Stadium Review: LGOIMA request and 2009 Town Hall speeches

████ Download: Stadium Review Nov v 15 (585 KB, DOC)

Copy received from Bev Butler
Sun, 30 Nov at 12:17 p.m.

Message: A while back I was told there was Rugby pressure happening behind the scenes to exclude the mothballing option.
Cheers, Bev

From: Bev Butler
To: Sandy Graham [DCC]; Grace Ockwell [DCC]
Subject: LGOIMA REQUEST: Stadium Review/Mothballing
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2014 12:10:47 +1300

Sunday 30 November 2014

Dear Sandy and Grace

Earlier in the year it was announced that the stadium was to be reviewed and that all options would be considered, including mothballing.
Now with the recent release of the Stadium Review only two options are presented, namely, the status quo and the most extreme option of demolition.
1. Why were the options of sale and mothballing not reported on?
2. Did the Stadium Review committee look at the sale and mothballing options? If so, I request a copy of the findings. If not, why not?
3. Whose decision (names) was it to not include mothballing as an option?
4. Did the NZRU and/or ORFU have any input into the Review? If so, I request a copy of all documentation.
5. Who (names) from the NZRU/ORFU was consulted/involved in the Review?
6. Did any member of NZRU and/or ORFU influence/pressure/request that the mothballing option be removed/excluded from the Review? If so, who (names)?
7. Mayor Cull has publicly stated that the demolition option was included in the Review to show the “lunatic fringe” that demolition is not a realistic option.
a) Who (names) are the “lunatic fringe”?
b) If Mayor Cull is unable to name members of the “lunatic fringe” then why was the demolition option considered?
c) Why were the mothballing options not considered when well informed stadium critics had publicly called for this option? ie. Why was the extreme option from an unidentified “lunatic fringe” considered over the mothballing option proposed by identifiable well informed stadium critics, like myself, who have been proven correct in their predictions?
8. What part did Sir John Hansen play in stifling the mothballing option?
9. Will the mothballing options now be reviewed?

Yours sincerely
Bev Butler


Speeches made to Stop The Stadium public meeting held at Dunedin Town Hall on 29 March 2009:

Alistair Broad
Dave Cull
Gerry Eckhoff
Michael Stedman
Sukhi Turner

Speeches to Otago Regional Council (ORC) public forums for stadium:

Public Forum Speech to ORC by Bev Butler 11.2.09 – stadium meeting
Public Forum Speech to ORC by Bev Butler 3.3.09


On behalf of ratepayers and residents Dunedin City Council decided on and publicly listed ten conditions (10 lines in the sand) to be met for the stadium project. Unfortunately, this summary table shows the extent of departure!

Received from Bev Butler – Summary of Conditions
Sat, 29 Nov 2014 at 7.44 a.m.

[click to enlarge]
Summary of Conditions Butler

Recent Posts and Comments:
26.11.14 Cr Hilary Calvert, an embarrassment
22.11.14 ODT puffery for stadium rousing ?
21.11.14 Stadium Review: Mayor Cull exposed
19.11.14 Forsyth Barr Stadium Review
15.11.14 Stadium #TotalFail

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr


Filed under Architecture, Business, Construction, CST, DCC, Democracy, Economics, Events, Highlanders, Hot air, Name, New Zealand, NZRU, ORC, ORFU, People, Politics, Project management, Property, Site, Sport, Stadiums, STS, Town planning, University of Otago, Urban design

8 responses to “Stadium Review: LGOIMA request and 2009 Town Hall speeches

  1. Elizabeth

    Stadium Review news audio

    ### Friday 21 November 2014
    RNZ National – Morning Report
    Idea for Dunedin stadium to be knocked down labelled ridiculous
    By reporter Michael Allan
    08:27 An option for the Dunedin City Council to knock down or mothball the controversial Forsyth Barr Stadium has been labelled as ridiculous.
    Audio | Downloads: Ogg MP3 (2:40)

  2. Elizabeth

    A tale of grievous parallel, and obfuscation, from our files:

    They charged (pun) into indictments…….

  3. Peter

    Their only sin was that it wasn’t big enough, but it was at least useful to a point.
    Our stadium was too big for what was needed and it is useless, laying idle for most of the time.
    Go figure.

    • Hype O'Thermia

      What about a parking space for those troublesome “freedom campers”? Toilets, cooking facilities, lovely view of the new road….

      • Elizabeth

        DVML’s Terence Davies could charge out in competition with every other camping ground in greater Dunedin. If he can run family movies to compete directly with [take away custom away from] established cinemas, then world is the frigging charlatan…. for that oyster.

  4. Hype O'Thermia

    Actually I think the DCC’s provision of some allowed spaces for freedom campers is free. This would be in accord with normal Fubar practice. Better, actually, since he wouldn’t be bribing woops incentivising them to use the place.

    • Elizabeth

      And pending, a ripper brewery/restaurant close adjacent for our Happy Campers if the stadium’s DEFUNCT FOR MOST OF THE YEAR commercial kitchens finally have to be packed up and removed, to the financial embarrassment of the DCC, or have we already squandered our pennies on those – will have to look up our records (our grasses had something to say about that not long ago). Meanwhile DCC is generously subsidising the Stadium Market operation each week – bloody hell.

  5. Bev Butler

    It is interesting to listen to what was stated when the review was announced and compare with the contents of the review:

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