Ya gotta have heart
Back in February the council raided the budgets of the Sarjeant, Library and Museum to pay for a talkfest by five very eminent architects who not only talked, but then put pencil to paper and produced what the Diva calls a "series of options and ideas" for what to do with Queens Park.
Nine months after the act of conception, citizens are still waiting for a glimpse of the products of that mating of architects. But not to worry, this very day, the Diva has given birth to - an idea of his own.
Within a year it will join its less favoured siblings, the bastard children of a bunch of architects, in a people’s choice beauty contest. As always, the people will chose, the Diva cooed reassuringly.
So what does the blue-eyed offshoot of the Diva and his council working party look like, and what will cost? Oh, $13-15 million or thereabouts, apparently, and the Diva is sure that the government will come to the party, along with lotto money.
Even better, we could have a PPP (public private partnership) with a developer putting up the building of the Diva’s dreams and milking the ratepayers via a lease arrangement for as long as it takes.
So, here’s what the architects aren’t recommending:
All this will come as little surprise, we are sure, to New Zealand’s five leading architects. Did they really think they had the talent or ideas to compete with the Diva’s dream?
Of course, by launching his own model into the public arena now, the Diva gives it a head-start of several months over the architect-designed options, since they're being kept under wraps till early next year. Think of it this way: What if the Chron ran a colouring contest, and Mickey and all the other little children entered. Then a few months before the contest closed, Mr Maslin took out his best crayons (the ones he keeps for writing editorials with) and made his own entry, which then ran on the front page of the Chron till the contest closed and people could judge the entries. Would little Mickey be upset? You bet he would.
Comments on this post are now closed.
28 comments:
It was interesting at the meeeting that he picked what he agreed with from the architects' (alleged)comments, ie re-open Majestic Square to traffic, and made a big deal about it.
Meanwhile, where are their ideas on the Queen's Park buildings, Mickey?
Notice that this whole project can go ahead without the Sarjeant receiving any attention at all?
"Oh sorry, it just became too expensive. Perhaps after we've built the velodrome roof."
So Mickey's dream will cost $13-15 million, he says. Can he now tell us just who has produced that costing?
Or is it MB Laws Ltd, architects, interior designers and quantity surveyors by mayoral appointment to the city of Lawsville?
I like the idea of the V8 track, how much would that cost? We are also lacking in an major stadium in NZ for the world cup. Could we have one of those also please. Could we dam the river and make a non tidal rowing lake?
Where does the Local Government act fit an and Long Term Financial plans? The Act was supposed to moderate foolish expenditure such as this. If he really wants to sell art, why spend it on this when we could reduce debt and pay for flushing our toilets. That is where these ideas (and their makers) belong, flushed.
If $130,000 was set aside for the Heart plan development stage, how much of it is going to be wasted bringing Mickey's little scheme up to presentation standard?
Just as the '05 referendumb made no provision for practical issues like funding, we have another grandiose ego-trip, ill-thought through, seen with Mickey's one eye (the other one is always checking for mirrors).
Nice of the Chron. to start their report with the word "Demolishing" though.
Look at it this way: Mickey's Amateur Architecture Emporium has no experience, zero draughting skills, and not the slightest idea how to cope with professional critique. There'll be holes in Mickey's idea big enough to park the museum in, and he's given us a head start showing them up.
For example: What is the estimate for moving and storing the contents of the museum (including iwi consultation, tapu lifting ceremonies, blessings, powhiri, tena koutou, tena koutou, tena koutou, tena koutou katoa)?
Tick tock buy-election Mickey...
Alan Anderson should split the Mickey vote quite nicely.
The mayor and his council should be applauded for facing up to the Queen's Park mess. The last council walked away from it in 1998 and this one has typically taken on the challenge.
What ML is saying is that there will be three or four costed options put out for public display and comment and then the final choice be made by the ratepayer (who is paying for it). They've employed two professional architects in van Raat and Mitchell and it was van Raat who publicly slammed the museum as a dog, not the mayor. Obviously the working party agree with him though. The Sarjeant-Sarjeant Modern option saves two buildings and would enhance the art gallery.
Where does the Local Government act fit an and Long Term Financial plans? The Act was supposed to moderate foolish expenditure such as this. If he really wants to sell art, why spend it on this when we could reduce debt and pay for flushing our toilets. That is where these ideas (and their makers) belong, flushed.
10:41 PM, November 28, 2005
*********************************
What peasant (or is that pissant) made these comments? Is a cultural centre not worth having? Is it the Sarjeant extension or nothing? Ots time the SOS mob started providing solutions instead of their negative bilge.
And do you think SOS or LawsWatch will provide a candidate for the by-election? The word is - wait for it - John Martin is NOT standing and that he's been telling people.
So, here’s what the architects aren’t recommending:
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Is that right? that's not what the mayor has said is it?
Alan anderson is an anti-Laws candidate. It won't split the vision vote - exactly the reverse.
Laws Watch - that entry about John Martin not standing for the by-election is getting passed around work here. Could you find out?
anonymickey said
So, here’s what the architects aren’t recommending:
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Is that right? that's not what the mayor has said is it?
9:39 AM, November 29, 2005
Thanks Mickey. So if they HAVE recommended this option then why are YOU taking the credit?
Whoever said John Martin was an SOS or Lawswatch candidate? What a lot of crap.
Mickey thinks the "arts community" is going to put up an "arts" candidate that he thinks he can vilify. But the reality is that any independent candidate will put a spanner in his poxy divisive agenda. Spin Mickey spin.
If anyone other than Brian were to have suggested this, people would consider the ideas on its merits. This his Mickey Mouse scheme isn't designed to be taken seriously: it's a facade to draw out "opposition".
$13-15 million? By my calculations it'll be more like $30-35 million.
Isn't it funny how no-one wants to stand for Mickey's council? If they're such a go-ahead vibrant bunch, I wonder what the problem is?
With Allan Anderson standing, Mickey can kiss goodbye to the redneck conservative and rural votes that he so desperately has been chasing.
Apparently a prize rural candidate has told him to bugger off so he's stuck with the rower Baker-Hogan.
If baker-Hogan stands she'll defeat anyone put agst her - world champ, Halberg winner, top-polling health board candidate, family mum etc. That may be closer to the reason why Martin isn't standing. there will be no arts candidate - they're all talk and know that their candidate would lose. it would be the kiss of death for Martin toi be identified with SOS and LawsWatch, but he already is.
I was speaking with a horse at the pub the other night and he said that his mate, a 1 legged donkey, was considering standing on the Vision ticket (must have great balance!).
I had to agree with him that whoever stands for Vision will get past the post easily.
Tick tock. River Queen shambles. Jimmy Barnes underwriting. Of course Mickey's mouthpiece will romp home.
Mickey obviously sees John Martin as a threat, or he wouldn't spend so much time here bullshitting about him.
JM, if he wins the mayoralty in 2007, will show Michael Brian Laws up as the incompetent pork-barrel roller that he is.
JM the "LawsWatch" candidate? Politics 101, Mickey - set up a straw man, then try to knock him over.
Then when the plebs don't fall for that, try taunting them: "You're too chicken to put up an arts candidate". Thing is, aside from a few single issue nutters, no one wants an arts candidate. What they want is an anti-Mickey candidate, Mickey. Even with Rangi singing the Vision chorus, the entertainment value alone makes such a tilt worthwhile.
FYI LW endorses no one in the buy-election (a bit difficult to do otherwise at present, but you know what we mean) and have offered all candidates a profile and a chance to engage with electors via an offshoot blog which will commence once nominations start coming in.
John Martin is identified as the SOS/Laws Watch candidate. Why?
1. He supported the Sarjeant Gallery extension;
2. He opposed the nil rates increase;
3. He said Wanganui couldn't get a decent CEO to replace Whitlock.
He said all of these things publicly and if he ever stands, they'll be quoted back at him ad nauseum.
And then there's the little tete-a-tetes he's been seen having with our Carol. Face it, he 's not standing in the by-election because he doesnt want to lose to Baker-Hogan or whoever else Vision run.
The "arts community" are honour bound to select or endorse a candidate. They have whinged and whined and if they don't present a candidate then the mayor and his mob will crow about it forever.
Seriously though, is there any truth that John Martin is not standing?
Q: If Baker-Hogan is such a shoe-in why was Laws trying to catch himself a rural candidate?
Tee hee. Isn't Mickey getting pissy?
Q: If Baker-Hogan is such a shoe-in why was Laws trying to catch himself a rural candidate?
5:12 PM, November 29, 2005
******************************
He wasn't. Self-evidently wrong.
This is what happens when you start false rumours, you need to get your references right.
The by-election - troll - is for the URBAN ward, not rural. There is a vacancy in the rural ward only for a board member. He may be looking for a representative there but they already have one. Vision will put up candidates from within their ranks and the surgeon P J Faumui is another option they have. Very popular.
This blog has made a big deal of the by-election in February of next year. On the front page there's even a by-election countdown and polls have been run to find the best two possible candidates to take down the vision team.
That has seen three frontrunners emerge in John Martin, Jodie Dalgleish and Carla Donson. If what we are reading is correct then neither JM or JD are candidates. That leaves Carla. We need to get behind her now, get her a campaign team and back her all the way. If Vision win the by-election then they and the press will interpret that as support for what they've done and a mandate for what they will do.
C'mon people. Why the lethargy??
This blog has made a big deal of the by-election in February of next year.
Indeed we have.
...polls have been run to find the best two possible candidates to take down the vision team.
Wrong on two counts. The poll question asks "who do you think has the best chance of winning the by-election?" and includes possible Vision candidates. The intent is to see who people think will win, not necessarily who they want to win (we'll run that poll once actual nominees are known).
Second, even if the candidate who emerges as a front runner is anti-Vision and wins the by-election, they won't be able to "take down" the Vision team, since that team effectively includes Rangi Wills, Mickey's well-known sock puppet.
At best they'll act as a check on some of Vision's worst excesses, but they may have their work cut out doing even that.
Post a Comment