tax. Were the shortfall to be c. 100% (as in the CST exercise) it would cause considerable hardship within some parts of the Mosgiel community, especially if it was augmented by a large shortfall in your predictions of operational revenue. I would reiterate that both these outcomes have now occurred with regard to the FB Stadium. As many of the poorer residents of Mosgiel are also very elderly, often live alone and are unlikely to be regular users of the pool, this would be a particularly unfair outcome.

    As a Taieri resident who may (will) end up carrying the fiscal can for this, I would therefore be grateful if you would furnish me with a full copy of the Compton Fundraising Group report, with summaries of all meetings and descriptions of all thirty of the ‘groups’ who formed the basis of it, plus its calculations that predicts a willing donation of $7.5 million from within the catchment, and a willing $1-2000 donation from me personally.

    As this is not a commercial facility proposal, and the research was presumably paid for by your ratepayer (me) funded DCC grant I do not consider ‘commercial sensitivity’ to be a valid reason for withholding it. I would also expect to see it tabled in full at your Coronation Hall meeting in December.

    Yours sincerely,

    Robert Hamlin

    • Elizabeth

      Quite brilliant Rob, and straightforward for transparency!

    • cinimodjunior

      A standing ovation for Rob Hamlin. His challenge is an arrow to the heart of these pompous cretins who are so besotted by their self importance that they are totally blind to the notion that there may be some in the community who can recognise their bullshit for what it is. I don’t know Rob Hamlin, but I would like to shake his hand. He is asking all the valid questions. His focus is on the pursuit of the truth and he structures his question in a manner ‘that failure of the Trust to answer’ will confirm that we are facing a re-run of the work of despots such as those who gave us the Albatross at Awatea St. So I call on all reasonable people to unreservedly support the sentiments of Rob Hamlin by inundating this ‘gangster group’ with a simple e-mail to their office which might read “Could you please copy to me your response to Rob Hamlin’s communique (to you) of 26 Nov 2014. His questions are precisely my questions, so rather than burden you with a repetition of those concerns it would be suffice for you to simply copy to me your response to Mr Hamlin’s concerns.”

      I have had many years of association with Local Authorities, and they love to divide their enemies (the principle of divide and rule). So we must not allow them this charity. The reason why people sit at home and bitch about issues is that they have too many ‘survival issues’ in their day to have the time to sit down and construct a meaningful argument. A consequence of this is that the Council/Trust receive a bunch of desperate and poorly constructed (and sometimes barely literate) arguments which do not focus on the succinctly asked and potentially ‘game changing’ questions. Rob Hamlin has done that for us, so let’s plagerise his work by saturating this Trust with a simple request to have their response to Rob Hamlin’s questions copied to you. The real value of this strategy is (a) we feed off Rob Hamlin’s uncanny propensity to ask the right questions in an incredibly succinct and literate way, and (b) the bugbear that stops 90% of good and honest people to go to war against these egotistic bastards is that few of us are ‘wordsmiths’. Most find it incredibly hard to compose an ‘ordered’ written argument, so consequentially they walk away. Let Rob fix that for you! Ten to twelve words should do; just ask them (in a courteous manner) for a copy of their response to Rob’s questions. Can’t remember the US President who historically said “When injustice becomes the rule, revolution becomes a duty”. Let’s all go out and in as few as ten words………. do our duty. Saturate them with that request.

      Oh! and by the way could Elizabeth put the e-mail address of these gangsters ‘up in lights’. It’s probably provided somewhere, but both I and many others of my grey-haired variety are quite ‘dot com dumb’ and the voyage of discovery to find an e-mail address is sometimes enough to destroy our motivation. So could someone please whack it out for all to see?

      Pooling Together aka the Taieri Community Facilities Trust uses a contact page at its website for messages, go to

      • cinimodjunior

        Thank you Elizabeth – we need those personal addresses so that we can nail them as individuals. It’s too easy for them to hide behind the mantel of a Trust.

  10. What’s that Rob – you think they have to have an actual reason for “commercial sensitivity” other than “we don’t want you to know”? Too late for that I think. It’s no longer related to literal fact, it’s morphed into a special part of Our NZ Culture.

  11. Elizabeth

    cinimodjunior, it’s probably best that people wishing to communicate with Pooling Together / Taieri Community Facilities Trust use the official channel provided via their website
    Alternatively, they can contact the trust chairman Michael Stedman.

    Another thought is, because Mosgiel Taieri Community Board has to greater effect set up the pool project, local residents should contact community board members personally with their issues and concerns. Their contact details are published by DCC at —or briefly here:

    Mosgiel-Taieri Community Board

    mosgiel taieri community board [] 1Board members (from left) Bill Feather, Sarah Nitis, Martin Dillon, Mark Willis, Maurice Prendergast, Blackie Catlow

    Bill Feather (Chair) 1 Brookside Place, Mosgiel 9024
    P 489 5842 M 027 598 1011 | feather.billinda

    Blackie Catlow 6 Lynas Street, Outram 9019
    P 486 1102 M 027 489 4456 B 489 4456 | info

    Martin Dillon 23 Church Street, Mosgiel 9024
    P 489 5277 M 027 433 7800 | dillonfamily1

    Sarah Nitis 27 Cherry Drive, Mosgiel 9024
    P 484 7632 M 027 543 3903 | sarah.nitis

    Maurice Prendergast 2 Crossan Terrace, Wingatui, RD2, Mosgiel 9092
    P 489 8612 M 027 434 5545 | abacus336

    Mark Willis 31a Lanark Street, Mosgiel
    P 489 4531 M 021 990 032 | mark

    • cinimodjunior

      Nah – where did this info’ come from? I can understand the logic that one would expect (as you say) the Community Board to have set up this ‘Pool Project’ but this is far from the truth. The Community Board was mooted as the vehicle to promote this pipedream, but it got ‘guzzumped in the early stages’ by this nebulous Taieri Communities Facilities Trust. Notwithstanding any intentions the Community Board may have had, this interloping Trust elbowed the Board aside by presenting to the DCC Annual Plan asking for $50,000 to fund their grand feasibility plan. The record shows that Council chose to ‘give credence’ to this Trust by granting them $30,000 and in doing so Council ‘shouldered’ the elected arm (the Community Board) out of the way; giving preference to support this Trust made up of unelected members. So with respect’ there is no point in referring folk to the Community Board, because it is an unelected Trust that is engaged (using ratepayer funds) in this rorting. We shall never know why Council bypassed the elected Board and funded this ‘little understood’ Trust, but it is fair to say that the project is such a ‘fairies at the bottom of the garden’ exercise that I’m aware of at least one Community Board member who relishes being excluded from any association with such a profoundly witless exercise. If anybody is minded to argue that this is not a witless exercise, I’d prefer to let Rob Hamlin do the talking. His contribution on these pages describes better than I the level of fantasy and puffery that this Trust engages in in an attempt to sell their shabby plan. Sadly, because they (the Trust) have solicited public responses based on ‘would you like a new pool’ rather than would you like to pay for a new pool’ they can point to all these affirmative responses and thus ‘launder’ them as a mandate to proceed with the pursuit of madness. So in summary Elizabeth, don’t refer readers to ask questions of the Community Board – the Community Board knows little or nothing of the activity of the Trust that is promoting this ratepayer ‘debt funded’ monster.

      • Brian Miller

        I find cinimodjunior’s conclusion that the community board knows little or nothing of the activity of the trust rather unusual, when one considers that at least three present and one former community board members are involved either directly or indirectly with the trust. As you can see from the photo above that there are only 6 members of the board.
        Chairman of the community board Feather is the board’s representative on the trust. If the board members claim to know little as to what is going on in the trust, them that lies directly in the lap of chairman Feather. It would appear that the Chairman is still running the board as a shambles, as it was when I was on it. It should be noted that the picnic table issue has been before the board about six times, and each time the shambles continues. They move a resolution, and then at the next meeting they revisit it, withdraw the previous resolution, and change the resolution again. This circus has been going on for well over 12 months, and chairman Feather appears to have no grip on how meetings are to be run to achieve an outcome that will survive past the next meeting.

      • Jacob

        You say cinimodjunior that the trust asked for $50,000. I believe that
        Cr Lord supported giving them $80,000, and during the election campaign promoted a targeted rate for the pool.
        I also recall Cr Lord said during the election campaign, “No more money for the stadium.” He must have forgotten that last week, when he suggested selling assets to prop up the stadium.
        It must be hard being a dairy farmer and a politician, and having to work out which tit to pull.

  12. Tiger

    What a pretty sight. It is hard to tell if is the inhabitants of the Mosgiel zoo, or the attendants. Who is the big fat boy at the back?

  13. Elizabeth

    cinimodjunior, I stand by my earlier comment.

    The Mosgiel-Taieri Community Board is there to represent the constituents of the area and as such Board members have a direct and substantial responsibility to be aware of and conversant with all aspects (good and bad) of the proposed pool project.

    This might well include the responsibility the Community Board now has, for example, to inform local people if their existing pool will be open and upgraded in the interim period before a new pool complex might be built, giving enhanced year-long access (since this is a topical issue). And also making sure to evaluate the best location of the pool for Dunedin’s wider Southern electorate – perhaps such a significant potential community asset is not best sited at Mosgiel at all ??! Perhaps a wider more inclusive feasibility study is needed to canvass the Southern area.

    I would have no confidence in a Community Board that abandons its duty of care and proper functionary role for its Community, or devolves its responsibilities to a non-elected entity(s). Otherwise, in assuming a passive non-critical role there is no Community representation (ensuring best outcomes for all???) and no reason for the Community Board to continue functioning.

    If people in the Mosgiel-Taieri area have any concerns or issues with the proposed pool project, of course they should make their feelings known clearly to the Community Board.

    • cinimodjunior

      You’re not listening Elizabeth. The Community Board did not ‘devolve its duty of care’ to non-elected entity’ies. I believe that some particular Community Board members (by fireside meeting) were ‘complicit’ in undermining the Board by promoting this particular Trust as the lead entity. Why they did this is a moot point but maybe they sensed unwanted criticism (from within) if the plea was made by Board resolution. In consequence it was this unelected Trust which made the manic bid for ratepayer support for what can only be described as a ‘vanity project’ and (inconceivably) Council gave them status and gave them money. What say you?

  14. Brian Miller

    It could be difficult Elizabeth to discuss such matters with some community board members who could be developers, or worse still have a pecuniary interest in establishing the pool.

  15. Elizabeth

    Good point, Brian. This Community Board needs some clean up it must be said. Mr Feather’s job as Chairman.

  16. Elizabeth

    To be tabled at the full Council meeting on 15 December 2014:

    Report – Council – 15/12/2014 (PDF, 10.3 MB)
    Aquatic Facility Issues in Mosgiel: Taieri Community Facilities Trust Feasibility Study

    The Taieri Community Facilities Trust (the Trust) has completed a feasibility study after $30,000 was made available by Council to the Trust for the 2014/15 year to develop a proposal for a new aquatic facility in Mosgiel. The Trust’s feasibility study specifically covers a preferred site for a new aquatic facility, a preferred design, and a funding proposal. The Trust will be seeking commitment from Council during the development of the 15/16 LTP for funding to progress this project.
    This report summarises key points of the Trust’s “Taieri Aquatic Centre Feasibility Study”, which is included with the agenda. It also describes the advice staff will need to provide around the proposal to ensure Council can make an informed decision before further progress can be made.

    That Council:
    1. Note that the Taieri Community Facilities Trust have completed a feasibility study and identified their preferred Mosgiel aquatic facility and location, and thank them for the extensive amount of work done to date.
    2. Note that there has been insufficient time, since receiving the report in late November, for staff to be able to provide a full analysis of the feasibility study, its assumptions and implications for Council.
    3. Note that staff will provide further advice on the projections, estimates and assumptions in the Trust’s feasibility study, in late January, for consideration during the Council’s January 2015/16 Long Term Plan meeting.

    Agenda – Council – 15/12/2014 (PDF, 250.8 KB)

    Other reports here.

  17. Elizabeth

    Another chance for Council to get stiffed by a community of do-gooders that won’t do the full fundraising required to build a new community asset and meet its operational costs. Stadium 2.
    What happens to the existing pool and why isn’t it being upgraded instead?!

  18. Elizabeth

    ### ODT Online Tue, 16 Dec 2014
    Staff to assess pool plan
    By Debbie Porteous
    Dunedin city councillors will wait until a proposal for a new aquatic centre in Mosgiel is assessed by staff, before discussing it. Michael Stedman, chairman of the Taieri Community Facilities Trust, appeared before yesterday’s full council meeting, during the public forum, to talk councillors through the proposal.
    Read more

  19. Elizabeth

    From another thread:

    Submitted on 2014/12/14 at 10:41 pm

    To be honest, I’d want that tree removed too.
    On the Mosgiel pool site, Seddon Park is the better location, no tree removal needed and better synergy with existing sporting facilities.

  20. Jacob

    You had to be at the pool meeting in Mosgiel tonight to believe it.
    About 35 turned up, and the top table was full of the trust members and looked like the last supper, with a fat fellow sitting on the end.
    Old councillor Prendergast and a few others asked some good questions, but got no answers.
    The two ward councilors Lord and Wilson were notable because of their absence.
    It appears that the trust must have been coached by Farry, because it appears that the trust believe there is plenty of locals who are keen to fund the $7 million private funding. Yet none of the 35 there tonight were prepared to put their hands in their pockets, and start the private money rolling in.
    That is the second meeting that I have been to about the pool. The only difference between the two meetings was that there was no screaming baby at tonight’s meeting.
    35 turned up, about half were supporters. If that is all the interest there is, then the pool is dead before it gets off the ground.

  21. Elizabeth

    OK Jacob, so the old fob-off “half community funding / half DCC” ain’t a flyer – ratepayers get stiffed for the majority of capital build and operational expenditure. I thought Malcolm was DEAD, or at least hated in Eiontown (by report). Ah then his name recently appeared at ODT for the Dunedin Art Festival wash-up – but he was shaking and dribbling.

    Carry that heavy rock into the Lake, Malc.

  22. Jacob

    Elizabeth, from what I have seen tonight, I don’t think there will be any half from the DCC either. The absence of Lord and Wilson to listen to their community, tells it all.
    By the way, they have dragged out one old fossil to help out. Former Cr Weatherall. He could have a few good connections for them.

  23. Rob Hamlin

    I was there – the Mosgiel pool catchment apparently has 30,000 people living in it, and it apparently includes South Dunedin ‘because it’s quicker to get to Mosgiel down the motorway than it is to get to Moana though all those pesky lights.’

    To a degree that’s reassuring. If we’re going down to a targeted targeted rate (compulsory pool donation/koha) in Mosgiel, at least it looks like we’ll be taking plenty of other unsuspecting souls with us. It will be a surprise in Musselburgh, that’s for sure. The Southern and Western territorial limits of the ever-generous MossiPoolite tribe were not specified, but the next pool to the South is Balclutha I think, and Alexandra to the West – so Milton and Ranfurly, with Waverly to the North – s’pose?

    Balcutha’s pool got mentioned a lot in the meeting as an inspirational aspirational example. Odd – I don’t recall that one being all that happy a story.

    The site was not really specified at all, and people did pick this up. But it was the most interesting part of the meeting to see how it was dealt with. There were five sites. The existing pool site is too small (rejected). Two others had established existing users (rejected). Memorial Park was favoured, but it looks like it’s going to run into serious and highly predictable resistance.

    That left the fifth site – Puddle Alley. Puddle Alley is a greenfield area that lies temptingly to the West beyond the advancing tidal wave of Syd’s housing projects. It was mentioned just once, early on, and not developed with reasons either for or against. It was never returned to – Oh but it will be I feel – or somewhere close by. Just look how Wanaka’s pool is panning out.

    • Peter

      They are building a new pool in Lawrence for well over a million dollars. The population is 400 plus. This does not seem to have been fully supported in the community. It will be open for only six months of the year. The old one does look somewhat decrepit from the outside, but not sure whether refurbishment was an option (probably was). At least it is sited within the Lawrence Area School grounds so the school can make more use of it, presumably.
      Personally, I think the money would have been better spent on continuing to refurbish the main street and /or spent on helping owners to restore major old buildings. The impact of drawing more people to the township may have been greater.

  24. Elizabeth

    Jacob – Ex Cr Weatherall did vouch earlier to help the cause – this during his pointed speech at the first council meeting held after last year’s elections. He caught my attention directly after this and offered a short yet impassioned explanation (representing the interests for the City’s southern constituents). To be honest I’ve always liked C Weatherall, and particularly because he gave me judiciously cautioned freedom in consent hearings to say what I think for better or worse (against planning staff who jumped around in their recommendations), but also because he, in my opinion, worked hard for his ward constituents —AND answered every email I ever sent him, and did so very reasonably and personably.

    Yes he has useful connections.
    And yes, he was fully behind the stadium vote with his rugby jersey on.

  25. Elizabeth

    Rob, Syd is not a well man — he can’t take property speculation riches to heaven. I don’t think.
    But he will most certainly try to the best of his ability.

  26. Elizabeth

    Search engine term 16.12.14 (cf pooling together):

    yuletide boloney

  27. Jacob

    Interesting what you say about Weatherall, Elizabeth and his hard work for his ward. I didn’t know Syd’s land was in Weatherall’s ward?

  28. cinimodjunior

    Weatherall didn’t represent a ward at all – other than the greater Central Ward. Re your laudable comments about Colin always responding to your e-mails Elizabeth, maybe he got his PA to respond, because in my experience with him he never wrote anything to me that was even close to literate. Ah well, as Darwin once said: “Ignorance begets confidence more commonly than does talent.” Colin absolutely meets Darwin’s test. He demonstrates little talent, he doesn’t have the wit to know that he’s continually making a fool of himself, so because he doesn’t know that he’s foolish, he never experiences embarrassment and in consequence his confidence is never undermined. That’s why he so comfortably runs with the hare and hunts with the hounds. I would be totally embarrassed if caught behaving like that (notwithstanding that it’s a tempting practice that can be quite remunerative) but Colin seems totally comfortable being where he can support both sides of a case – depending on which argument offers the greatest ‘loyalties’. I rest my case!

    {Moderated. -Eds}

  29. cinimodjunior

    Cinamodjunior apologises for his lapse of concentration when he ‘penned’ the word loyalties in the concluding sentence of his earlier post. The word intended was ‘royalties’ Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa!!

    • cinimodjunior

      Not approved for publication!! Where have I heard those sentiments uttered before? Ah! it was the ODT; they too refuse to approve comment that does not align with their own. Such exercise of power must be quite euphoric.

      {We move on from the outburst, by edit. -Eds}

  30. Rob Hamlin

    I do not know why cinimidjunior’s comments were not approved for publication, but if they are against my own comments then as long as they are not actionably libelous to me or anybody else, I’m happy to see them.

  31. Jacob

    A little Dickie bird tells me that at a secret meeting of the trust after the meeting, that things are not at all happy in the trust camp. The meeting was considered a non-event. Hardly any supporters turned up, and the opposition seems to be coming mainly from those affected by the site selection, and where the $7 million was coming from. Some cracks starting to appear within the trust.

  32. cinimodjunior

    Rest easy Rob. Cinimodjunior considers you as the flag bearer of well founded and robust script. In the belief that this will not be edited. I am happy to disclose that my contribution ‘washed around’ that charlatan who chaired the meeting. Clearly Elizabeth does not share my view of and him I happily concede that she is the Boss and holds the right to use her pruning knife. Sadly that does not bring me peace because hers is such a valuable medium that hitherto has stood out like a shag on a rock as an emblem that (largely) exposes the despots who have the power to put our properties in hoc. Clearly Elizabeth supports the principle of people power and she frequently gives me the refuge to expose my ‘institution knowledge’ of the function of Council. I am indebted to her for providing that ‘opportunity to expose’ I had an unfortunate 12 year ‘team association’ with that Chairman of the night who speaks with a forked tongue. My (edited) contribution suggested that he runs with the hare and hunts with the hounds and the pack that he runs with is determined by that which offers the best royalties. Notwithstanding this I unconditionally acknowledge Elizabeth to censor contributions; that is her absolute right and I must respect that. But of course I am saddened. Which US President was it who said that; “when injustice becomes the law, revolution becomes a duty”. I want to be part of that revolution so it is my humble plea that Elizabeth will ‘let me back in’ and once again be part of the revolution.

    {Simpering has its day, earlier assails cleaned up to remove risk of liability to site owner. -Eds}

  33. cinimodjunior

    No – it is sweet reason that has had its day. Reason has slayed prejudice.

  34. Elizabeth

    See latest comment on the Mosgiel Pool saga by Rob Hamlin at another thread –

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 )

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