Rob Goulden letterhead

9 May 2009

Media Release

Attention: The Chief Reporter / Political Editor

Auditor-General to probe WCC Indoor Sports Centre Plan

The Auditor-General, Kevin Brady, is to review the Wellington City Council’s decision to build an indoor sports centre at Cobham Drive, Kilbirnie after the matter was referred to him by Wellington City Councillor Rob Goulden.

Councillor Goulden says he has no issue with the Council wanting to build an indoor sports centre, but he has serious misgivings about how the decision to build the proposed Cobham Drive centre was reached and the quality of the information that decision was based on.

“I have gone on record that Wellington needs an indoor sports centre. But we need to make sure that if we do build one it is in the right place, that we know how much it is going to cost to build and run, and that the Council and ratepayers are properly consulted and given the facts,” he says.

“We are talking about committing tens of millions of dollars of ratepayers’ money to this project. As a Wellington City Councillor I have a duty to ensure that the Council acts in the best interests of all Wellingtonians and that ratepayers’ money is used responsibly and prudently. I am not satisfied that the Council’s Cobham Drive decision stacks up or that Councillors were given all the information they needed to make a fully-informed or properly-costed decision. For these reasons, I have referred this matter to the Auditor-General and asked him to investigate.”

Councillor Goulden says he is concerned on several counts.

First, that the Council did not adequately consult with Wellingtonians and that the proposal as it now stands is vastly different to what the public were first told and asked to comment on when the public consultation process started in June 2006.

“The decision-making and consultation process was fundamentally flawed. It should have started by asking where is the best place to build a sports centre instead of committing to the Cobham Drive site at the outset.

“Furthermore, the initial proposal was for an eight-court centre estimated to cost $29 million to build and $1.89 million a year to run. With annual revenue forecast at $1.1 million, that meant an $800,000 annual bill for ratepayers. Now it is a twelve-court centre costing $40 million-plus to build and possibly $6.1 million a year to run, leaving ratepayers with a $5 million a year operating shortfall to fund, according to the latest figures to be aired, he says.

While he is concerned that there have been significant increases in both the forecast capital and operating costs, Councillor Goulden says he is more concerned that the assumptions behind the financials have not been properly and publicly tested, and that he is aware of at least six different sets of figures being talked about.

“I have repeatedly asked both the Mayor and Deputy-Mayor to tell me what are the real figures and to provide me with an assurance that their figures sack up. Neither of them has done that so I have had no choice but to take the matter to the Auditor-General.
Councillor Goulden says he is also concerned that too littler consideration has been given to transport issues.

“Building a major sports centre will have significant transport ad infrastructure consequences. However, they scarcely figured in the decision-making process or the recent review by Sir John Anderson which the Council commissioned.

“The major roads in the eastern suburbs are already gridlocked during peak hours, and with the airport planning to expand flight and passenger numbers over coming years, the situation can only get worse unless it is seriously addressed.

“The Cobham Drive decision needs to be completely rethought and serious questions asked about the traffic and transport issues.”

Councillor Goulden also questions the role of the Andersen review, in particular that the Council agreed to leave the final decision on the Cobham Drive proposal to Sir John.
“I have no problems with external parties reviewing the decision, and I have read Sir John’s review with interest. However, I would point out that his terms of reference were fairly restricted and in particular traffic issues were largely excluded. The financials were also not part of the review which should be of real concern to Councillors and the public.

“So for the Council to leave the final decision to Sir John both astounds and alarms me. The entire decision-making process has been flawed and Wellingtonians have had a raw deal from the Mayor and Council.

“I have therefore felt that it is my duty to refer this matter to the Auditor-General for him to conduct an independent review. And that is what I have now done,” says Councillor Goulden.

ENDS

© Scoop Media