We’ve started going through the proposed budget and singled out for this first analysis council’s intended expenditure on sport and associated facilities. Please note that the following figures do not include monies intended for GESAC. Further, we’ve also included the original intent to ‘redevelop’ 4 sports grounds, since the new resolution is only DELAYING this for one year. The money will be spent – just a little later. We also freely admit that we might have missed some items that relate directly to ‘sport’ since the explanations/identification for all venues are basically absent. The figures are:
|
Intended |
Projected |
| Duncan Mackinnon Pavilion Redevelopment |
$5,500,000 |
| Sports Ground Drought Tolerant Grass |
$1,430,000 |
| Drip Irrigation Systems |
$115,000 |
| Sports Grounds Upgrade |
$70,000 |
| Car Park Renewal Program |
$285,000 |
| Replace Coaches Boxes (EE Gunn Reserve) |
$35,000 |
| Irrigation Upgrade to Caulfield Park |
$20,000 |
| Replacement of Synthetic Cricket Wicket Surface |
$50,000 |
| Car Park Upgrade Design Program |
$74,750 |
| Upgrade of Athletic Track Throwers Cages, Shot Put Zone & Surrounding Surfaces |
$70,000 |
| Kitchen Oven Renewal (King George Pavilion) | $5,000 |
| Vulcan Outdoor Heating Unit |
$7,000 |
| Power Upgrade to the Sub Main to accommodate newly installed external Ground Lighting |
$25,000 |
| TOTAL | $7,686,750 |
Please note that Council’s total income is $106,664,000. This means that just over 7.2% of income is spent on sport and assorted facilities for this coming year alone! It doesn’t take into account the millions that have already been spent and
which we’ve commented on in previous posts. We ask:
- Is this what the community sees as a top priority – especially in these difficult financial times.
- What cost cuttings should be applied to the above list?
- Drains only gets $3 million – is this adequate given recent events?
Glen Eira Debates 
May 12, 2011 at 5:13 PM
When you’ve got a population that has more elderly than most other councils, then this kind of planning is just plain nuts. It’s almost negligence to even contemplate spending 6 million on a pavilion and millions more on grass. There are simply too many councillors with a vested interest in this kind of waste and too many officers as well. Sure it might look good with grey and blue building all over the joint and concrete everywhere, but it doesn’t benefit the vast majority of residents who don’t play sport and have no damn interest in it. I want a park with well maintained and pruned trees – not a bunch of cricketers and footballers monopolising every square inch of the park that my rates pay for.
May 12, 2011 at 7:51 PM
I’ve checked last year’s budget and there are a few things that really stand out. The staff increase in costs in 2009/10 was $4.15 million. This year it’s going up another $5 million. That’s a 9 million increase in the space of two financial years. Unheard of I would suggest across all businesses and government sectors.
Then there’s also the 2009/10 figures for sports grounds and facilities. By my reckoning there was $1.31 million for “tolerant grasses” on ovals; $285 for drip systems; $150,000 for oval lighting; $750,000 for pavilion upgrades. As far as libraries go, book collections stayed the same – even though the costs of books have probably gone up a lot.
I really think that we need to challenge how and why our money is being allocated, and as Glen Eira has asked, whether or not this spending is really reflecting what the community values and wants. My guess would be that most people want essential services not simply maintained but improved such as child care and aged care for starters.
I would also like to know why any design of anything should cost close to a millioin dollars. Think I’m in the wrong profession and should have become an architect or a planner working for a council. It seems that that’s where the payola really is.
May 12, 2011 at 9:26 PM
Follow the money folks! That’s what will be Newton’s achilles heel. He now has to find I reckon at least a couple of more million to cover up the 0.45% drop in rates. Bet ya that this will come in increased charges rather than dropping some of his pavilions and other stuff.
The budget is a total joke and has been for donkeys years. But me hats off to the new alliances amongst councillors since maybe, just maybe someone is starting to ask real questions and demanding answers. The vote the other night was important but still not enough.
May 12, 2011 at 9:28 PM
Since when has child care been and aged care local gov. responsibilty. Glen Eira Council inherited some aged care and has turned them into some of the best facilities in the State. Childcare is the responsibility of the parents not the Council. The Council does provide assistance to the elderly to stay in their homes. HACC Services. Glen Eira Council also maintains ILU’s in the form of housing for elderly people with little resources. You won’t find Bayside or other Councils helping the elderly or disadvantaged in this way. I understand that the Federal Gov. funds childcare so why should our rates need to be added. It is not what rates are for. Past State Governments have tried “cost shifting” so the could outsource the responsibility and hence outsource the blame. Glen Eira has rightfully resisted this push where they could. How about a bit of balance in the discussion.. mate.
May 12, 2011 at 9:49 PM
Yup you got it straight from the horses mouth anon. That’s the scapegoat for everything this council does – blame someone else. Melbourne Water, Federal Govt, State govt and so on and so on. Buck passing has become a religion for Newton and his lackeys. FYI check out the Bayside draft budget and their increases for young kiddies. Not $31 per day from next year – only 12 bucks at the most and the top price is 99 dollars – again not the %115 that Glen Eira wants. Not every council is like this one which charges like wounded bulls for everything!
May 13, 2011 at 12:40 PM
Smart Aleck you are ignorant. .45% of rates is approximately $300,000.00, or about 12 cents average per rateable property per week. A real brave Council decision given the surplus is over $6,000,000.00. Real brave decision.
May 13, 2011 at 2:47 PM
Would love to know how you do your maths Anon. Here’s how I do mine! There are approx. 53,000 residential properties in Glen Eira and probably around 6,000 commercial. Let’s for the sake of argument say that each property pays around $1,000 in rates. That’s 60,000 by 1,000 right? which gives us the grand total of 60 million bucks. What’s 0.45% of 60 million? My reckoning is 2.7 million. and this is probably a very conservative estimate since we sure pay more than $1000 in rates. What do you pay?
May 13, 2011 at 10:31 PM
So 0.45% of $60 mill = $2.7 mill? Gee, I’ll bet you’re a bit embarrassed about that Smart Aleck. Time to change your name – or get your kids to check your arithmetic.
May 13, 2011 at 10:51 PM
Glen Huntly, you’re right and I’m wrong. I freely admit it! However, I’d still claim that we’re looking at probably a million that has to be found from somewhere. Reckon that most people pay over 1000 and commercial properties even more.
May 13, 2011 at 12:45 PM
I mean $300,000-00 and @6,000,000-00.I failed typing.Sorry
May 19, 2011 at 8:58 AM
What really gets up my nose is that the $5,500,000 they have decided to spend on Duncan McKinnon Reserve to improve the existing pavilion and ADD another one can be better utilized. You even have councilors like Cr Penhaulluriack stating that the existing pavilion can be renovated and you don’t need to add another one.
This amount of money can be redirected to several other pavilions that have a greater need and have been without for several years. Why take so much money all at once when you can take half of that and the other half can be used to address other issues within the municipality.
May 19, 2011 at 10:19 AM
I took my dog for a walk last night at Victory Park.
There were about 13 to 15 young girls aged around the 12 to 13 years of age getting prepared for their training session under some trees.
I went over to the canteen and asked why this is happening only to be told that, “our facilities cannot cater for the gender and age mix that the club has. Something we have been asking assistance from Council since way back in 2006.”
Yet my rates are going towards something like Duncan McKinnon Reserve which at the moment satisfies the current needs of the people using those facilities.
This council and especially the so called representatives of the Tucker Ward ( Hyams, Magee and Lobo) should be ashamed of themselves placing children in this predicament.
What are you three doing for these kids?
May 19, 2011 at 11:11 AM
Is that issue at Victory Park still alive?
This has been going on forever.
Talk about negligence on the Councils behalf.
What are Paul Burke and Andrew Newton doing about this?
I don’t want any of my rates money going to some legality that these clowns are potentially creating by ignoring the obvious.