We’re not accountants. We’re just ordinary citizens looking for answers and wondering why so much secrecy surrounds the financial dealings and details of GESAC. The latest items to raise eyebrows stem from the budget and the lack of detail as to rates and charges.
The Regulations (2004) define the mandatory ‘standard statement of cash flows’ as ‘a statement which shows all cash inflows and cash outflows from all activities of a Council during a financial year’. GESAC is now open. Charges for everything should certainly be known, and known in advance, if an adequate Business Plan exists. Yet GESAC does not feature in the ‘rates and charges’ section of the draft budget. Carnegie Swim Centre does, as does every other ‘service’ – even to the extent of booking rotundas and open space. GESAC, the largest financial unit, is certainly conspicuous by its absence.
The ‘get out of jail card’ appears to be this vague and repeated paragraph:
“The 2012-2013 budget reflects user fees for GESAC of $6.9m. GESAC will provide a range of facilities and services including some never offered before and some which are subject to market forces. Some experience will be required in order to set charges for some of these facilities and services and adjust them from time to time. Separate arrangements will be established under which the Centre Manager will be able to manage charges within the Budget determined by Council”
This is surely an astounding statement for several reasons:
- It flies in the face of accountability and transparency. With no itemised figures as to income how can anyone determine the veracity of anything? Is $6.9 million simply plucked from the air?
- It provides carte blanche to officers – again without councillor knowledge as to precise details. Delegating such authority to officers as happened with the basketball allocations is simply another example of why full transparency is required
- What does this reveal about Business Plans – do they in fact exist?
Our argument is that throughout the entire GESAC saga the public and probably most councillors have been kept in the dark. All we have ever had are vague statements of totals – without detail, without explanation and without real justification. Below are several more statements taken directly from the budget. We ask readers to consider them carefully and to ask themselves, several fundamental questions:
- Do the figures really add up?
- How are they derived?
- Are you be satisfied that this explains fully what is going on with GESAC?
“The Centre is expected to generate income of $7.07m and incur costs of $6.77m. The financial impact of the Centre in 2012-13 is an estimated operating surplus of $297k”.
“The largest additional cost increases (over and above the 2011-12 forecast figures) are as follows: Glen Eira Sports and Aquatic Centre (GESAC) expenses $3.7m”.
When this Council has basically ensured that the next generation of residents will have a financial millstone around their necks, then it is even more incumbent on them to provide full and transparent financial details. Otherwise residents are fully entitled to believe that secrecy is the means for covering up a gaping black financial hole and that the reported figures belong to the land of fairy tales.
Glen Eira Debates 
May 20, 2012 at 12:08 PM
How can you suddenly have an additional 3.7 million worth of expenses? What are these expenses? Looking at all this there’s no way of knowing whether staff costs are included, whether this includes the car park or if this has been shoved into another account or anything. Then does the 6.77 million include the 3.7 million extra on top of the 7 million that we were once told involved set up costs. You need to be a genuis to follow any of these figures and I think that’s the idea. Like pulling rabbits out of a hat they’re all magic, rubbery and designed to hide stuff.
May 20, 2012 at 12:33 PM
You won’t get details cos that makes it easier to figure out what’s going on.
May 20, 2012 at 1:10 PM
At least with GESAC, the pool steering committee actually met and whilst minutes were rare, there was some transparency. However here we are with the MRC agreement being a month over schedule and the racecourse steering committee hasn’t even met for over a year. There probably won’t even be an update on Tuesday night at the Council meeting. What is going on?
May 20, 2012 at 5:55 PM
Tend to agree that there should be a regular (monthly) update on the progress of key projects. The racecourse agreement would obviously be one as residents have fought long and hard for this, but there should also be a regular update on other key projects such as Duncan McKinnon Reserve and Booran Rd reservoir. When projects are hidden and there is a lack of transperency as with GESAC, it usually means some poor old residents are being shafted.
May 20, 2012 at 1:45 PM
The figures and arguments put forward by council puzzle me. If we know that “user fees” amount to $6.9 million, then this must be based on some quantifiable figure. It should then be included in the “rates and charges” section of the budget. On the other hand, if this amount remains speculative then it is even more important that Council clarifies to residents how this figure was arrived at.
I would also like to know how lost revenue has been handled together with liquidated damages and if the latter is the basis for Lipshutz’s and council’s repeated claim that Gesac is under budget. Countless questions need to be put to this administration by councillors and I would hope that this is done before a highly questionable set of data is accepted. As a ratepayer what has occurred throughout this entire period of gesac is anything but accountable.
May 22, 2012 at 12:15 AM
You’ll like to come for a swim with me. I live near Caulfield park and will be leaving at about ten one morning. I will be catching a tram to Malvern Station after buying a daily ticket for two zones at the local Tatslotto Agency and then onto the train journey of five stations. I will alight at Bentleigh Station and probably walk about four kilometres to the amazing GESAC. I’ll pay my 48.00 PLUS TO GAIN entry ,take a dip and spend a total of three quarters of an hour there befor undertaking my journey home. I could be home about four hours after I started out if I’m lucky and the small outing would have cost almost $20.00!!
Maybe I should continue using the Haro;ld Holt pool???
May 22, 2012 at 10:25 AM
Should have been built at Caulfield Racecourse near the train station and Monash University. However this Council cannot even enforce an agreement made with the MRC to undertake certain tasks by 27 April 2012 at Caulfield Racecourse. What has happened with the agreement??
May 22, 2012 at 11:39 AM
yes I think that was what people were calling for that car park on the corner of Queens Avenue and Normandy Avenue to be. MRC to be forced to chip into the community in reaps so much from to build a sports facility for the people. Instead it is used for student car parking circuses and the like. Amazing! This is central to everyone whereas Bentleigh is miles away from the other side of GE.