Sign In
or Create a new accountSelling assets to fund leisure centre
This is what the reclassification of public land to sell off is all about! Speak now or forever lose our parks and space.
This online discussion forum has concluded. You can still browse the site but the discussion area will no longer accept new comments or votes.
Relates to
document:
Draft LEP 2007 (2.457 MB)
Comment 1 7 Feb 2008, 11:51 PM
This all relates to the reclassification of lands owned by the ratepayers of the shire to fund a $23 mil "leisure centre". Land to be sold off is a childrens playground in Cherry Lane in East Bowral which as council puts it "is surplus to council requirments....and is totally under utilised...". How can they take the view that a childrens playground is surplus to our needs and underutilised! This is just one example.
Council has shown nothing but contempt for its citizens in not taking any of our views into consideration re the reclassification of lands. This contempt follows right more…
Comment 1.1 20 Feb 2008, 12:04 PM
http://www.wsc.nsw.gov.au/planning/4753/4756.html
go to web to see the moss vale meeting the 1Mb (biggest)has written submissions too
check out rest of bang the table
Comment 2 8 Feb 2008, 9:44 AM
I agree totally with Nick Cleary's comments.
Additionally, I'd like to draw attention to a letter in today's SHN - written by Patricia Drysdale of Bowral - in relation to Wingecarribee Shire Council's proposed sell-off of parks and reserves for the funding of a facility that would only be used for an elite few in the community. Her last paragraph stating, " ... Council has shown little sensitivity by amalgamating the parks and reserves issue with a total Shire Rezoning issue of considerable magnitude and on which the microscope of public scrutiny must be focussed."
Furthermore, and in relation to a multi-million dollar Leisure Centre (which would only be used by an elite few, at everyone's expense), I am opposed to the concept on grounds of sustainability. A large centralised heated swimming facility is not an appropriate response by the community to address Climate Change!
Comment 3 8 Feb 2008, 10:33 AM
More residents are going to benefit from the green spaces - playgrounds, virgin bush, accessible fields and facilities than a multi-million dollar leisure centre which would be for a few elite sports people, travelling in their gas-guzzling, greenhouse gas-producing vehicles to an out-of-town high dependency building.
Spend far less and improve the decentralised facilities we already have that are accessible to more people. There are 42,000 people in the Shire to be considered - not just a few hundred.
Comment 4 11 Feb 2008, 2:37 PM
council is not able to answer all the main questions, eg: will it be later, if not at the start, run privatley
what role has state gov got in all areas, including recent investment news, and future levies, or future sale of.
what will the resevre price on park land be and what about councilers that retire.
nobody understood the how and what of our last council elections
Comment 4.1 12 Feb 2008, 8:16 AM
I agree, but that's what is wrong and yet endemic in the political system in Australia. We are force fed the notion by repetition that we 'enjoy' a "Democracy".
In reality, some people are elected and in that perspective it is democracy, but all too often those people take the view that they are provided with a "Mandate" to do as they wish - there endeth democracy.
One could ask why the resistance to a Shire Referendum, when that is true democracy in action.
Remember - the details are being discussed, but the overall issue that involves the issues is not as it is a "fait accompli" that it will proceed.
It's the provess being adopted that is the concern to me at this stage, not the swimming pool.
Peter Cunningham
Comment 5 11 Feb 2008, 5:35 PM
Please be aware that the entire process is out of kilter.
a) The decision to proceed has been made and is inflexible.
b) The decision to sell assets has been made and discussion on assets reclassification and sale is underway now.
c) No financial plan, and not even a business plan is yet available.
d) I have not seen any risk analysis on the website.
e) I have not seen any alternative structures or layouts.
Council is going through process out of necessity, and proceeding to bulldoze ahead by referring to the "silent majority" and by ignoring those who do take the time to voice their more…
Comment 5.1 20 Feb 2008, 12:07 PM
good on you
http://www.wsc.nsw.gov.au/planning/4753/4756.html
go to web to see the moss vale meeting the 1Mb (biggest)has written submissions too
