Wouldn’t it be fantastic if the residents of Glen Eira had a council that was upfront, direct, and fully transparent? Wouldn’t it be fantastic if residents knew how much money was going down the drain, wasted, misspent on lawyers, stuff ups, and countless other ‘irregularities’? Alas, this is definitely not the way council functions.
Last council meeting saw a public question asked about Duncan Mackinnon pavilion. Readers will remember that apart from being years and years behind schedule, plus the fact that originally the stated price was around 6 million and then ballooned out to 10 million, there were plenty of other problems. Maxstra, the original main contractor ostensibly got the boot and another contractor replaced this company. The pavilion is still not finished! Here’s what the public question asked and council’s response –
What exact sums of money has Council paid to Maxstra Constructions prior to their dismissal as major contractor for the Duncan Mackinnon pavilion? Are funds still payable to Maxtra following the termination of their contract? And, what were the total invoiced costs for legal advice regarding the termination of the contract?”
“Maxstra Constructions have been paid $2.81 million. Whether any other payments are due them cannot be determined until all works are completed. As the balance of the work was taken out of Maxstra’s hands no legal costs have been incurred in relation to a termination because a termination has not occurred.”
Going back into history, it’s worthwhile considering the following as well.
- On the 22nd May 2012, council awarded the contract to Maxstra for the amount of $9,744,651.52
- On the 10th June 2014 a new contract was awarded to Fimma for $8,185,711.67
Doing our maths, things just don’t add up. If Maxstra has already been paid $2.81 million, with the possibility of receiving even more, then does this mean that the Duncan Mackinnon Pavilion project is literally MILLIONS OVER BUDGET?
We also can’t accept that there will not be any further wrangling over these sums, which potentially means more lawyers, more courts, more settlements, and more cost to residents. Nor can we believe that a company like Fimma would undertake work for a set price and then be prepared to have that sum whittled way down.
For years now there has been a stony silence concerning this project – no upfront public announcements of what’s really going on. Just a buried sentence or two in annual reports (that 99% of people don’t bother to read). So, how about a simple, honest answer to these questions councillors?
- How much over budget is Duncan Mackinnon pavilion?
- Can residents expect more legal battles? And how much is this likely to cost?
October 3, 2014 at 11:21 AM
Sounds like a job for LOBOCOP, Oscar will find the truth and report back.
October 3, 2014 at 11:51 AM
Sounds like a job for all councillors if they’ve got their eye on the ball and not just Lobo
October 3, 2014 at 2:22 PM
The more you watch the more you become aware that having minimal memory retention is a decided plus for Councillors and the Administration.
I refer to previous posts on this blog site
June, 2014 – appointment of Fimma
https://gleneira.wordpress.com/2014/06/12/duncan-mackinnon-pavilion-silence-is-not-golden/
June, 2014 – Leader – Council axes Builder
https://gleneira.wordpress.com/2014/06/24/7304/
Might I also remind readers that in deciding to spend much of the open space developer contribution revenue on demolishing and rebuilding the Duncan McKinnon Pavilion, Council ignore both the residents and various sporting clubs who only wanted a revamp.
October 3, 2014 at 6:31 PM
The sporting people using DM Reserve have got on fine without the pavilion so do they really need this monster
October 3, 2014 at 8:47 PM
As Anon 2 says – all they wanted was a revamp, so the answer is a resounding NO!
Meanwhile because Council ignored the sporting folks input (and incidentally a lot of ratepayers) everyone continues to suffer. In particular the sporting folks are suffering due to demolished facilities (eg. change rooms and toilets) being replaced with inconveniently located alternatives, ie. their location is well away the building site and retained athletic facilities. The scheduled deadline expands and costs just keep mounting…
Suffering + expanding deadline + mounting costs = incompetence.
October 4, 2014 at 10:42 AM
plus loads of injuries because of the construction due to the damaged track + reduction in participant numbers. They have basically decimated athletics. Can you believe the athletic clubs actually have to pay for the privellege of using the facilities in the poor state they are in?
October 4, 2014 at 11:04 AM
Someone please tell me if I am wrong because I am relying on memory here. I cannot remember any single major building project that didn’t start off reasonably small and end up costing a lot more than first stated. I don’t remember anything ever coming in on time either. What I distinctly do remember are the legal battles and the ongoing costs to rectify something that should never have happened. Gesac is the prime example. Not only car parking but pouring in another $650,000 I think for some heating problem. I can accept that on large projects there are always some teething issues. What I can’t accept is that it happens all the time when there are the same people in charge and they don’t seem capable of learning from their mistakes. In private industry they would not last another five minutes. In Glen Eira they reward Newton with another unadvertised five year contract and a terrific pay increase.
October 15, 2014 at 9:16 PM
Of course major building projects can be brought in under budget and on time. If the feasibility and cost plan is done right, and appropriate contingency amounts are included in the contract, then it is up to good Project Managers and the Council projects team to ensure cost and time is managed properly. Who has been managing this project? This is not some backyard project, so I am baffled that the project has advanced to where it is with the level of poor workmanship. There must be more to this debacle.