How good is Glen Eira at running commercial enterprises? How good are their business plans? How good is their homework? How comprehensive is their analyses of current commercial climates and how good are they in estimating where a dollar could be made? Looking at history, we have to conclude that their track record on commercial endeavours is exceedingly poor. GESAC is starting to sound like it might be the latest white elephant.
Most landlords (and that’s what council is when we consider GESAC) will have ironclad contracts in place. They simply hire out space and it is up to the tenant to outfit the place, provide staff, and do whatever is necessary to make a buck. The owner is simply there to ensure that everything is safe and above board.
GESAC has been calling for ‘expressions of interest’ for potential tenants for several months. The propaganda machine has been in full swing. We’re told that everything is on budget, that 5 zillion tons of concrete have been laid, etc.etc. What we haven’t been told is how many commercial operators have actually shown any interest whatsoever? And of those that might have applied, how many have been deemed as ‘suitable’? This Saturday’s Age Tender advertisement has given us further cause to doubt the business acumen of Glen Eira. Here’s the ad –
“Reference No.: 2011.034
Provision of Gymnasium Equipment to Glen Eira Sports and Aquatic Centre
Requirement: Provision of a suite of gymnasium fitness equipment including installation, ongoing maintenance and centre staff training.”
One very feasible conclusion that could be drawn from this ad, is –
- There has not been any expressions of interest (or at least not considered viable)
- If, as a last resort, council is contemplating ‘managing’ this itself, then what’s the cost?
- Does this mean that instead of rent coming in, council will be forking out to guarantee that all premises are occupied?
- Where will this added ‘cost’ be itemised in budget figures, and will the final figures really reveal the truth? Will we still be told that the ‘cost’ is $41.2 million?
- How well did the ‘business plan’ foresee the possibility of commercial disinterest?
- How many actual ‘expessions of interest’ have there been overall? Are we dealing with something that will end up costing the community millions and millions simply because planning, strategising, and other considerations are proving to be inaccurate? Who should take the blame for this?
The bottom line is clear. Organisations only go to tender, and pay for services themselves, when they have to – that is, when no-one is interested! Of course we could be wrong in all of the above, as so many Anonymous responses tell us. So, what’s everyone elses take on that tender advertisement?
Glen Eira Debates 
March 28, 2011 at 7:14 PM
Feldman,the Councillor who dissappared and is rumoured to to be a diving teacher in Cairns and a ski instructor in the USA is responsible for GESAC along with a few of his friends eg Tang, Magee, Esakoff and Lipshits. GESAC has nothing to do with Council Staff who have only built this potential risk as a result of a few fools who have put our city at risk to pay off for their election. A Council should never take risk.
March 28, 2011 at 8:19 PM
Wrong, wrong, wrong. Councillors decide and vote on the basis of information that is provided to them. When the information is poor, incomplete, and lacking then the decisions are ultimately poor. The buck stops with Newton on this one. It’s his baby and he needs to wear the responsibility and the blame if residents end up paying through their nose for his grandiose plans and schemes.
March 28, 2011 at 9:08 PM
Both Anonymous comments are probably correct. Risk avoidance is the primary concern of a council – whether this be about mulch heaps and public health, or about the responsible management of public monies. If the original modelling and strategic resourcing was inadequate then councillors are voting blind. They are incapable of fulfilling their fiduciary duty unless all the information presented is accurate and comprehensive. I must admit that I raised an eyebrow when reading about figures of over 500,000 in a year, especially when a renovated Waves as competition is just around the corner. It all sounded far too good to be true. Maybe this is the start of the bubble really bursting and everyone is left with egg on their faces.
March 28, 2011 at 9:19 PM
Apart from Penhalluriack, none of the Councillors or administration have an understanding of business and money. GESAC will be the downfall of Glen Eira and we will be paying for it long after Newton has been dumped and Lipshutz and mates kicked out…and I have my angle grinder charged ready to grind all these useless Councillors names off the plaque.
March 28, 2011 at 10:42 PM
You’ve got to wonder if these overpaid pen pushers and mealy mouthed councillors really have any idea about anything to do with cost effectiveness. If they were all running businesses they’d be broke in 6 months. John C is 100% correct. The only councillors who have got any business nous is Penhalluriack and Lobo. Both of these men should be on the audit committee and they should insist on a cost benefit analyses for every single item of expenditure.
March 28, 2011 at 11:50 PM
I seem to remember that late last year in reports on this blog, and perhaps even this year, both Penhalluriack and Lobo raised the issue of cost effectiveness in chambers. As a resident I want assurance that my rates are being spent in the most appropriate fashion. It’s imperative that officers reports contain such figures and that they are backed up with consistent and accurate local analyses. I’ve yet to see anything that suggests that this council invests in such analyses. Decisions are thus based on hearsay, or irrelevant data. Worse still, is that ratepayers end up footing the bill for the incompetence of management. If this council is serious about openness and transparency then they should immediately publish the data upon which all business proposals are based.
March 29, 2011 at 10:18 AM
Anon you are pathetic.You blame Newton for GESAC without a shred of evidence. You assume the information provided to the Councillors by the Administration is always followed. There are plenty of examples of Crs rejecting advice. Anon if you had any courage you would name yourself.You just hate Newton.
March 29, 2011 at 12:29 PM
What I hate with a passion is hypocrisy and bullshit and the absolute disregard for what the community wants and values. This has been the history of this council since the arrival of the gang of five – not Lipshutz and his mob – but Newton, Burke, Akehurst, Waite and Swabey.
March 29, 2011 at 1:28 PM
Ya know anonymous one of things that links all your posts is your continual unsubstantiated praise of Newton while belligerently demanding substantiated evidence from others.
But this time you have really outdone yourself… fancy claiming someone has no courage because they sign their post exactly as you do.