A new hockey centre worth $2 million is among the larger of the wish lists presented to the Tauranga City Council during the annual plan submissions process.
The Tauranga Hockey Association has aging facilities, increasing demand and is no longer able to maintain, sustain or grow its operations, says THA president Lynne Whitaker.
But the association is not expecting a hand out from council, says Lynne.
What they want is the same level of support for hockey that the Tauranga City Council gives to other sports in the city.
'Council are actually doing a levels of service review at the moment and out of that review they will be able to see which sports are less equitable I suppose in what they receive from the council,” says Lynne.
'For example, none of the grass field users have to pay for the use of the grass fields, whereas we have to fund all our operational costs through looking after the turf, for the lights, for the water, all that sort of thing.
'Indoor users get all their lights paid for, the nets are set up and they just walk in, walk out – and for that they pay a nominal fee.
'So what we are looking at is we want to have a review of that to make sure there is some understanding of equitability among sports codes and a 30 year plan where instead of having to go to the annual plan or the Ten Year Plan, it's already in there to look at the five yearly cost of replacing the turf.”
The two turfs that the THA is paying all the costs for are saving the city council the upkeep of 15 grass fields for each turf, says Lynne.
'They are acres and acres better off having those two turfs than 30 hockey fields,” says Lynne.
'If we didn't have the two all-weather turfs we would have to have the equivalent of 30 grass turfs to play all our hockey.
'We are not asking for a handout, we are asking for sustainable help in maintaining our facilities – and of course we are about the only sport in the BOP that gets international games on a regular basis so we are maintaining that as well.”
The way the turfs are looking, the Black Sticks' visit to Tauranga in 2010 may be the last.
The turf was assessed by the manufacturer's representative last week, says Lynne.
At the moment it is still fine for international play, but beyond that it will deteriorate quite quickly.
'But they like coming here because of the beaches and stuff,” says Lynne.
The THA represents about 2000 hockey players who pay a $200 membership fee and turf use fees of $6-7 per player per game.
The power bill is $25,000, the water bill $6000, and turf maintenance $16,000.
A player levy for turf replacement has been vacuumed up by increasing operating costs, and the existing turfs are well past their use by dates.
The sand turf is now 18 years old and is almost unplayable. The original life expectancy of 10-12 years has been extended through ‘faithful and diligent' maintenance by volunteers.
The water turf is eight years old and has exceeded its five to seven year design life and needs replacement.
They want a third turf because the association is struggling to meet the demand of its membership for practice and playing time.
The facilities no longer meet international tournament standards, and have also slipped beneath the minimum requirements for allocation for Hockey New Zealand's premium tournaments.
Replacement of the water turf will cost $400,000, the replacement of the sand turf with a multi-purpose/training turf $800,000, and the third turf at tournament standard another $800,000.
The THA is suggesting it shift from a self managed independent body to some sort of partnership model with the Tauranga City Council.
The move would then put hockey in the same category as other sporting codes which have ratepayer support through playing fields for soccer and rugby, courts for netball and indoor facilities for volleyball and other indoor sports.
It would enable the TCC and the THA to pool resources to work together to access capital funding opportunities for the replacement turfs that are required but also to plan future upgrades.
The required capital would come from a range of sources including TCC's city partners, TCC, WBOPDC corporate sponsorship and further contributions from its membership base.



7 comments
Fair to ratepayers comes first
Posted on 15-05-2011 14:56 | By Murray.Guy
What's fair to ratepayers must come first, but rarely does! There is no doubt that there is significant disparity of support between different codes and recreational pursuits. Bit like the unjust treatment the city centre gets parking meters but no where else. Reality is, if elected members can put to one side their biases, all users may well have to meet more of their costs to enjoy their chosen sports, interests - and frankly, sooner rather than later, and rightly do! More and more a minority of squeaky wheels are getting far too much of the 'good oil'.
How far do we expect our council to go?
Posted on 15-05-2011 15:32 | By whiskers
Comments by the THA are a bit off the mark as there are grass users that do have to pay for the full upkeep of their lawns including mowing,fertislising,maintenance and water from subs and grants.How far can a sport expect the council,already heavily in debt,to go with funding.Time has come, with the council already expecting to bump by the rates each year,to say no to organisations unless that organisation pays its share.It would seem like THA hasn't levied those playing on the turf enough over the years because after 18 years since the first turf went in there should be more in the coffers for the replacement now required.Sport is essential for health and exercise but the costs need to be shared over those that the play the game.
What about other sports?
Posted on 15-05-2011 18:16 | By The author of this comment has been removed.
Alot of other sports groups also do not get a bean from Council. For example, anything to do with shooting sports get virtually nothing from council at all, and now they are also getting a hard time up at TECT park having 'non shooting groups' jammed in next to them, even before they are well established. It is a sign of the times that alot of sports groups or non-profit societies now basically have to be run like a business in order to survive or move forward. The days of inexperienced volunteer type committees just billing their members a sub to cover minimum costs and scraping through year by year does not cut it now. Commerical advertising and other corporate or busness sponsorship must be investigated. With a membership base of over 2000 (supposedly) alot of businesses may see this as a good opportunity to exploit. Either that, or put your subs up to cover the true costs. Some 'clubs' in TGA are up over the $400-$600 per year mark to belong. I know this may be tough for some of the school kids, but that is a the reality if you want to have the facilities without constantly going to the council for a handout, like some 'other' organisations in this city......
Please get real
Posted on 15-05-2011 21:59 | By al pillocksworth
Council should support this hockey thing to the same level it supports a sport such as chess - nothing! Who paid for the stuff that's there now? Strangely enough I have to budget to pay for the maintenance on my own house and I think hockey should do the same. As for the bit about not looking for a handout - yeah right. As for 2010 possibly being the Blackcaps last visit, who gives a toss? All us ratepayers should provide is the equivalent of parks, and the sports people should pay their own way for everything else instead of sucking on the ratepayers generosity or stupidity.
The cheek of it all
Posted on 16-05-2011 09:15 | By Scambuster
Murray Guy ,Raptor ,Whiskers and Pillocksworth you have all hit the nail on the head and for once we all agree.This equity vs. charity thing is an illconceived try on by the THA hockey gluttons. $2million indeed try zero nil zilch for openers because that is what you rate.Talk about dissatisfied greedies first they get Rolls Royce facilities to enable the game to be played at a high standard then they expect TCC ratepayers to fund the upkeep and renewal of the facilities in perpetuity.The local community in every case should only provide the land and that is where it must stop-such extras as lighting electricity water and maintenance etc etc that is for the sporting bodies to address.Sure by all means level out the playing field but that means less not more.In view of the attitude displayed here by THA blacklisting from any funding for a while would be a good lesson for this sort of 'troughing out' try on.
And where do the increased cost come from?
Posted on 16-05-2011 10:06 | By SpeakUp
They come from the everlasting, self-perpetuating, self-propagating BUREAUCRACY. Too many know-it-alls, too many politically ambitious sticky-beaks, too many unemployed, still ambitious-to-'share'-their-importance but bored-out-of-their-mind alpha people trying to fill their self-actualization as bureaucrat, distributing others' hard earned money for their pet projects. One of them is to create even more rules, laws, regulations and bureaucracy designed to steal even more of your labor-worth. Go and get a real job, bloody pseudo-socialists! 'The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money” -Margaret Thatcher-
YEAH RIGHT MURRAY
Posted on 20-05-2011 10:52 | By WOMBLE
yes thre is for sure MASSIVE disparity, just look at Bay Cricket, Mt Bowling club, Cosmo Club (let me see what sport are they into?) yes very hard to see the sense in any of this lot and it just got worse here.
Leave a Comment
You must be logged in to make a comment.