Comments on: Richmond Valley Council criticised over aerodrome contamination http://www.ballina.info/blog/2007/06/01/richmond-valley-council-criticised-over-aerodrome-contamination/ Regular information and comments on the Ballina Shire. Thu, 20 Nov 2008 08:29:50 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: barry http://www.ballina.info/blog/2007/06/01/richmond-valley-council-criticised-over-aerodrome-contamination/#comment-34984 barry Wed, 06 Jun 2007 04:18:09 +0000 http://www.ballina.info/blog/2007/06/01/richmond-valley-council-criticised-over-aerodrome-contamination/#comment-34984 Richard Gates of the Evans Head Memorial Aerodrome Committee Incorporated has contacted Ballina.Info in regards to a Northern Star article published this week on the retirement village for the Evans Head Memorial Aerodrome. The newspaper 'referred to a letter I wrote, but failed to publish it. They selectively reported what I had to say', Dr Gates said. "The article left the reader with the impression that I was opposed to the nursing home/hostel when nothing could be further from the truth. I am opposed to it on the Aerodrome site as it is an inappropriate place to put it, but I have no doubt that Evans Head has need of such a facility," he said. The letter is shown below. Dear Editor I think its becoming clear now why Richmond Valley Council paid extra money to rush through the Plan of Management for the Evans Head Memorial Aerodrome back in 2005. We were told it was to make sure that we didn't lose the retirement village on the Evans Head Memorial Aerodrome because the Federal government had a 'use by' date for beds for the site. But that was clearly a furphy as press reports tell us the Feds are still hanging in there some two years later. It's looking more and more as if they wanted the Plan rushed through at ratepayer expense so that the Aerodrome contamination issue wouldn't overtake the ill-conceived retirement village for the site. Can you imagine the State Heritage Council signing off on a plan for a retirement village on a contaminated site? By the way, the June 2005 Plan of Management for the site is still not finalised in spite of what Council keeps telling us. Council has a whole bunch of requirements to meet before that's the case. The contamination issue impacts on many aspects of the management of the Aerodrome and surrounding lands. In view of the fact Council knew that there was a potential contamination problem back in 2005 and failed to raise this with the NSW Heritage Council at the time the plan was being finalised, and in view of the fact that Council did a sweetheart deal for the sale of the land just as it did with the Casino Aerodrome at ratepayers' expense, isn't it time for the whole planning process to be reopened. There is no doubt that Evans Head needs a nursing home and hostel facility, but not on the Aerodrome. There are alternatives. And ratepayers who are already under the gun of a 58 per cent rate increase need to ask: Just how much is it really going to cost us if Council has already subsidised the land sale and now has to pay additional money for clean-up for a regional retirement village. How much? Yours sincerely Dr Richard Gates President The Evans Head Memorial Aerodrome Committee Incorporated Richard Gates of the Evans Head Memorial Aerodrome Committee Incorporated has contacted Ballina.Info in regards to a Northern Star article published this week on the retirement village for the Evans Head Memorial Aerodrome.
The newspaper ‘referred to a letter I wrote, but failed to publish it. They selectively reported what I had to say’, Dr Gates said.
“The article left the reader with the impression that I was opposed to the nursing home/hostel when nothing could be further from the truth. I am opposed to it on the Aerodrome site as it is an inappropriate place to put it, but I have no doubt that Evans Head has need of such a facility,” he said.
The letter is shown below.

Dear Editor
I think its becoming clear now why Richmond Valley Council paid extra money to rush through the Plan of Management for the Evans Head Memorial Aerodrome back in 2005.
We were told it was to make sure that we didn’t lose the retirement village on the Evans Head Memorial Aerodrome because the Federal government had a ‘use by’ date for beds for the site.
But that was clearly a furphy as press reports tell us the Feds are still hanging in there some two years later.
It’s looking more and more as if they wanted the Plan rushed through at ratepayer expense so that the Aerodrome contamination issue wouldn’t overtake the ill-conceived retirement village for the site. Can you imagine the State Heritage Council signing off on a plan for a retirement village on a contaminated site?
By the way, the June 2005 Plan of Management for the site is still not finalised in spite of what Council keeps telling us. Council has a whole bunch of requirements to meet before that’s the case.
The contamination issue impacts on many aspects of the management of the Aerodrome and surrounding lands. In view of the fact Council knew that there was a potential contamination problem back in 2005 and failed to raise this with the NSW Heritage Council at the time the plan was being finalised, and in view of the fact that Council did a sweetheart deal for the sale of the land just as it did with the Casino Aerodrome at ratepayers’ expense, isn’t it time for the whole planning process to be reopened.
There is no doubt that Evans Head needs a nursing home and hostel facility, but not on the Aerodrome. There are alternatives.
And ratepayers who are already under the gun of a 58 per cent rate increase need to ask: Just how much is it really going to cost us if Council has already subsidised the land sale and now has to pay additional money for clean-up for a regional retirement village. How much?
Yours sincerely
Dr Richard Gates
President
The Evans Head Memorial Aerodrome Committee Incorporated

]]>