GRANT District Council will explore a $1m request by its city counterpart to help bankroll the infrastructure costs of the proposed Mount Gambier Recreational Hub.
Ahead of the postal community vote that closes tomorrow, Mount Gambier Mayor Lynette Martin urged elected members in the Grant council chamber to consider a co-funding arrangement between the two bodies.
This comes as City Council chief executive officer Mark McShane described the $39.1m proposed centre as a “watershed” project for the region.
In a blunt warning, Mr McShane said the region’s population was falling and Mount Gambier needed new modern infrastructure seen in most other cities to attract and retain people.
He also described the federal $15m windfall as the biggest single cash injection for a council he had ever witnessed.
The council chief warned if the project did not become a reality, the city could face a $80m spend in the future to replace ageing infrastructure.
Ms Martin also highlighted the fact City Council allocated $500,000 towards the $9.2m airport redevelopment in the Grant Council area and argued the case for state funding for the hub would be “strengthened significantly” if it was co-funded.
“I personally had many Grant district residents say to me they would have loved to have been able to vote for the hub,” Ms Martin said.
Following robust discussion, Grant elected members agreed to hold a workshop in mid January to explore allocating ratepayer funds to the project.
City Council faces a tight deadline to shore up its funding resources for the centre or it risks giving back the $15m to the Federal Government coffers.
Mr McShane warned the federal money was just for the recreational centre and could not be transferred to drug rehabilitation or health services.
While some members raised concerns over the financial impact on Grant council’s ratepayers and budget, others supported the idea of allocating funds.
Grant elected member Barry Kuhl argued the council should consider contributing.
“I think it is a necessity that we do put money into it, how much I do not know,” Cr Kuhl said.
He said he wanted council’s financial staff to put a number of options on the table for elected members to explore.
“Maybe we need to work out if we can handle $500,000, $1m or $250,000,” he said.
Adding to the debate, Cr Megan Dukalskis said the hub was needed at a regional level and questioned whether Wattle Range Council was approached given its residents would also use the facility.
While conceding the project would benefit Grant district residents, Cr Shirley Little raised concerns the city could ask for a co-contribution for the running costs of the facility.
“That is really my major concern,” Cr Little said.
Grant council chief executive officer David Singe said the City Council was “prompt and generous” regarding its airport funding.
He said council needed to consider the request on the basis of council’s budget and regional infrastructure needs.
“I think they have delivered as much information as you can reasonably expect,” Mr Singe said.
Council deputy chief executive officer Jane Fetherstonhaugh said the council did not have $1m “sitting in the bank” and had other infrastructure needs such as stage two of The Waterfront and the $9.2m airport redevelopment.
She warned council’s cash reserves would be depleted to fund these two projects and council would have to borrow the $1m.
Ms Fetherstonhaugh said the timeframe was too tight to hold a ratepayer poll of its own.
Mayor Richard Sage questioned whether state funding hinged on a contribution from the Grant council.
“The Federal Government’s funding for the airport was hinged on the city contributing.”
He called for the matter to taken to a workshop to explore council’s finances and the various options.
“But this needs to be done early in the new year and the city council needs a reply back to say we are actually considering it,” Mr Sage said.
