 |
| CLICK HERE TO GO TO SOURCE |
LETTER TO ALL COUNCILLORS
Sent: Thursday, 28 Jul, 2022 At 11:37 AM
Sent: Thursday, 28 Jul, 2022 At 11:37 AM
Subject: Shocking waste of public funds at this critical time
City of Launceston Councillors,
Along with many, many ratepayers and residents of Launceston, I am shocked and appalled that there is again the prospect of Council approving the expenditure of $600,000 of public funds on an exclusive staff 'end of trip' showering facility for a mere handful of Council staff who choose to travel by bicycle.
Setting aside the breach of tendering ethics (for which I am very well qualified to comment on, and having also been engaged by your Council to undertake similar projects in Launceston), this proposal to award a lucrative construction contract to a non-tendering party (yes Nick Daking, and I understand that you are presently apprenticed to this favoured building contractor, not that your likely absence from the meeting completely absolves you from question), certainly in this COVID-world and period of homeless and general financial stress, is an appalling use of public funds that ought to be applied to other more-important matters and projects, or simply used to reduce the ever-spiralling budget deficit.
There is no justification for this expenditure to be made at this point in time, not even as a building stimulus action as clearly from the rather pathetic justification given, the building contractors are so over-stretched as to not need the work !
The proposed contract is over-budget and in my opinion the budgeted cost is excessive in any event for the work outlined.
Bicycles DO NOT need to be stored in an enclosed room, where they will be locked onto racks in any event. The bicycles will not by purpose be left on site overnight. The area in question already has a paved floor and is enclosed by walls on all but one side and has a roof.
So where is this expenditure justified?.
Quite apart from the capital expenditure for this project, what is the additional impost on the ratepayer for the regular maintenance that will be required throughout the day?
What is the budget allocation for this?
It is not as if where at home, your mother will be yelling at you to clean and dry out the shower after each use!
Coercing the Benevolent Society into managing 2 showers for 6hrs per week at Kingsmeadows....for the homeless, doesn't sanctify your likely action today to provide luxury accommodation for your personal benefit.
Be reminded that as a part of the Paterson Central mixed development (that you refused a Permit) retail parking office and residential development, your planning staff imposed 'end of trip' facilities to be incorporated.
Had you approved that Development Application, Council staff and you the Councillors would have had convenient and free access to (and the maintenance and cleaning at the Developers expense!) then it would have cost the ratepayers NOTHING.
And so, in conclusion, Please, Please, do not approve this expenditure today.
Regards,
Lionel Morrell,
Architect
and President Tasmanian Ratepayers Association Inc.
POSTSCRIPT: With their second chance to approve this extraordinary and outrageous expenditure, and having mustered the numbers, this extraordinary process was approved with only two Councillors not supporting the proposal.
“You can lament over what could have been, or you can do something bold; use that energy to create an enviable future. It is up to you.” ― Richelle E. Goodrich
