Cycleway bill could reach $7m: report

Nope.
I haven't missed your point, thanks for playing though.
Have you ever actually looked into the three waters programme, what it involves, and what sort of time frame it's happening over?

Tell them they can get your vote by supporting just one issue. Now that's really going to assure we get candidates with integrity and competence.
We certainly are in the age of instant gratification when voters can sell out so readily. And it does explain a lot.

Again, you missed my point. Sure, the DCC and council has known about it for 10 years, even though they acted all surprised and all when it was reannounced after they'd committed to the stadium. But we need to have a council that can think ahead, can show leadership about what's really important in life and not spend our hard-earned cash on fripperies like a stadium when that same money is needed for their core infrastructure maintenance.

It's very simple - the DCC says our worn out water system needs $1billion over the next 20 years - the stadium is going to cost us $350m over the same period (plus however much money it loses every year). How hard is it to understand that if we do them both it will cost a lot more than if we just fix the water? Is it hard to understand that for most people clean water is more important than watching sport? Because our current councillors don't seem to get this - maybe we need some younger councilors for whom 20 years in the future is a time frame worth planning for, so we leave a functioning city to our children rather than just leaving them our debts.

It's pleasing to see that both the Caversham and Wingatui tunnels are assessed as being in good condition and need only a bit of localised work to be fully usable.

So what are we waiting for? Every time I'm at Ravensbourne, Vauxhall or MacAndrew Bay I'm astonished at the sheer number and variety of people using the short walking/biking paths we already have. Babies in strollers, kids learning to bike, middle-aged ladies out for a quiet ride, old folks walking the dog - even a scattering of lycra-clad exercise freaks. Dunedinites clearly want these recreational facilities to be provided, and it's only a few DCC staff and councillors who are blocking progress.

So let's all get on the blower to our council candidates and ask each of them:  If you get on Council, will you vote to fund the Tunnels Trail? And vote accordingly.

No.
Your point did not go over my head.
Pretty sure I had to scrape some of it off my boots though.
And it's no good blaming the stadium for the lack of stormwater/wastewater upgrades, because that just doesn't fly.
The DCC has known about it for 10 years or more.
The problem there is that the ratepayers don't want to spend money on something they'll never see, and the politicians haven't wanted to make unpopular decisions - not to mention the fact that nobody wants to put up with the inconvenience of the roadworks that will invariably be involved.
The problem is that up until very recently the average joe on the street just hasn't cared what happens to their poo after they flush their toilets.

Whoosh! ... I think my point passed right over your head. We don't have any ratepayer money to spend - all we have is debt, you can't buy a lot with that. It doesn't give us a lot of options for funding new things - and we haven't finished with the rates rises to pay for the stadium. The 'capitalising interest' creative accounting just put that off until after this year's election - it still has to be paid.

You know what worries me? the $1 billion we need to fix our aging water system. I can't believe that the council voted for the stadium with that looming over us - talk about short sighted. There's the real reason why they need to be voted out.

The CAVE Society strikes again.
Well done people.
Next thing you know, we'll have people objecting to the DCC spending ratepayer money to upgrade Tahuna.
Heaven forbid anyone should ever want to spend any ratepayer money on anything to improve Dunedin.

It's obvious who pays here - $7m (plus interest on the same terms as the recent stadium loan would be ~$14m principal and interest over 20 years) comes from the ratepayers. To cover a loan like that the city will have to pay about $700,000/year, plus maintenance.

If it's a toll tunnel or has some direct way to pay that $700k back to the DCC that's great. On the other hand, if that '$1.7m worth of tourist dollars' is going to B&Bs, restaurants, bars etc then in essence the ratepayers will be subsidising those industries. We wont get that money back in rates. Remember, rates are not like GST - you don't pay more rates if you have more customers and make more money.

The "it will bring enough money into the local economy to pay for itself" was just as false an argument when they were trying to sell us the stadium as it is here. By all means, build a tunnel for good reasons - it will get people out of cars, reduce traffic and pollution etc etc, and be prudent and careful about how much of the ratepayer's money you spend - but don't pretend that the ratepayers will be paid back because tourists will use it. The economy doesn't work that way.

The report notes that the $7m Option C could bring in $1.7m per year in tourist dollars. So after 5 years the cycleway can be subsidising the stadium. A win-win situation, surely.

Where have I heard that figure before?
Oh. I remember. We paid that for a stadium we don't need because we'd already blown the budget on a stadium we can't afford to support a 'professional' sport which can't pay it's own way.
Boy, how silly can we be?

First, there was the stadium and other ridiculous, costly projects in the pipeline; now this cycling track that is going to be used by very few people. The present council members definitely need to be sent on their bikes.They spend money we dont have. No more. Vote carefully, people - it's your money they are frittering away.

I'm sure there are thousands of things that would be better value for money than the stadium - the problem of course is that the city now has no money because of the stadium. All we have is debt - hundreds of millions of dollars of debt. Lots of great projects are going to have to wait.

Sadly, we're all going to have to tighten our belts for the next 5-10 years unless we can persuade the rugby people to raise some money to offset their extravagance. What you can do is to make sure that you vote out the people who foisted this disaster upon us so they can't make it worse. Remember:  "Don't rank the rank, leave their space blank"

Guest wants to see a cost-benefit analysis for this? Where was he when the stadium funding was up for grabs?
Seven million for a facility that would be world class, used by thousands of people of year, cater for the fastest growing recreational groups in New Zealand and help deal to the increasingly noticable traffic flow going in and out of Dunedin vs... well, the stadium.
I know what's going to be far better value for money and used by a lot more people. Wake up, DCC.