Debate Argument in Support of Option 3: Asset Owning Council Controlled Trading Organisation

Introduction: Option 3, the Asset Owning Council Controlled Trading Organisation (CCTO), proposes a model where the Nelson Marina is managed with a primary focus on profitability. This approach not only aims to enhance the financial sustainability of the Marina but also seeks to provide a return on investment to the community. The following points, derived from community feedback, outline the support for this option.

1. Enhanced Commercial Viability and Development: Several community members have expressed that a commercial ownership model is essential for the Marina's progress. The current state of underdevelopment, particularly in areas like Akersten Street, suggests a need for a more business-oriented approach to unlock the potential of the Marina. A CCTO would facilitate focused commercial development, potentially transforming the Marina into a more vibrant and economically productive area.

2. Financial Independence from Ratepayers: A significant advantage of Option 3 is the financial independence it offers from the ratepayers. By operating as a CCTO, the Marina can generate its own revenue and cover its operational costs without relying on public funds. This model alleviates the financial burden on the local government and, by extension, the ratepayers, ensuring that the liability of business operations does not fall on them.

3. Profit Generation and Reinvestment: The ability to generate and reinvest profits back into the Marina or other community projects is a compelling aspect of Option 3. This approach not only ensures the continuous improvement and maintenance of the Marina facilities but also contributes to the broader economic health of the community. Profits could be used to enhance public amenities, further justifying the investment in the Marina.

4. Utilization of Specialized Management: The CCTO model leverages the specialized management and governance expertise of its Board of Directors. This professional management can lead to more efficient and strategic decision-making, helping to identify and capitalize on new opportunities that may not be as readily pursued under the current or alternative models.

5. Long-term Lease and Renewal Options: The suggestion of implementing a right of renewal lease every 25 years under Option 3 ensures that the future of the Marina remains flexible and responsive to the changing needs and conditions of the community. This periodic review allows for adjustments and realignments with community interests, ensuring sustained public benefit.

6. Public Scrutiny and Ethical Operation: Despite concerns about reduced public accountability, Option 3 can incorporate mechanisms to ensure that the CCTO operates ethically and in alignment with community values. Ensuring council oversight and setting up stringent reporting and accountability measures can mitigate risks and enhance transparency.

Conclusion: Option 3 presents a strategic opportunity to transform the Nelson Marina into a self-sustaining, commercially viable entity that not only meets its operational costs but also contributes to the community economically. By focusing on profitability with an eye towards community reinvestment, this model promises a balanced approach to managing a significant local asset. The CCTO structure, with its professional management and potential for financial independence, offers a promising path forward for the Marina's development and the broader community's economic health.

Comments

Option_Selected	Comment
Option 3	The Marina needs a commerical ownershipmodel to make any real progress.Akersten Street has sat as it is for far to long un-developed.
Option 3	Given the wide range of underused amenities closer to where people live and work, I don't see value in prioritising the marina's broadening of service. The simple fact is that our only viable connection to it is the Trafalgar Park underpass or driving there via pedestrian-unfriendly SH6. Until socioeconomic conditions can drive a substantial attractor development out there, it appears to be a remote fringe area, for minority benefit, that seems to look after itself just fine. It's a nice peaceful place to go for the occassional walk but only if you're already at Trafalgar Park. From anywhere else, it's too far and too poorly connected. We should be looking to extract benefit from it, not to put benefit where hardly anyone will go – especially in this time of austerity when we have ever less to spend.
Option 3	With a right of renewal lease so that every 25 years or so this option of what to do with the Marina is able to come back to the council table.
Option 3	The liability of a business should not be on the rate payer
Option 3	Outsource it and focus NCC on core matters
Option 3	It seems like receiving profits can then further leverage the long term planning requirements and boost the resiliency of the marina.
Option 3	Council cannot run business.  Complete conflict of interest which limits business aqdaptability
Option 3	Assume Council 100% shareholder
Option 3	OPTION 3 … must be agreed as it provides a dividend.
Option 3	What protections exist to prevent the future sale of Marina assets without ratepayer consultation? As a COO how can we ensure the ethical operation of this organisation, other examples of this model have shown councils try to distance themselves from COO’s who for example do not pay a living wage, have poor employment practices or do not serve ratepayers and residents well. We need to have an operational model where council can be held accountable to the ratepayers and residents, and ensure that our interests are served through the project.
Option 3	Support providing modern facilities to meet the changing needs of boat owners including sewage and waste.
Option 3	it is a significant asset that should be giving the ratepyer a return and be open to public scutinary.
Option 3	It appears that Council controlled companies not providing good returns. Council governance needs to take a sharper interest in the returns it is getting from its assets and at least have a set of indicative dividend targets the assets should return. hese Council governance should publicly investigate and report on how these targets are met or not, each year.
Option 3	Comment:
Option 3	? Unsure Why do boaties pay launch fees where mountain bikers get similar facilities for free.