Simon Nixon Submission

Sports Park Submission
Simon Nixon

I see no personal benefit what so ever. It will not be used by myself, my family or my friends and acquaintances. I don’t care what is done at Percival Road, but I am not interested in paying for it.

History suggests no notice what so ever will be taken of this submission or any other. We hear often that there is lack of interest in the consultation process. It takes a lot of time and effort to prepare material. The comments made by councillors during the presentations are often dismissive. My experience is no change of direction has ever been taken by council as a result.

The Hastings District Council has such an unsatisfactory history of evaluating and managing major community projects. Opposition to the proposed sports park seems the only wise course of action because anything less will be interpreted as support.

In my 30 years living in the area I have suffered the ring road system, a council driven change in the CBD street system that sent many businesses to the wall, and almost destroyed the centre of town. I attended the meeting when the proposal for Splash Planet was announced when people argued from the floor against the projections. I argued publicly with Jeremy Dwyer against the conversion of the ring road to shopping malls and one way streets, and was vindicated when only a few years the system needed changing again to replace these elements with conventional traffic streets. I watched with amazement when council planning for a visitor centre was abandoned after spending many thousands of dollars because the trains simply could not be accommodated in the space available. Not to mention passenger services were soon dropped anyway, something that could have been anticipated. I have been closely involved with the Airport development when council willingly accepted inappropriate bad advice from consultants Price Waterhouse Coopers, even though I had given detailed warnings in advance. The parking fiasco in Havelock North is a more recent example of accepting inappropriate advice from consultants.

All of these have one thing in common, the outcomes were wrong. And it was the ratepayers of Hastings who picked up the cost, increased costs that are still in some instances being incurred 10 years after the original decision. If we do not get these things right they become a long term burden on all citizens not just ratepayers.

With perhaps one exception these projects were based on advice from consultants. Consultants are just that consultants. They are under no financial pressure to be right with their recommendations, and this makes them more ambitious and less responsible.

One element that always seems to be missing is lack of peer review. Instead this responsibility falls on the citizens who often seem more qualified and more motivated to judge than the promoters. Of course we know council seldom takes any notice, perhaps because citizens advice is free. Once the consultants have departed with their money the costs are born by the community.

A bad history but a likely pointer to the future of the Sports Park. When I see those promoting and consulting making a binding commitment to return all moneys paid in the event the financial and other promised statistics not eventuating I will start to give them some credibility. Until that happens their claims and promises will be treated simply as dreams by people taking no risk but gaining financial benefit to themselves. .

It seems to me that other than the carefully managed release of favourable information there is a total dearth of details for people to accurately judge the project. All the critical decisions are being made behind closed doors and from the beginning a blackout has been imposed on all aspects from land sales and purchases, fund-raising, contracts and involvement. Claims are being made about the level of consultation yet it is also clear many sporting codes have not been included or the wrong individuals spoken involved. Significantly one group that seems excluded is rugby league. Promises are being made and accepted at face value for which there is no real undertaking. If the sports codes are not becoming contractually involved then their word is not worth much.

So who will benefit? The project seems to be driven more by the opportunistic sale of Nelson Park than anything else. As I understand payment has not been received in full. The Mall business in Australia is taking a beating. The HDC is already spending funds it has not yet obtained. All spending should be stopped until these funds have been received.

Health benefits:
The claimed health benefits offered by the proposed sports park are unrealistic. To suggest obesity will be reduced fails to acknowledge the reality of those in this health category. If anything demographics suggest this problem will get worse.

A look at those waddling about our fast food outlets should leave little doubt they will not be seen at the sports park.

People get involved in sports because that is there inclination and if anything the park will deter them because it is difficult to access.

An ageing population:
Hawkes Bay is ageing rapidly and the park and all its facilities are not going to see a forest of walkers and wheelchairs. More importantly the elderly could be better catered for by making it safe to use the footpaths and cycleways, and ensuring these are provided in the neighbourhoods where these people live.

Access:
The park sited is away from the population it is supposed to be serving. Being in the “middle” actually means further for almost everyone.

The park will be accessed mainly by motor vehicle because almost no one will be able to walk there, and only the super fit and brave will cycle there.

Future Proof :
The sports park project is being undertaken in a rapidly changing economic environment. The impact of rising fuel and food prices is not yet fully appreciated. Significant structural changes are likely in both the world and New Zealand economies. Hawke’s Bay is already a remote and expensive place to get to and there are no actions to improve accessibility. The one chance to open up new markets in Australia by developing the airport have been squandered by inaction.

Population growth is low and Hawkes Bay is likely to make up an ever smaller proportion of the countries population because rising transport costs will make living in areas close to Auckland more attractive.

There is already anecdotal evidence visitor numbers are dropping.

The suggestion public transport could be provided fails to account for the low utilisation of public transport now. Hawkes Bay does not have favourable geographics for effective public transport with a thin population density spread over a wide area.

Risk Assessment:
So far work limited to the athletics track. We are committed to this because work is past the point of no return. We should now complete this stage then assess performance to see if the projections are met. If not then further work should be stopped because it will be a strong indication the thinking for the concept is flawed.

Each stage should be delayed until the fundamentals are proven correct.

The enthusiastic talk surrounding the new velodrome appears not to have considered the possibility of a competing facility being built closer to the main population centres north of Hawkes Bay. If this eventuated the Sports Park facility could see a dramatic reduction in support and it seems inappropriate to spend multi-millions for a small elite group of sports people.

Conclusion:
For me the issue is I will not use it. I do not know anyone who will use it. I do not believe any of the supporters. I think it will become a financial imposition on ratepayers and as a ratepayer I am not willing to contribute.

Perhaps you might all like to submit your resignations now to be effective if the sports park imposes a greater burden on ratepayers than currently claimed. At least if you do so the rest of us will know you have confidence in the research that has been done. Even if the rest of us do not.

Simon Nixon

Comments

Got something to say?




Subscribe to BaybuzzSubscribe to comments for this article