The ACDP acknowledges that several key operational activities need to proceed without being interrupted, in order to “maintain the integrity of the infrastructure, the brand and its event hosting capabilities” (pg 118).
Further, we acknowledge that certain “land use planning and environmental management processes , as well as a realignment of cadastral boundaries are currently underway and have a lifespan beyond the 30 June 2015 lifespan” (pg 117)
However, since 2009 (before the FWC), this government has been promising “stadium profitability” or at least that year or year income will match capital and operating costs – thus releasing the ratepayers of the burden of paying for a R4bn white elephant for generations to come.
Meeting these fiduciary responsibilities, accepted through promises repeated ad nauseam by senior political and administration leadership, still, 6 years later, seem only to be a distant possibility, definitely not a likelihood or certainty.
How then can one blame irate ratepayers for their calls to rather demolish the stadium instead of wasting their money? What was a proud moment in CT’s history has become a furious embarrassment for the City and its people.
This report does little to alleviate our concerns or those of the ratepayers whose money has been squandered through 6 years of hand-wringing, shoulder-shrugging, foot-shuffling ineptitude, when what has been needed all along was decisive, effective, courageous leadership.
Council is now forced to accept this report or demolish the stadium.
To stop this from becoming another 3 year financial waste and embarrassment, that council only discovers in 3 years time, the ACDP proposes an amendment to Recommendation (A) in terms of Rule 24, being the addition of the words:
“with a biannual progress report submitted to council during this period and subject to councils annual approval” at the end of (A)