Council deny accusation of ‘creative accounting’

An accusation of “creative accounting” to sway the public in favour of getting rid of Balmoral Hall has been denied by Ashburton’s Council.

Historic Places Mid Canterbury’s Nigel Gilkison and Maxine Watson appeared before the council recently, asking for an explanation of the proposed sale of the hall.

The Cameron St hall had been scheduled for $484,000 of renovations in 2022, but the work was deferred from the 2022/23 work programme.

A new estimate in 2023 then showed the building required $1.3m to be brought up to code.

The fate of the building will be consulted on in the long term plan, with the council preferring to sell it rather than funding the repairs.

Gilkison had strong reservations about the “latest questionable estimate of $1.3m” for the repairs.

“The cynic in me might suggest that this is just some creative accounting on the part of the council in order to get the public to support its preference to get rid of Balmoral Hall,” he told councillors.

“It is really disappointing that we are having to, yet again, make a complaint about the council’s lack of openness and transparency in relation to its decision-making on community-owned assets, particularly so soon after our complaint about the decision to demolish Cavendish Chambers.”

The fact the hall is proposed to be put up for sale so soon after the demolition of Cavendish Chambers “doesn’t paint a pretty picture of the council’s respect” for heritage buildings, Gilkison said.

He questioned how the estimated cost had jumped 250% in two years.

Council’s business support group manager Leanne Macdonald told the Guardian there was a budget allocated to conduct a basic repair of the hall in 2023/24.

“When it came to undertaking the work, we realised the building needed far more.

“An external expert advised that we required $1.3m for additional work such as fire protection systems, having the right ratio of sanitary fixtures, and accessibility access for example.

“The work was not completed because the updated cost exceeded the budget.”

Gilkison also accused the council of withholding information with its “woefully inadequate” response to an official information act request, which has resulted in a formal complaint to the Ombudsman.

The council responded to the information request within the required timeframe and answered as fully as possible, Macdonald said.

Watson expressed her concerns that because the repairs had “not been completed in the prescribed timeframes, there is a very real possibility it seems this much loved and well-used community facility will be lost”.

A dance school has operated in the venue for 40 years, currently running classes six days a week for around 200 students, Watson said.

Gilkison suggested a community group, such as the dance community, could take over the property – something he had not discussed with them – to remove the cost from council and retain the building.

The council fees for the hall are $25 per hour and in the 2022/23 year the hall’s income was $11,445, whereas expenditure for the year was $44,733, Macdonald said.

Mayor Neil Brown thanked Gilkison and Watson for their presentation and advised them to submit on the long term plan, where they would have another opportunity to discuss the future of the hall.