Ice rink costs inexcusable
I have never contributed to KapiMana News before, but ‘‘Ice rink makes $100,000 loss’’ (November 19) rankled me and I believe something needs to be said.
I am appalled by the barefaced arrogance of the mayor and Porirua City Council that they knowingly ran an event that would incur a significant loss and then tried to justify it with a lame comment like ‘‘our kids deserve a chance to go ice skating’’.
Almost with what appears to be an afterthought, they say they wanted to ‘‘show what is here as well’’. It defies belief. The council has a responsibility to all ratepayers to use our contributions for running the city wisely. It’s called fiscal responsibility. To run an event like this and then have the gall to say they are considering doing it again is an abuse of their position. Is it any wonder our rates are so high!
We all accept there must be some ‘‘public good’’ spending that fails to recover costs.
We have the pool, Arena, skate parks, holiday programmes, [Festival of the] Elements etc for that.
Those places and events benefit everyone, providing a positive focal point for the wider community.
The ice rink just doesn’t deliver on that front and should be abandoned to the ‘‘been there, done that’’ basket.
Porirua is diverse and the council need to accept it can’t be everything to everybody and should concentrate on value-formoney activities.
To say ‘‘our kids deserve it’’ is a very weak argument and one Mr Leggett should be embarrassed to see in print.
Our kids deserve food on the table, an education, a computer in every home, playgrounds, and healthy waterways where they can fish and swim.
Just think how that extra $100,000 could have improved or advanced some of those areas.
Every school holidays the kids gravitate to the shops to hang out with friends, go to the movies, the skate park, pool etc.
Holly Thompson (Chamber of Commerce) should look out the window next school holidays. The buzz will be there and it won’t be because of an ice skating rink.
The council needs to stop hiding behind ‘‘the kids’’ to justify its bad financial decisions and start acting like a business, not a welfare scheme.
Attract more business and the community/social benefits will follow. instance. However, insurance companies are unlikely to pay up if the fence was rotten, and there is usually an excess to pay. Alan Knowlsley replies:
If either or both owners are insured for damage to their properties, an insurance claim can be made by each owner for their share of the repairs.
It is still necessary to sort out those costs with the neighbour so the insurers can consider what the repair costs are for each owner and pay any amount owing under their policy.
They will also take into account the state of the fence before the storm.