IF the “survey” announced by city council this week on the $40m indoor sports centre is indeed a de facto ratepayer’s poll, it is a huge victory for common sense over arrogance and pigheadedness.
Council’s backflip is a victory for local MPs Tony Pasin and Troy Bell and the Chamber of Commerce, which stood firm on seeking a poll.
It is especially so for Messrs Pasin and Bell who said they would not lobby for the $30m needed for the project to go ahead.
It is also a victory for ratepayers and this newspaper’s readers who rallied to write letters to force council to change their view on giving all ratepayers a vote on the issue.
If council had not have acted, the $40m indoor sports centre debate and council’s denial to allow a ratepayer’s poll to decide the issue would have become a council election issue.
Once financials are released council has committed itself to a “survey” in November.
There are two issues which need clearer examination.
Firstly council’s poor language in the use of the word survey is misleading because in the Macquarie dictionary a survey is described as thus: a partial poll or gathering of sample opinions, facts or figures in order to estimate the total or overall situation.
In other words, a survey is only a sample of opinions and by pursuing this course council is denying ratepayers a vote.
However, if they are genuine that this “survey” is indeed a poll where everyone on the council electoral roll gets a chance to vote, then everyone should be happy.
It is therefore important to clear up another point – a ratepayer’s poll includes everyone who is enrolled to vote at a city council election – it excludes neighbouring district councils or children.
As an example of how a poll works, in 1951 a ratepayer’s poll was held after a petition from ratepayers demanded council hold a poll because they wanted to vote on council’s decision to move the Town Hall (James Morrison Music Academy) to where the library is now.
At the poll, ratepayers rejected the move but council arrogantly went ahead with the plan.
Within two months council elections were held and as a result only two councilors survived – the remainder were sacked by ratepayers.
There is a message there for today’s mayor and councilors.
Up until this week council has been in denial that opposition was nothing more than the voice of one columnist with little community support.
Even MP Tony Pasin acknowledges that every day, people who are in the “undecided” column are moving into the “opposed” column – perhaps that’s why council acted.
During this campaign I asked people who had a view on the sports centre to contact the mayor – it was wrong advice.
The smart people clearly recognised the “money-men” in this issue were MPs Troy Bell and Tony Pasin, who would lobby for the $30m.
So instead, people put their views to MPs who suddenly realised the project was in trouble.
They then sourced views from the general public and guess what? The opposition was greater than they realised.
It is interesting that one of the area’s council visited when looking for comparisons for similar sports centres was the Barossa Valley.
When opposition to Barossa’s sports centre began mayor Brian Hurn called a poll and the final vote allowed the centre to go ahead and everyone moved on.
By reaching out to the council electorate as Barossa did, it gave ratepayers a fair go – it’s called democracy.
Finally, as an example of why a poll is necessary rather than surveying everyone in the community, including kids, consider the following.
If you put 1000 kids in a hall and asked them if they wanted an indoor heated pool, gym and sports facility in their home backyard, they would all put up their hands in agreement.
If you put their parents in another hall and asked the same question and then asked if they were willing to pay for it, how many would put up their hand?
You be the judge.
