Dunedin Stadium

The amount of money the Council wish to spend on the stadium is ridiculous.
At Carisbrook there is adequate room for the small amount of supporters - most sports' fans prefer to watch the games in the comfort of their own home on Sky television. It is much cheaper for a family to have Sky than pay the price of admission to Carisbrook.
So why build "a white elephant". Simply upgrade Carisbrook. There are much better uses the money could be used for - such as a decent bus service and all the buses modern and painted in blue and gold and the drivers all in a uniform, it would create a better impression on tourists. At present we have an assortment of buses, some of them 'third world' standard.

The silent majority

I think the better question is "how do you know the silent majority have an opinion one way or another?" - after all by definition they are silent - they're not saying anything. They may even be being silent because they do not even have an opinion one way or another.
Certainly almost everyone I talk to about the stadium is against it - but I'm willing to admit that I don't attend a lot of rugby clubs and that someone who does might get a quite different view of people's opinions.
Probably the only vaguely comprehensive information we have is the survey/vote the city held this time last year - they sent out a card to every home and the result went against the stadium - it was pretty flawed process - only one vote per household not per person - and not much warning. I didn't get to vote because I was out of town on a business vote
I think we should put the whole process on hold, not spend any more money and hold a proper referendum.

Silent majority

Simple - if 100,000 people are capable of commenting, and only 500 actually do so, then 99,500 have remained silent. 99,500 is a larger number (the greater part) than 500. Majority means 'greater part'. I hope this explanation helps.
KPL

Profesional rugby?

if it's professional rugby then they are a business and shouldn't be looking for handouts from the taxpayers - user pays and all that - all they have to do is up their gate charges to cover their costs and make a business decision about building their stadium - if they can't do that then they're not going to last anyway. Remember they are a business, they don't represent us in Dunedin, they represent their shareholders no one else. In fact currently, I understand, they actually owe us (the Dunedin taxpayers) 2 million dollars that they can't afford to pay us - and they want us to reward them for this by buying them a 200 million dollar stadium .... good money after bad if you ask me. The real problem of course is that the team chose to take the advertising money from Sky and play games at night when it's colder, and the gate's gone down as a result - this was their choice - this is, in my opinion, just plain greed and their own fault. Personally I think we should let professional rugby sink or swim - and if they aren't economically viable go back to the great old days of amateur rugby where the team really did represent us because they were comprised of the guys down the road or who we'd gone to school with - people we knew and could actually cheer for

Silent majority

If a majority is silent, how do you know it's a majority??

Stadium is a huge risk

The economic climate is changing rapidly and this community needs responsible leadership from the DCC and ORC. Not everyone can afford to cope with rates continuing to rise, especially now that they are being squeezed by acute rises in other living costs. The stadium is a huge risk, it isn't a necessity, rugby is not the obsession in this country it once was - what is wrong with recycling Carisbrook? We don't need this giant, expensive project. Let's cut our cloth and stop committing ratepayers' money to grandiose schemes. Get your heads out of the clouds councillors and consider the welfare of all your constituents, not just the most persuasive ones.

Stadium falacies

Falacy 1: Taking quarter of a billion dollars out of the Dunedin economy, and putting it into a lump of concrete and grass, duplicating the lump of concrete and grass we already have, will somehow be a golden egg that will "save" Dunedin - it will do the opposite. Falacy 2: The new stadium will get top All Black Games. WRONG. The new stadium is NOT up to the standards for A Grade Tests. The Rugby Union has said it has no intention of changing these conditions. Falacy 3: The new stadium will cost an average of $66 dollars per house per year. WRONG With 45,000 ratepayers, $90 million to pay from rates, and additional $92 million in interest on this money, the average on rates over the period will be $4044 per house. However depreciation is missing from this equation. This will add at least another $100m over this period. which brings the total to $6266 per houshold. If there is a cost blowout, then this will all be lumped onto ratepayers. i.e. Just a 50% blowout will double this figure to over $12,000 per household. A doubling in cost of the stadium to $400m (as predicted by some experts and as per the average cost of stadiums elsewhere) will mean the ratepayers contribution will go from $90million (plus interest plus depreciation) to $310 million. Add interest and depreciation (increased by the same ratio) and that works out at $21,500 PER household. The problem with those in favour with the stadium, is they want it no matter the cost. They are so unrealistic they have no cut off point on what cost is too much. And what of the rediculous comparisons to the railway station town hall, moana pool museum etc? The comparison should not be with the original building of these amenities (we've already done that - built Carisbrook and poured tens of millions into it in the last decade and a bit). This is not a new facility that we don't have - it is merely a replacement. The real comparison would be destroying Moana Pool, The Railway Station, Museum etc, just to bankrupt the city to build a replacement in a different place. A new stadium is financial insanity. Skyrocketing rates (and therefore student rents) will drive people from the city. The benefits will be few - and 95% of those benefits are currently already derived via Carisbrook.

Why we need the stadium

It astounds me that some people just don't get the reason why a change is needed.
It's because in the commercial reality of modern rugby Dunedin has been told its current stadium is not up to scratch and it will not get games without a new stadium. There is no halfway measure here, either Dunedin upgrades the stadium- and that upgrade has been decided on as the new stadium at the waterfront- or it no longer hosts professional rugby.
So does Dunedin really not want to host professional rugby? I would hope not as the joy of rugby game-weekends in Dunedin are one of the points of difference that the city has over bleaker northern cities.
So I agree with B Swift, it's time for the silent majorioty to knock down the knockers.... people like Syd Adie and his bunch of a half-dozen beige-cardigan wearing cronies who make a teabag last a month but would really love a nice fresh cuppa. We can all cut costs, but at what price?

New stadium

As a rate payer, and small business owner who employs local people, and one of the silent majority, I feel it is time for people like myself to make a stand on this issue.
It is vitally important that this project comes to fruition and I suggest all of the councillors think very clearly about the ramifications of not proceeding with this.
For the last 12 years this city has been stagnating and it is largely due to the negative attitudes of a few who seem to make the most noise. These are the same people who in the past have prevented worthwhile business opportunities from getting started and denying Dunedin workers real job opportunities. If this attitude is allowed to continue this city will soon become another provincial town, and the University will also suffer and as it is one of our larger employers. I dread the future in the naysayers get their way.
The city councillors and regional councillors need to grasp the moment like many of there forebears who had the courage to invest in amenities such as the Museum, University, Railway Staion and in our time, the Container Terminal, Moana Pool and Art Gallery in the Octagon. All of these had great opposition in there time and had the city fathers not proceeded with these and many other facilities we would most certianly be the worse off both as a city and its people.
You need to bear in mind that there is no gain without pain - build this for the future generations of this fine city.