BASIL FITCH WRITES TO THE EXAMINER

NB: Not published by the Examiner at the time of posting

BASIL FITCH RESPONDS TO LCC RESPONSE TO THE PETITION

LCC HAS PROVIDED THE FOLLOWING RESPONSES ON FACEBOOK TO THE CONTEXT NOTES RELEVANT TO THE PETITION

QUOTE "It's time to shoot down some wild conspiracy theories and misinformation. We know this is a long post, but we believe the community deserves to know the facts on a topic of this importance:

The University of Tasmania's Northern campus expansion proposal has generated a lot of community debate. And that's a good thing. But before you are swayed by misinformation and conspiracy theories, we'd urge you to look at the facts and reach your own conclusions.

In May this year, the City of Launceston joined with the State Government, the University of Tasmania and TasTAFE under an MoU to explore the potential of an inner city campus in Launceston.

As UTAS has made clear, the Northern campus is unsustainable under the current model, and redeveloping the Newnham site will be more expensive than creating a purpose-built campus at Inveresk and Willis Street.

UTAS undertook a public consultation process on the proposal, and held a public meeting at the Albert Hall. For many months, Aldermen have been liaising between the community and UTAS and other MoU signatories in order to get the best outcome for Launceston.

We believe UTAS has acted in good faith in these discussions. UTAS plans to expand on its current course offerings, and to build its student base in the North.

At the most recent Council meeting, Aldermen voted unanimously to transfer two parcels of land to allow this proposal to be explored further; one at Inveresk and one at Willis Street. The Inveresk land parcel is currently valued at $1.9m, while the Willis Street car park parcel is currently valued at $2.6m.

Why did the Council vote unanimously to do this, and why was it supported by so many organisations like the Property Council of Tasmania, the Launceston Chamber of Commerce, the State Government and Cityprom? Because if the proposal proceeds it will cement UTAS in the North for generations to come.

It could lead to a $220m capital investment on the doorstep of our CBD.

Modelling from UTAS indicates that by 2025, the economic impact of a relocation to Inveresk could top $290m annually.

It could create a new student population on the doorstep of our CBD who will live in Launceston, work in Launceston, and shop in Launceston.

Because to advocate for the status quo does nothing to further our city. Because this represents a once-in-a-generation opportunity for capital investment in Launceston.

There is no doubt that the investment by this Council is significant, and there are some important conditions around this transfer. They include that before any land is transferred, UTAS must be able to secure funding to allow its development to proceed. Another condition is that the development shall be undertaken by UTAS in line with the commitments it has made in writing. Yet another is that should the relocation not be complete within five years of a Development Approval issued by the Council, the land will either transfer back to the Council or UTAS will have to pay compensation for it as judged by an independent valuer.

The petition launched today under the auspices of the Tasmanian Ratepayers Association makes a number of misleading claims.

Let's take a look at them.

CLAIM: 1. Launceston ratepayers going to be robbed of Millions of $$$ (sic)

STATUS - INCORRECT: Should UTAS not secure funding for the proposal, the land transfer will not take place. Should they secure funding but not proceed with the development, the parcels of land will transfer back to the Council or UTAS will have to pay for them according to the valuation as judged by an independent valuer.

CLAIM: 2. LCC intend to GIVE (not sell) Willis St, Car Park and Old Velodrome site to the University of Tasmania for NOTHING, not 1cent - WHY? (Sic)

STATUS - MISLEADING: This is only the case should UTAS fulfil the conditions of the process. If those conditions are not met, the land will not transfer in the first place. Should the $220m proposal proceed, the Council believes the relatively modest investment of $4.5m in land to secure the future of UTAS in the North and an economic impact of $290m per year is a wise one.

CLAIM: 3. The Willis Street car park returns $88,000 p.a. and that will be gone too and without 1centcompensation thus contributing to higher rates in the future - WHY? (Sic)

STATUS - MISSING THE POINT: The transformational economic and social impact of the proposal dwarfs the short-term loss of the gross parking revenue.

Claim: 4. LCC now involved with building bridge from Willis St. over Nth. Esk River to Inveresk, costing $millions thus contributing to higher rates in the future - WHY? (Sic)

STATUS - INCORRECT: Yes, the Council will consider building a pedestrian and cycling bridge to provide good access between Inveresk and the CBD. Such a bridge has been mooted for many years and would allow improved linkages across the North Esk River. The funding for the construction of this bridge will form part of the application to the State and Federal Governments. In other words, if the proposal is successful, both the State and Federal Governments will be contributing to the cost of the bridge. The strategic benefits of this linkage have long been identified and will provide a benefit to the whole community, not just students.

Claim 5. Willis St and Velodrome Car Parks to go - 600 car spaces go - where will patrons to Aurora Stadium park? LCC don't know or care thus thus contributing to higher rates in the future - WHY? (Sic)

STATUS - INCORRECT: 

UTAS plans to create car parks at both the Inveresk and Willis Street sites. UTAS has already indicated that its parking will be available to the public on weekends and public holidays.

Claim 6. Who is going to pay for new car parks to cater for 1,000 cars from Newnham Campus (4,500 students) to Inveresk. LCC don't know or care - WHY? (Sic)

STATUS - INCORRECT : UTAS has indicated that it will provide significant car parking as part of its proposal. The Council also has under-utilised car parking capacity at Inveresk. The Council does acknowledge that traffic and car parking related to the proposal are legitimate concerns and these will need to be addressed by UTAS in a future Development Application, as is the normal process.

It should be noted that the Council believes many students will utilise public transport, cycling, or indeed take advantage of close access from the CBD and walk to the site.

Claim 7. LCC have spent $thousands of Ratepayers money on this project so far (staff hours and money) but no compensation thus contributing to higher rates now and in the future - WHY? (Sic)

STATUS - INCORRECT: The Council is elected to safeguard the future of Launceston. We believe a strong and sustainable UTAS is critical to Launceston's cultural and economic growth. In short, it would be irresponsible for us NOT to engage with UTAS on a matter of such importance to the city.

Launceston’s status as a university city is extremely important.

The business plan for the current Northern campus has shown continuing losses and reductions in student numbers. The participation rate of Northern Tasmanians in post-secondary education is at alarmingly low levels.

The Council is keen to consolidate the future of the UTAS Northern campus, to grow its influence economically and socially by increased academic course offerings and student numbers and to ensure that Northern Tasmania has the skills among its workforce to meet future demands. The council has been materially involved in planning for the successful delivery of this project alongside the State Government, UTAS, and TasTAFE.

The Council sees this as a fundamental aspect of its role in working towards a sustainable and productive future for Launceston.

Claim 8. WHY weren't ratepayers consulted with Public Meeting to discuss these issues? The LCC did not want you to know the truth - WHY? (sic)

STATUS - INCORRECT: Actually, we are more than happy for people to know the truth. Deputy Mayor Rob Soward answered questions at the public meeting at the Albert Hall organised by UTAS and we have answered any and all questions posed by the media. At the recent Council meeting, which was open to the public and streamed live on the internet, people were entitled to come along and ask questions about the proposal. Some people did. The debate on the matter was publicised widely in the press, open to the public and completely transparent. In addition, the University launched its dedicated Northern campus website, a far more effective way of reaching a broad cross-section of the community than the old-style Town Hall meeting.

Claim 9. These two prime parcels of land could bring $10million each on the open market - why should Council give them away FREE? (Sic)

STATUS - INCORRECT: The Council is required by the Local Government Act to source a valuation of the land. This valuation was undertaken by Opteon Valuers and is current.

The land is valued at $4.5m. The Council has been open to development of these sites for many years and has not received any concrete proposals. One of the things the Council considers is the best use of the land -- given that Inveresk is fast becoming a cultural and educational hub, an expansion of the UTAS campus on this site makes sense. It is arguably the best use for the land in question, with the added economic, cultural and educational benefits an expanded campus will bring to Launceston.

Claim 10. Ratepayers demand $20million compensation for land and associated costs. (Sic)

STATUS - INCORRECT: The land is valued at 4.5m, not $20m.

Claim 11. Selling the two parcels of land would enable LCC to give Ratepayers 3 years with NO INCREASES in rates and a surplus to pay off $millions of loan debt thus mitigating higher rates in the future (Sic)

STATUS - INCORRECT: The land is valued at 4.5m, not $20m. 

Claim 12. LCC rates are already $300-$400 higher than for equivalent properties in surrounding Councils - WHY? (Sic)

STATUS - MISLEADING: The Council provides a wide range of services and regional facilities to the Launceston community, including Aurora Stadium, the Princess Theatre, Carr Villa Memorial Park and many others. The strategy of supporting the University proposal offers the potential to grow the rate base to the benefit of all ratepayers.

Claim 13. Universities DO NOT pay rates or fire levy - WHY?

STATUS - OUT OF OUR HANDS:

The rating of Universities falls within the provisions of the Act where they are treated as exempt. This is a State Government matter, and not one the Council can determine.

Claim 14. A proponent of the petition tonight claimed that Big W had expressed an interest in the Willis Street site.

STATUS - INCORRECT.

The UTAS Northern expansion proposal is a legitimate topic of debate in Launceston. People are entitled to oppose it, and to disagree with the Aldermen over the decision to take part in the MoU process.

However, we owe it to each other as a community to deal in facts and logic. If you would like more information on the proposal, visit http://www.utas.edu.au/northern-expansion"

FOR MORE CONTEXT ... CLICK HERE

COUNCIL PETITION IN THE EXAMINER TODAY

CLICK ON AN IMAGE TO ENLARGE

You may wish to enlarge your photocopies

CROWD FUNDING UPDATE 23.11.05

Thank you one and all!!

CLICK ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE

EXAMINER REPORTS ON THE PETITION

CLICK ON THE IMAGE TO ENLARGE

CROWD FUNDING UPDATE

Thank you one and all!!

CLICK ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE

MEDIA RELEASE

Spokesman for the Concerned Citizens Group, former Ald. Basil Fitch, said the launch of the petition against LCC's 'in principle' decision to give to UTas land known as 'Willis Street Car Park' and 'Old Velodrome' free, now gives Launceston's ratepayers and residents an opportunity to call a public meeting to fully discuss this matter.

Under Section 57 Local Government Act a petition must carry at least 1,000 signatures from ratepayers and residents to be effective.

Today former Ald. Basil Fitch, warned "if LCC are allowed to give this land worth millions $$'s away, it will set an awful precedent for the future."

 He also  "urged all ratepayers and residents to consider the petition very carefully."

"All our assets should be sold, not given away, thereby reducing rates by the proceeds of sale" Basil Fitch said.

For further information CLICK HERE

PETITION CROWD FUNDING PROGRESS UPDATE- 20.11.15

CLICK ON THE IMAGE TO ENLARGE

THANK YOU TO OUR DONORS SO FAR!!

We trust that your commitment will be rewarded.

Thank you one and all!!

Mayor van Zetten and the Citizen's Petition

Ratepayers need too be aware that the Mayor has been on radio talking down the petition being circulated by concerned citizens and ratepayers.

"Council slams ratepayers petition against UTAS relocation 

A PETITION against the proposed relocation of UTAS by the Ratepayers Association has been slammed by Launceston City Council.

Launceston Mayor Albert Van Zetten said the group who had commissioned the petition "hadn't read the plans".
The petition outlined 14 dot-points around the relocation proposals and Mayor Van Zetten said the information was wrong.
"We'd love to have a debate on the facts, but they've got to be the facts," he said.

He said he would consider legal action if the petition came in with "a thousand signatures plus".

CLICK HERE TO LISTEN ONLINE: http://www.tasmaniatalks.com.au/latest-news/223-council-slams-ratepayers-petition-against-utas-relocation

PETITION CROWD FUNDING PROGRESS UPDATE

CLICK ON THE IMAGE TO ENLARGE

THANK YOU TO OUR DONORS SO FAR!!

We trust that your commitment will be rewarded.

Thank you one and all!!

CROWD FUNDING PETITION #1

This petition against Launceston Council's 'Land Handover' is gaining support. Getting the message 'out there' to all the people interested in this issue  is going to cost a great deal more than at first imagined. 

The prospect of the city 'giving away community assets', assets that could be earning revenue or delivering dividends for residents and ratepayers. Giving them away without there being a clear social dividend, is simply untenable and unacceptable.

Without doubt Launcestonians are increasingly concerned  about this kind of recklessness at the City of Launceston Council. 

Collectively, the City of Launceston's aldermen seem to have assumed a Social License to give  away 'community assets' – and to do so without redress. 

This petition challenges this recklessness, and it must be challenged!

Importantly, the aldermen's actions in this instance demonstrate a concerning lack of commitment to meaningful community consultation – contrary, it seems, to the General Manager's Community Engagement Policy. 

Clearly, the City of Lauceston's council has decided TO do all this to its constituency rather than WITH it.

Consequently, it appears as if the aldermen have deemed themselves as being only accountable to themselves rather than to the community they represent. This cannot go unchallenged!

Against this background the 'Ad Hoc Working Group' that is facilitating this petition against this 'handover of community land' has decided to crowd fund its efforts. 

To get to as many potential signatories as possible it has been decided to take out a large and prominent advertisement in The Examiner. This moves the level of activity to yet another level.

WHAT IS THE MONEY FOR?

1. To place an appropriate advertisement in the newspaper making readers more aware of the issue and the petition;
2. To cover graphic design and other costs relative to the overall petition campaign;
3. To meet the production costs more generally.

WHAT WILL DONORS TO LAUNCESTON PETITIONS # 1 RECEIVE?

1. Most importantly, a warm inner glow from the knowledge that they have participated in a significant way in holding their Local Govt. representative to account and the satisfaction of being a part of this community initiative;
2. An personal Citizen's Certificate in a form best fits their contribution either in cash or in-kind;
3. A  commitment to ABSOLUTE CONFIDENTIALITY valid until they 'out themselves' by publicly displaying their Citizen's Certificate.

HOW CAN YOU CONTRIBUTE?

1. A cash donation, preferably a 'folding donation', handed to a member of the 'Ad Hoc Working Group' facilitating this petition – anonymous cash donations can posted to PO Box 513 Launceston TAS 7250;
2. Professional time and skills dedicated to the petition campaign;
3. Distribute PETITION FORMS and collect signatures.

For further information eMAIL: LauncestonPR@tassie.net.au

MEDIA RELEASE: PRESS EVENT MONDAY NOV 16 CIVIC SQUARE

A growing group of concerned citizens, ratepayers and residents in Launceston are increasingly concerned about Launceston Council's intention to handover public land to the University of Tasmania for free.

Despite obvious public disquiet at a public meeting called by the University of Tasmania at Albert Hall October 1 Council has agreed in principle to hand over land at the Inveresk precinct to the university of Tasmania.

Having failed to get a reasonable opportunity to discuss the issue with Council, and Council failing to meaningfully consult with its constituency, the group has initiated a petition calling upon Council to call a public meeting on the issue.

Apart from the lack of consultation, the group is concerned about future costs to ratepayers and the loss of both opportunities and income as a consequence of the 'hand over'.

The expected impact of this is the likely increased need for infrastructure with no additional income coming to Council to meet these costs.

Universities do not contribute to the city's income by way of rates and charges despite being users of Council services.

Representatives from the group will be present at 11:30 AM in Civic Square Launceston (next to Town Hall) to launch THE PETITION and provide additional information.

For Further information email launcestonPR@tassie.net.au

Click here to access Petition Graphics

PETITION: Land Handover To UTAS

CLICK HERE TO GO TO THIS STORY IN THE EXAMINER

CLICK HERE FOR UTAS EXPANSION CONCEPT

CLICK HERE FOR A THREAT ASSESSMENT

CONTEXT

•  Launceston ratepayers going to be robbed of Millions of $$$ 

•  LCC intend to GIVE (not sell) Willis St, Car Park and Old Velodrome site to the University of Tasmania for NOTHING, not 1cent – WHY?  
•  The Willis St. Car Park returns $88,000 p.a. and that will be gone too and without 1cent compensation thus contributing to higher rates in the future – WHY?
•  LCC now involved with building bridge from Willis St. over Nth. Esk River to Inveresk, costing $millions thus contributing to higher rates in the future – WHY? 
•  Willis St and Velodrome Car Parks to go – 600 car spaces go – where will patrons to Aurora Stadium Park? LCC don’t know or care thus thus contributing to higher rates in the future  – WHY?
•  Who is going to pay for new car parks to cater for 1,000 cars from Newnham Campus (4,500 students) to Inveresk. LCC don’t know or care – WHY? 
•  LCC have spent $ thousands of Ratepayers money on this project so far (staff hours and money) but no compensation thus contributing to higher rates in now and the future – WHY?
•  WHY weren’t Ratepayers consulted with Public Meeting to discuss these issues? The LCC did not want you to know the truth – WHY?
•  These two prime parcels of land could bring $10million each on the open market – why should Council give them away FREE? 
•  Ratepayers demand $20million compensation for land and associated costs. 
•  Selling the two parcels of land would enable LCC to give Ratepayers 3 years with NO INCREASE in rates and a surplus to pay off $millions of loan debt thus mitigating against higher rates in the future
•  LCC rates are already $300-$400 higher than for equivalent properties in surrounding Councils – WHY?
•  Universities DO NOT pay rates or fire levy – WHY?

Act now-don’t take this nonsense any longer 

You and your neighbours please sign the Petition NOW!

REQUEST A PETITION FORM

eMAIL: Tandra Vale [LPR]: LauncestonPR@tassie.net.au

WATCH THIS SPACE

My Community Tasmania provides this BLOG to facilitate COMMUNITY INITIATED PETITIONS on any subject relative to:

• Tasmanian community issues; and/or
• Community issues that impact upon Launceston;and/or
• Local, State & Federal governance issues relative to Launceston.