Stop the Stadium has given its own calculations of the
stadium's cost today, as the group opened its injunction in
the Christchurch High Court.
Before Justice Lester Chisholm, counsel for Stop the Stadium,
Len Andersen, said the issues in dispute included whether it
was impossible to proceed with the project on the basis of
the council's annual plan, and the status of the private
sector funding, which was ''an important
issue''.
He understood the main area of dispute was the council was
saying it had not changed aspects of the stadium plans
significantly, whereas the plaintiff's position was that it
had.
The key points that were changed in the latest annual plan
included the cost of $198 million, which previously was not
to have exceeded $188 million.
''If you look at the plan you can say 'this is something the
council is absolutely committed to'.''
The $10 million expected from the Community Trust of Otago
had dropped to $7 million, and there was a requirement for a
bridging loan, for private sector funding that would be
''coming in over a number of years''.
Mr Andersen calculated there was $13 million he said the
public had not been told about, from the extra $10 million
the project would cost, and the $3 million shortfall from the
community trust.
''The extra $13 million has to come from somewhere.
''This is not something that has been made absolutely clear
in the draft annual plan.''
Mr Andersen argued section 97 of the Local Government Act
prohibited decisions that would ''significantly'' affect the
cost to the local authority, if they were not in an annual
plan.
He said the increase to the total cost of the stadium was $28
million: A $10 million increase in costs; $15 million for
bridging finance, and the $3 million shortfall in Community
Trust of Otago.
Ratepayer input stayed the same, but that was dependent on
lower interest rates, and revenue being sufficient to cover
the bridging loan.
The council had a policy on what was significant, which
stated it had to consider issues including the present and
future implications on the city, financial costs and the
effect on levels of service
''The cost has gone up $13 million. This is significant.
''Having started consultation, [the council] can't abandon it
halfway through.''
Dunedin City Council counsel Frazer Barton began his evidence
at 3.45pm.
The plaintiff is the Stop the Stadium group and the defendant
is the city council, which passed a motion at a meeting on
Monday to sign the construction contract subject to the
outcome of this legal action, The Christchurch Court News
website reported.
Justice Chisholm has been presented with a great deal of
written material as the hearing opens: the statements of
claim and defence, a bundle of authorities, affidavits,
submissions and a spreadsheet.
The Stop the Stadium group is opposing the council's decision
on the following grounds:
* The contract for the construction is significantly
different to the proposal for the stadium specifically set
out in the council's Long Term Council-Community Plan, which
is the operative plan.
* That the process of amending the plan and signing the
contract has effectively deprived the community of its
entitlement to be consulted before the draft is changed and
any contract is entered into.
The Stop the Stadium group says it is accepted that the
council can enter into the construction contract for the
stadium based on the existing plan.
But it says the main area of dispute is that the council says
the plan has not changed significantly while the lobby group
says the changes are significant and the new plan should be
put out for consultation.
The group says because of the changes and the increased
costs, the council is prohibited under the Local Government
Act from signing the contract before the draft plan is
amended.
The statement of defence contends that the signing of the
contract will not disadvantage people who want to have their
submissions on the matter considered under the Local
Government Act.
It is not clear how long the hearing will last. - with NZPA
Bookmark/Search this post with: