LET US THINK about words and meaning when spending ratepayers’ money. Prospectus, partnership, subsidy, landlord, ownership and preposition…
The starting point would be: the Willow Court Partnership Prospectus was a tentative proposal intended to ascertain someone’s attitude or opinion. To break this down: a feeler, overture, hint, sample, tentative inquiry, tentative proposal, tentative suggestion, and my favourite, test trial balloon.
This same prospectus is an invitation to partner with private business in the Derwent Valley. A prospectus contains information about a company, its management team, recent financial performance, and other related information that investors would like to know.
There is no sure evidence produced that demonstrates that we would even be a good partner. As an investor I would draw attention to the fact that within the Derwent Valley Council August 20 agenda item 10.5 “Willow Court Partnership Prospectus”, Corumbene is mentioned as giving feedback, but there is no mention of any feedback from the community.
In the document three partners have been identified but our organisation does not seem to have made the case for us potentially being a good part. Of course if subsidising (although commonly extended from government, the term subsidy can relate to any type of support – for example from NGOs or as implicit subsidies) private business is part of the criteria. We are right at the top of the list to be a partner.
A landlord is the owner of a house, apartment, condominium, land, or real estate which is rented or leased to an individual or business, who is called a tenant. It appears the business partner is not part of this definition.
On the face of it doing deals with partners is part of the cost of doing business. I can understand that as the landlord this “Willow Court Partnership Prospectus”, BUT as an equal partner in this partnership I would have thought that my organisation might have thought it prudent to include shareholders in the in the feedback loop.
It does not appear to me that prospectus contains information about the council, its management team, recent financial performance, and other related information that investors would like to know.
JAMES T. GRAHAM
James Graham reflection Let Us Think: Partnership Prospects identifies apparent significant shortcomings in the DVC Willow Court Partnerships Prospectus; an addition to those shortcomings is the complete lack of a long term vision and management plan for Willow Court, one of Tasmania’s most significant and unique heritage site.
In contrast, it was just over two years ago that many in the Tasmanian community waited with great anticipation on the outcome of the Council’s submission for Willow Court to be listed on the National Heritage Register, with that listing providing long term protection for the site.
Now, it seems all the justifications for seeking National Heritage listing for the site have been tossed aside, along with consultation with stakeholders on the future development of the site.
I thank you James T Graham.
You clearly care about your community.
You raised points I have never considered. They are very valid.
I am new to this community and love it.
I do hate our community leaders thinking we are ignorant.
We the very basic ratepayer do understand what this community needs.
We have community leaders that put promotion of a few local businesses above the true essence of regional significance and in the end promote complete spin and cheapen the Derwent Valley as an area to invest in.
Please community leaders calm down with the adjectives of sublime or great.
Let our quiet producers shine with the product they have been gently perfecting.
They are the investors in the region we need.