Thursday 6 September 2012

Committee's aims and methods 'misrepresented' (#814)


Robert Laing’s letter about DACCI (Bulletin 813) demands a response because it seriously misinterprets DACCI’s aims and modus operandi.

DACCI has never wanted a pool at “any cost.”  Our aim has always been to determine whether it is feasible to build and operate a pool tailored to the Denmark community’s needs, at a cost which the community is able and willing to bear. To this end we have always argued that councillors must have the most accurate information possible to enable them to make an informed decision. In responding to CCA’s Feasibility Report and the Finance Director’s Report, we saw it as our role to question dubious assumptions and challenge perceived errors in the interests of getting to the truth. We do not apologise for this.

The CCA Report and the Director of Finance’s Report certainly suggested that
“a pool would be very costly and ratepayers would face very significant increases in rates to build, run and maintain it” and invited the conclusion that a pool would be beyond the community’s means. However[CU1] , DACCI challenged a number of the key assumptions in those Reports, and has framed an alternative plan for a facility with a smaller footprint and reduced operating costs, which could be within the community’s means. A wealth of meticulous research underpins this plan and it merits due consideration.

We believe that there is strong community support for a pool.  The Denmark Aquatic Centre Association has a support base of over 850 families - more than half of the 1437 families normally resident in the community.  We have yet to see whether in-principle support translates into willingness to pay higher rates to make an appropriate facility a reality. However, we are confident that many ratepayers, knowing the significant benefits of a pool to the community, would support a rate increase.

It would clearly be unworkable for DACCI to build and maintain a pool for its members, as Robert Laing suggests. We would have no chance of securing grant funding, and it would anyway be unthinkable to embark on a major project to be managed long-term by volunteers.

When the joint Council/DACCI Project Team puts its final recommendations to Council, Council is likely to consider the projected costs to the community in a range of scenarios (dependent on projected capital and operating costs, possible income from grant applications and donations etc). Council is then likely to ask the community for its input on paying higher rates to support a pool. The final decision will be made by Council, taking account of that community input.
  
Wendy Edgeley, Secretary, DACCI Management Committee

 [CU1]It would have cost $770k per annum to service the finance and replacement costs alone – that’s without even opening the doors

No comments:

Post a Comment