Kingston Council closes Moorabbin Grandstand!

[casey scorp]

I knew they were relying on the $2.1 million from the sale of the bowling club site to the Saints to partly fund the Council's share. There was money going round in circles, and being double-counted in the estimated $16.5 million development project. However, the Council contribution was to be $2.5 million (meaning there was to be another $400,000 [or $500,000 suggested in another document] coming from some other source. I understood that it was rates sourced, and subsequently carried forward when not expended (and would therefore be available for reallocation for grandstand removal).

I noted your comment that the whole redevelopment fell through because there was a massive funding shortfall caused by less land to be sold. But the redevelopment fell through over 12 months ago, and I doubt that the club would then have blamed the poker machine issue (which partly poorly reflected on the club because the Council wasn't saying no poker machines - just less).

If this was the case why wouldn't the club have just said the deal fell through because the Council couldn't deliver the funds they said they would? That way only the Council would have looked bad.

[Mr Magic]

I noted your comment that the whole redevelopment fell through because there was a massive funding shortfall caused by less land to be sold. But the redevelopment fell through over 12 months ago, and I doubt that the club would then have blamed the poker machine issue (which partly poorly reflected on the club because the Council wasn't saying no poker machines - just less).

If this was the case why wouldn't the club have just said the deal fell through because the Council couldn't deliver the funds they said they would? That way only the Council would have looked bad.

Maybe by not supporting the movement of all teh Poker machines the Council was 'banking' on the deal falling over? That way they could claim the 'high moral ground' in claiming they were only looking after community interests by trying to decrease the number of pokies whilst covering up the fact that they had a funding shortfall.

I mean its not like Councils don't ever use 'smoke and mirrors' to cover up embarrasing things do they?

From day one you've taken the attitude that it has been the StKFC's fault for all of this.
Why not accept that maybe you, like the rest of us, don't know exactly what has been going on?
Maybe the City of Kingston hasn't been honest in their dealings with the issue?

Is that such a leap of faith to think that the Council has been underhanded and that our Club has been the 'victim' rather than the 'perpetrator' of this fiasco at Linton Street?

[casey scorp]

From day one you've taken the attitude that it has been the StKFC's fault for all of this.
Why not accept that maybe you, like the rest of us, don't know exactly what has been going on?
Maybe the City of Kingston hasn't been honest in their dealings with the issue?

Is that such a leap of faith to think that the Council has been underhanded and that our Club has been the 'victim' rather than the 'perpetrator' of this fiasco at Linton Street?

On the contrary, I haven’t ever criticised the club for the original development proposal at Linton Street (involving establishing a social club at South Road, relocation of pokies), or for not proceeding with that redevelopment. You are making things up there.

My criticism of the club relates to the initial decision to go to Frankston Park which was based on inadequate research and, even more so, on the decision to go to Belvedere Park (which ignored the touted benefits of the original Frankston park decision – getting an asset, prominent location, close to activities & cafes, close to the beach).

I have said redevelop at Linton Street. Go back to the Kingston Council, and renegotiate.

I agree that Kingston Council may have become less supportive of the original proposal than when it first committed to it. And that the club was entitled to feel mightily annoyed at the way they were stuffed around.

I also don’t criticise the club for looking at other options. I just don’t think that they looked at those options well enough. The evaluation process has been proven to be very poor in relation to the Frankston Park decision.

The Belvedere Park decision was just grasping at straws, when in fact an option to redevelop at Linton Street was rejected because the club had already made a decision to leave.

So to recap, I haven’t “from day oneâ€

[plugger66]

Why are you still on about going back to Kingston council. Its over and whether we like it or not we are going to Seaford. The chances of anything happening with Kigston are as likely as the Demons winning the flag next season or me, joffaboy and Stinger catching up for a night out at a strip club.

[casey scorp]

Why are you still on about going back to Kingston council. Its over and whether we like it or not we are going to Seaford. The chances of anything happening with Kigston are as likely as the Demons winning the flag next season or me, joffaboy and Stinger catching up for a night out at a strip club.

plugger66, I admire your unstinting loyalty to whatever is the current position of the club.

However, you know the saying, it's not over till the fat lady sings.

The decision to go to Frankston Park was poorly evaluated and a a disaster. Given that performance (and the reasons given as to why Frankston Park was a good decision - getting an asset, prominent location, close to activities & cafes, close to the beach) why are you so confident that the decision on Belvedere Park is correct?

I just hope that the right people realise before it's too late.

I actually think, however, that it is more likely to happen at Belvedere Park than it ever was at Frankston Park because the hurdles are so much lower, and that with grit and determination the club can make a purse out of a sow's ear.

Pity is, it won't be a silk purse. It's a crap location, and will never befit an AFL club locating there. It's as simple as that.

[plugger66]

Why are you still on about going back to Kingston council. Its over and whether we like it or not we are going to Seaford. The chances of anything happening with Kigston are as likely as the Demons winning the flag next season or me, joffaboy and Stinger catching up for a night out at a strip club.

plugger66, I admire your unstinting loyalty to whatever is the current position of the club.

However, you know the saying, it's not over till the fat lady sings.

The decision to go to Frankston Park was poorly evaluated and a a disaster. Given that performance (and the reasons given as to why Frankston Park was a good decision - getting an asset, prominent location, close to activities & cafes, close to the beach) why are you so confident that the decision on Belvedere Park is correct?

I just hope that the right people realise before it's too late.

I actually think, however, that it is more likely to happen at Belvedere Park than it ever was at Frankston Park because the hurdles are so much lower, and that with grit and determination the club can make a purse out of a sow's ear.

Pity is, it won't be a silk purse. It's a crap location, and will never befit an AFL club locating there. It's as simple as that.

I get confused with this crap location thing. Its a training ground. Probably a hundred people will be there at any one time. They are not playing games there and its 10 minutes from the hub of Franskton and the beach. Why is it any different to where the current premiers train. Doesnt look like it affected them.

[Mr Magic]

[quote="casey scorp"][quote="Mr Magic"]
So to recap, I haven’t “from day oneâ€

[ace]

[quote="Mr Magic"]How do you demolish the Grandstand and not the rooms/facilites underneath it?[/quote]


It is easier to demolish the Kingston council - another bunch of socialist scum.

Socialist = lazy scum who like to take all the credit for squandering the wealth that others work so hard too create.

[ace]

[quote="plugger66"]

I get confused with this crap location thing. Its a training ground. Probably a hundred people will be there at any one time. They are not playing games there and its 10 minutes from the hub of Franskton and the beach. Why is it any different to where the current premiers train. Doesnt look like it affected them.[/quote]

It is much more than a training ground.
It is a base for the club and an opportunity to expand the supporter base.
It is a location to establish another St Kilda FC social club. (There should be a number of these established throughout Melbourne).

Hawthorn moved to Waverley to steal the support of the south east growth corridor.
Melbourne wants to move to Casey to hijack the support of the Peninsula.

The club needs a green field site with young population and businesses that will grow up with St Kilda FC as the footy club that represents them and their area.
It is a waste of an opportunity to move to a location that already has a strong St Kilda FC support base.

If Casey is out then the club should trump Hawthorn in the south east growth corridor by going further - somewhere from Dandenong through to Pakenham.

This move is about the FUTURE of the club.

[saintspremiers]

Hawthorn train at Waverly.

Hawthorn fans gathered at Glenferrie Oval to watch the game on a big TV and have family day celebrations there.

Same could happen for us

[casey scorp]

My apology CaseyScorp, I have misread your posts on this matter.

No problems at all.

It just appeared to me that once the Club decided to abandon the Moorabbin project you seemed to have decided that Casey was the only option and that nothing else the Club did would be acceptable.
Once Casey was discarded by the Club you seemed to take the position that only Moorabbin would now be acceptable.

I think that the advantages of Casey outweighed the advantages of Moorabbin, so I supported that.

The Frankston decision has proven to be flawed.

When the club finally reached the inevitable conclusion that Frankston Park wouldn’t work, I supported Linton Street as the next best option. Belvedere Park is all about saving face - it’s an incredibly non-strategic decision.

I understand your frustration at the Club choosing to go down a path different to what you believe is the best, but maybe they do know what they are doing? In this matter you seem so convinced that they have no idea on what is the best option that you leap on any uttering (public or private) as further 'proof' or 'vindication' of their ineptness or lack of diligence.

The Frankston Park decision displayed the strategic decision making and evaluation credentials of the club. Belvedere Park just confirmed it. The proof of the pudding is in the eating.

As for renegotiating with Kingston, How could they possibly renegotiate with a Council that they 'believe' has already 'screwed them over' at the last hurdle? I can only imagine the posts you would be making if they went down that path and in 12-18 months found themselves in an untenable position again because the Council had 'shifted the goalposts'.

The negotiating situation should be a whole lot simpler with the gaming machines out of the equation (in fact St KFC could even reduce the number of machines at Linton Street in the existing social club, and that would create positive negotiating leverage).

Now I'll be the first to admit that I have very little actual knowledge on this whole saga - my knowledge is limited to what I read, see and hear on the matter, including your posts.

You obviously have taken a strong interest in the matter and may well have some inside information, that I and others do not, on what has been happening.
The problem is that your posts appear to speak with authority without ever divulging any source(s) .

I’ve researched all of the information I could lay my hands on, and although I’m aware of some of the confidential matters (which makes the interpretation of publicly available info easier) I don’t reveal any of the confidential stuff. Nor would I reveal my contacts.

Suffice to say, though, I’ve got a fair bit of inside info on the issue.

They are consistant in the following areas
a preference first and foremost for Casey Fields
an absolute abhorence for the City of Frankston
seemingly universal criticism of StKFC

I used to have a preference first and foremost for it, but I no longer have a preference for Casey Fields. It was an incredible opportunity to be at the same ground as our VFL aligned club, to get into a massive young growth area to generate membership growth, and to work with a Council that would have supported us strongly. It is true to say that I’m disappointed we didn’t grab the opportunity when we had it.

Casey Fields is no longer an option because:

• we ditched the Scorps
• MFC has got an agreement in principle with Casey Council.

I don’t have an abhorrence for the City of Frankston at all – I know a number of fine people from there. I do, however, think that Frankston Park was very poorly evaluated and that Belvedere Park is just ridiculous as a location for one of the premier sporting clubs in the country.

My criticism of St KFC is in relation to recent redevelopment decisions since and including the decision to go to Frankston Park – you’ll not find too may criticisms regarding other matters as I don’t claim to be a football expert. I keep my comments for something I’ve researched and know a bit about.

I also stop short of criticising the individuals involved, because I’m not certain of the dynamics between the various players within the club. The club’s decision will be based on consideration of the recommendations coming from the executive, the views of the directors and debate at the Board table. Somehow it’s just gets it wrong.

Do you not wonder why I and others appear to take exception to your position on this and suspect your criticisms may well be a product of your disappointment of the overlooking of Casey?

Yes, I was disappointed with the decision to overlook Casey Fields.

But my criticism of the Frankston Park decision was not only based on that disappointment - it was based on the obvious (and now proven) shortcomings of the site. Surely the proving of the shortcomings of Frankston Park underline that I wasn’t just coming from the perspective of disappointment. Do you really think I could only see the shortcomings at Frankston Park because I was disappointed with the decision to overlook Casey.

Earlier this year I harboured a desire that St KFC would see the light, and would review the opportunity to go to Casey. Unfortunately, just when Frankston Park was turning turtle for St KFC, and at a time when you would think that they would keep strategic options open, St KFC narrowed their options by ditching the Scorpions.

If I was just a Casey resident who had missed on an AFL club coming to Casey, then that would have been the end of it and I would have stopped posting. But I am a St Kilda member, and have been for years. My posting continues to be about what I think is in the best interests of the club, from the options remaining.