[COM] Re: Adelaide Oval Redevelopment Thread - Now Includes Poll!
Posted: Wed May 18, 2011 1:26 pm
hah, nothing like the power of raw statistics to back up an argument, thanks P.G 

Adelaide's Premier Development and Construction Site
https://mail.sensational-adelaide.com/forum/
https://mail.sensational-adelaide.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3335
THE Federal Government has left open the possibility of helping fund the Adelaide Oval redevelopment.
Treasurer Wayne Swan told AdelaideNow the "lines of communication remain open".
The initial federal funding package had fallen away because Australia failed to secure the soccer world cup.
But he would continue to discuss the matter with the South Australian Government.
"We come to this with good will," Mr Swan said.
"It is an exciting project for SA, it is one of the great cricket ovals of the world."
However, it was necessary to maintain fiscal discipline and he would make no commitment at this stage.
Mr Swan was similarly reluctant to promise any extra funding toward building the new Royal Adelaide Hospital.
"net spending in the country’s legal forms of betting divided by the number of residents over age 16". Population will be somewhat less than the full 23 million. Still a mountain of money, though.Wayno wrote:wowza! is that really $1200 per resident. With our population of 23 million people that equates to $2.76b dollars! I'd like to see a detailed breakdown of those numbers. I bet it's something like 20% of our population are responsible for 80% of losses.
The legal position is: Under the Park Lands Act 2005, drafted under the direction of John Hill, then Minister for Environment and Conservation, the Adelaide Park Lands are held in trust by the Adelaide City Council for the residents of the City of Adelaide (ie the 'square mile' and North Adelaide).Mmm, and a small group of residents from a particular suburb of Adelaide having control over not only the entire Parklands but also the Adelaide CBD is of course completely democratic…
And why is Memorial Drive Tennis Club doomed? If you take a look, MGTC has been more or less taken over by Next Gen.Treasurer Kevin Foley now says he was wrong to seek a permanent new grandstand.
He says the Opposition bill would have trampled on the interests of people living near Victoria Park.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008 ... ?site=news
silverscreen wrote:From the master of cut & paste, herewith the latest (pertinent) comments from Krystoff Raw:
Time For Yarwood To Go
May 18th
In the light of developments this morning on the State Government’s plans to blast the ACC off controlling the Adelaide Oval precinct (see our other article at ACC To Lose Precinct), it is time for Lord Mayor Stephen Yarwood to reconsider his position.
Hopefully Lord Mayor Stephen Yarwood (if he ever bothers to get up early enough to put the council’s view about anything that may run counter to the State Government’s) won’t feign surprise about what he and his council have now been told.
In response to very clear indications that this was always the Government’s game plan, and indeed ever since the Adelaide Oval matter started hotting up at the end of last year, Yarwood has run the line that the ACC is in negotiations with the Government and that it has communicated its concerns and issues (control of the precinct and car parking revenue) and these matters will be negotiated at the appropriate time. The message – it held all the keys to the gates of Adelaide Oval.
This was in the face of the SANFL stating categorically that its conditions precedent to any deal involved it having that control not the ACC.
At no stage did Yarwood attempt to get these issues debated in public and neither did he attempt to enjoin in the Vote No campaign to stir up public concerns and help bring that vote down. In that way, this type of pressure on the ACC could have been averted or better fought off with the SACA vote on its side. It seems he knew better and his cunning play of ‘slowly slowly catchy monkey’ would prove itself to be a master stroke in due course. Stephen Yarwood you are the Baldrick of the State.
The only city councillors who did raise a stink were Anne Moran on radio and TV very late in the piece, Mark Hamilton (in an article in The Advertiser that was written well before proxies closed but did not appear until after) and Deputy Lord Mayor David Plumridge. But when your chief is silent, there is not much you can do.
Well Lord Mayor, Stephen Yarwood, the following key points are now your reality (and they are much greater in importance than just car parking revenue):
* The ACC is going to be blasted off the parklands as we foretold 7 weeks ago.
* History has repeated itself – you don’t appease aggressors
* The Victoria Park racecourse is going the same way
* The Memorial Drive Tennis club is doomed.
* Your policy of attempting to redefine relationships with the State Government is in shreds and it is now too late to do much about it.
* Don’t expect The Advertiser or the Sunday Mail to support you if you do stand up for the Council (where were you this morning?) – everyone knows whose mast they have nailed their colours to. You too will now be another ‘whingeing naysayer.’ The sporting elite don’t give a toss about heritage. (But maybe Steve they will hail you as another voice of reason if you continue to be anonymous on this issue!)
* You will go down as the Lord Mayor who sold out the Adelaide City Council and its history of being the custodians for the parklands because you thought you knew better.
* Any thoughts you had about standing as the Labor Party candidate for the State seat of Adelaide, a la, Jane Lomax Smith and spending your post Mayoral years on North Terrace are gone. Especially as it seems the State Government will legislate for Barton Terrace to be opened to cater for traffic coming up from the Port – good bye all Noth Adelaide voters.)
You need to resign Stephen Yarwood and resign now and go back to town planning – perhaps in some ghost town like Silverton where you can hang out with other spirits of yesterday who thought they too were going to have the last laugh before harsh realities of the day set in.
share save 171 16 RAW: Time For Yarwood To Go
Adelaide Oval redevelopment, Anne Moran, Lord Mayor Stephen Yarwood, SACA
AND on the same web-site:
RAW: Adelaide Oval et al To No Longer Be Under ACC Custodianship
May 18th
.Especially as it seems the State Government will legislate for Barton Terrace to be opened to cater for traffic coming up from the Port – good bye all Noth Adelaide voters
I actually agree with the comment in bold. I can reconcile the state government taking those parks as part of its reserve, but it's another thing entirely for private interests to be controlling public land.Adelaide Oval legislation going to Parliament
ABC News Online, 18 May 2011
Legislation has gone to State Parliament for the Adelaide Oval upgrade to proceed.
Infrastructure Minister Patrick Conlon says it will protect the oval's current name, its heritage scoreboard and cathedral views.
The State Government will be licensed to control the Adelaide Oval parklands area under the bill.
The minister would be authorised to grant a lease over the Oval and sub-license parklands control to the Stadium Management Authority, to let football and cricket manage car parking.
The Government is yet to reach agreement with Adelaide City Council but can override any council resistance.
Mr Conlon has met councillors and admits management of parklands parking remains a sticking point, but he says he remains hopeful of solving differences.
"Despite the fact we could legislate we have not sought to simply go in with a stick, we've sought to make an agreement," he said.
"We're not quite there, but we're not far apart."
New CEO of the Department of Transport Rod Hook explained the City Council was being urged to relinquish control over car parking for the Oval.
"The Government wants the council to license the Minister to be in charge of that car park area and the Minister will sub-license the Stadium Authority to run those car parks," he said.
Keen for details
City Councillor Anne Moran says the council's non-negotiable desire to retain control of car parking is being swept away by government.
She says the council is keen to see the detail of Mr Conlon's legislation.
"Every councillor that's on the council now ran with banners saying 'protector and carer of the parklands', so in my mind this council's got nowhere to go," she said.
"Handing it over to the Government is one thing, if they ran a car park they're at least democratic, but to hand it over to them so they hand it over to footy is beyond outrageous."
Mr Conlon says the Stadium Management Authority will be required by a contract to maintain the parklands.
Greens MP Mark Parnell says he will not support the parklands being turned into a huge car park.
Mr Parnell says his support for the legislation is not guaranteed because the focus seems to be on parklands car parking rather than public transport.
"There is always going to be some car parking and we'll look at the legislation when it comes through but we need to make sure that we don't just turn the Adelaide parklands into a car park," he said.
And the fact that a small minority of taxpayers elect the members of ACC also means that small, vocal minority groups have a greater sway in how council opperates and who gets elected. I notice that you convieniently keep this out of your responce. The State Gov have all the right in the world to take over the parklands if it feels that the ACC are not acting for the greater good of the City of Adelaide.stumpjumper wrote:Speaking of facts, Adelarch:
Mmm, and a small group of residents from a particular suburb of Adelaide having control over not only the entire Parklands but also the Adelaide CBD is of course completely democratic…The legal position is: Under the Park Lands Act 2005, drafted under the direction of John Hill, then Minister for Environment and Conservation, the Adelaide Park Lands are held in trust by the Adelaide City Council for the residents of the City of Adelaide (ie the 'square mile' and North Adelaide).
That is precisely correct. ACC councillors are voted into office by and represent the residents and ratepayers of the council's area.And the fact that a small minority of taxpayers elect the members of ACC also means that small, vocal minority groups have a greater sway in how council opperates and who gets elected.
Under the present system, State government has no more right to take over the Park Lands than it has to take over, say, Hazelwood Park from Burnside Council.The State Gov have all the right in the world to take over the parklands if it feels that the ACC are not acting for the greater good of the City of Adelaide.
All this talk of there being no other option to build another stadium close to the city really is laughable. If there was justification (which there is not at the current time) for a new stadium to accomodate Footaball and Rugby (Adelaide doesnt even have state representation in rugby or Union codes), and there was enough political pressure for this to occur maybe 20 years down the line, the Gov. would find the space. Redevelopment of SANTOS is just 1 example. In the meantime Adelaide Oval will be built to such a standard that the ARU is willing to hold 2nd tier international fixtures here with such teams as the Springbox, and Adelaide United is also more than happy to play the odd high profile game. Until the fabled 2nd stadium will be used on a weekly basis there is no need for one.stumpjumper wrote:
Monopoly: By ensuring the destruction of AAMI stadium and by making it extremely difficult to build a second stadium in Adelaide, the AFL code of football, for no investment at all, achieves a practical monopoly with respect to soccer and rugby.