Show us the money

Discussions about anything in the news

Show us the money

Postby ArthurHH » Fri Sep 19, 2014 1:48 am

Well Bruce over the last few months or more you have presented a number of situations that you feel you have been disadvantaged by.
1 The council didn't give you money from what us locals referred to as the Sludge fund to have your model park.
2 You keep complaining that your prohibited to fly model etc etc at the location you occupy at the airport.
3 You suggest there is huge support for your plan of a model park and that there is many dollars pledged in support of it

Problem one is that you Havant done squat to play the game with the people whom make the decisions.
Problem Two you haven't converted all this promised money into anything real
Problem Three You have no plan and scheme supported by numbers and a business plan with cash flows and income/expenditure expectations.

Fact is that you can fly and test your gear as much as any single shite can when he buys a Chinese drone, you because your in a flight area for real planes and has made that known has to take extra precautions. These declarations have screwed you. End of the day just bring the gear up to my place and test, yeah sure I am in the controlled airspace but hell I didn't known that

I sit directly north of the runway, I regularly fly RC gear in my property, I have no issue with this, but then again I have not posted YouTube videos of me crashing into a faux control tower, or me trying to make a lithium battery explode or me running several Km FPV control of a craft while sitting in controlled airspace.

I support Neil Sinclair I support the rule of law so have to be against your position.
Your lack of ability to be a diplomat is your issue and problem. I am sure there is a diplomatic (read grease way) to resolve this.

I know you from way back Bruce, Colin Brown days and I see you have not changed much. Thats now 20+ years ago.
Posts: 17
Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 5:18 pm

Re: Show us the money

Postby aardvark_admin » Fri Sep 19, 2014 7:45 am

Actually Arthur, you're a little misinformed :-)

1. It was the council who suggested I apply for the funding as a method of presenting the proposal to them. I told them that the funding was not needed (due to the $40K of pledges already received and the fact that the only thing the SWDC needed to do was to delist the airfield in order for this to happen -- which is a net savings, not a cost).

2. I'll have you know that I am by far the *Safest* flier of RC models at the Tokoroa Airfield. My levels of skill, experience, knowledge and attitude far exceed those of the others who fly there. One only has to watch the ongoing and very blatant flouting of CA101 by the members of SWIM and the NZJMA (well documented by my and evidenced in my videos) to see that this is beyond question. I was the one who mandated the use of a scanner on the av-band by the club at a time when this was not a requirement or even felt to be necessary by any other parties -- but now it is compulsory. I have not repeatedly crashed large, fast, dangerous models into adjacent clubs, placing life and property in dange by doing so. I am not the one who has been prosecuted and convicted of offenses against the CAA Act (as the current president of SWIM has). I'm not the one who *deliberately* flew an RC model into the path of a full-sized aircrat on approach (resulting in a complaint to CAA and a physical assault by that plane's pilot) -- as the president of SWIM did.

3. There *is* huge support for the model park and the SWDC (through Marin Glucina) has been give copies of the huge stack of pledges made in support of this initiative. As for the "business case" -- why does it need a business case?

- the SWDC is not being asked to put any ratepayers money into it.
- it does not structurally change the airfield in any way.
- it does not deprive any existing users of the facility from that use.

Do you have to submit a business plan when you want to mow your lawns? Do you have to submit a business plan when you decide to have lunch down by the lake? No.

All the SWDC has to do is delist the barely-used airfield so as to open it up to the people who want to come here (and stay in our motels, eat at our restaurants, shop in our stores) and fly RC models at the airfield -- where RC models have been flown for many years. Why can't they do that already? Because in order to fly RC models at the airfield they would have to sit their MFNZ "wings" or be under the constant immediate supervision of someone who has that accreditation -- which is clearly impractical.

Right now, Tokoroa is a "go-through" town, what's wrong with making it a "go-to" one?

The SWDC has contributed huge sums towards promoting the Waikato River Trails -- which brings people "through" the district but does not encourage them to stay (except perhaps for free in some of the camping grounds -- hardly a boon to the local area's businesses.


I am the one who pays a healthy stipend for lease of the ground on which my hangar sits and that stipend *includes* use of the runway for "aviation related purposes" -- yet it seems *that* contract can be unilaterally broken with impunity by the SWDC. If developing aviation-safety technology is not "aviation related" then I do not konw what is.

I'm actually gobsmacked that you'd consider that venting a small lithium battery outdoors constitutes a safety risk to anyone.

As for "the tower"... please ask Mr Sinclair to explain why it took over 18 months for the SWDC to *finally* put a lock on it so that kids weren't endangering their lives by climbing up it and risking injury or death after I advised them of the risks and posted this video:

The Tower

Now *that* is kind of scary, isn't it? I don't think that Mr Sinclair nor his council can really be considered safety-conscious when that situation was allowed to continue for so very, very long. By comparison, complaining about a bunch of grown adults choosing to vent a battery in a location where it could cause no damage to property nor harm to others is just bitchy (IMHO).

You say "I support Neil Sinclair I suppor the rule of law so have to be against your position" but youy also say "I sit directly north of the runway, I regularly fly RC gear in my property, I have no issue with this".

Hypocrisy much?

Go read CAA101. You may *not* operate an RC plane at or within 4Km of an airfield without "wings" which, since you didn't say you had, I assume you do not.

As for my lack of diplomacy -- well I *was* very diplomatic until Mr Sinclair broke his word to me over a very important matter and until one of his bureaucrats started acting with prejudice. I also have little time for those who demonstrate such huge levels of hypocrisy (which now appears to include yourself, given the disclosures you've made in your post).

The mayor's latest jibe at me also shows that he's acting with prejudice. Gravely concerned that I might fly a small craft (with great control and safety) in a park, showing it to a bunch of eager kids) yet seemingly unconcerned that it was reported his own council's contractors started a fire and left it burning right next to the same playground -- prompting angry parents, concerned of the children's safety to call the fire brigade.

I also have some wonderful footage of adults kicking a rugby ball in the same playground such that the ball flies into the playground area, narrowly nissing several children playing on swings and other equipment there. That rugby ball weighs more than my little model and, once it left the kicker's boot, he had *no* control -- hence the near collision with a 3-year-old's skull. Now *THAT*'s the sort of scary thing the mayor should be concerned bout -- not engaging in petty prejudice towards me.
Site Admin
Posts: 3592
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 2:10 pm

Re: Show us the money

Postby aardvark_admin » Fri Sep 19, 2014 10:45 am

Just as a footnote Arthur, I invite you to describe to me how turning the airfield into a model park, at no cost to ratepayers and without disadvantaging any existing users, has any negative aspects.

Even if the model park concept only produced a trickle of visitors and nothing like the promised numbers -- what would be the downside to this? How would it constitute a loss of revenue, business or opportunity for locals?

I've presented a win-win proposition that very few (if any) other small towns around NZ have ever been lucky enough to entertain. Given the abysmal state of Tokoroa's economy (read this Infometrics report and you'll have to admit I'm right), surely Tokoroa is in no position to look this gift-horse in the mouth simply because it's an intiative that I have worked hard to create and promote.

Our local-body politicians (including Mr Sinclair) have an obligation to do what is best for the district, regardless of whether that might conflict with their own personal grudges and personal dislikes.

Look at the figures (from that Infometrics report):

Guest nights down almost 8%
Retail down almost 30% (and just look at the "for lease" signs that now clutter the CBD/retail area of Tokoroa)
Unemployment almost 11%, versus just 6% for the nation as a whole.

Are you also going to allow personalities and prejudices to stand in the way of an initiative that would:

1. Increase motel nights by a *significant* amount by way of national and international tourists coming to the model park.

2. Increase retail spending - because when Dad and the boy are flying at the park, mum and the girls will be in town shopping and the whole family will be eating at local restaurants and cafe's during their stay.

3. Increase employment opportunities because both of the above are benefits that will ultimately increase the number of jobs in Tok.

Sure, it's unlikely that the model park alone will make Tok a thriving town... but it will go some way towards addressing the steady and increasing decline of this town.

If you're opposed to providing these benefits to the businesses and people of Tokoroa simply because it's *me* who has done the hard work to make this happen then you and Mr Sinclair are indeed well suited to each others' company but both of you should be ashamed of your bias and myopia.
Site Admin
Posts: 3592
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 2:10 pm

Re: Show us the money

Postby Screw » Fri Sep 19, 2014 10:11 pm

Perhaps it's a reflection of the malaise that the country feels in general Bruce? The SWDC feels that they represent the only farming community (they shouldn't but that is too often the case) and the farmers just want a cute little country town to do their shopping in and don't want all those "Loopies" bespoiling their little paradise!

Leasing a piece of private property would simplify (but not solve) many of the problems you are having. Doing that would relieve that problem with the SWDC but not the MFA.
Posts: 1296
Joined: Tue May 13, 2014 3:52 pm

Re: Show us the money

Postby aardvark_admin » Sat Sep 20, 2014 8:33 am

Sadly, the airfield is the only suitable piece of land and it is because it has become so widely recognised within the ranks of the international model flying community (seen over 50 million times on YouTube) that it would be an essential part of the model-park concept.

Any small town anywhere in the world could make a model park from a grassy field but it would not work because nobody's going to travel hundreds, thousands or 10,000+ Km to fly at a grassy field just like the one down the road from them. What *does* make the TIMP initiative so different and so viable is that people from all over the world will get a chance to come and fly at the full-sized airfield they've seen so often on YouTube.

It's a bit like the reason people come to NZ after watching LOTR. There are mountain ranges and tussock-land all over the world but folk want to come to NZ on holiday because they've seen it in their favourite movies. Same goes with TIMP. People love the videos that have been made at the Tokoroa Airfield and they want to come fly there with me and others.

Now if Tok was a prosperous town and the airfield played home to regular full-sized flying activities, commercial air services or almost *anything* else -- or if turning it into a model park meant that full-sized aircraft could no longer use it -- or if the creation of the model park involved the expenditure of public money then you could understand the SWDC's reluctance to support it. However, there is virtually *no* full-sized aviation at the airfield, there are *no* commercial services of any kind running from the airfield and the delisting required to make the model park viable would actually *save* the council several thousand dollars a year.

The hypocrisy of the SWDC is huge.

For instance, as a footnote to the minutes of every council meeting they claim :

Strategic objectives

* More jobs - Council to support, where it can, the development of more work or jobs for our poeple

* Promotion of the district - Council to promote (both within the district and to others) and develop the essential qualities that make our community and district speciall


1. Stimulate economic development by assisting existing & attracting new businesses
3. Support tourism development
7. Enhance access to and use of Council's services and facilities
15. Develop partnerships that support the achievement of our vision.

Yet, here I am working my arse off to develop an initiative that would almost certainly create new jobs. I've also done more to *effectively* promote this district in the 11 years I've been here than *anything* the SWDC has done. It's been featured on TV several times -- including once on The Discovery Channel when various production companies have come to film my activities and my YouTube videos have made Tokoroa a household name within the RC model flying community around the world.

I'm also an existing business that strives to bring new employment opportunities to the town (strategy 1) (which Roger Fisher from the SWDC said I am not allowed to do). Instead of "assisting" me, the SWDC has constantly and repeatedly thrown road-blocks in my way, making "rules" that apply only to me and significantly compromise my ability to go about my lawful business.

The creation of TIMP would give the community far greater access to the use of the airfield (strategy 7) because they would no longer be required to pay a significant annual stipend to a MFNZ for the privilege.

I have offered on several occasions to partner with the SWDC (strategy 15) by allowing the free use of my YouTube channels to further promote the district to an audience of millions -- but that was declined.

Again I ask -- what small rural town with economic and social indicators as apalling as Tokoroa would, in their right mind, turn away an opportunity to work with myself and, by being true to their stated objectives and strategies, bring such benefits to that town?

It is easy to see why I have such a low opinion of the SWDC and politicians in general. The people deserve better.
Site Admin
Posts: 3592
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 2:10 pm

Return to General News Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest