News 
 Local News 
 News 
 General 
 Tennis club faces game, set match 

Tennis club faces game, set match

07 Sep, 2010 05:00 AM
The Newcastle District Tennis Association (NDTA) might fold if it is forced to pay Newcastle City Council rates back-dated to 2000 and totalling $96,000, unless a public voice next Tuesday can overturn the decision.

Competition tennis has been played at the District Park headquarters since 1900 and some of Australia's greatest players have graced the Broadmeadow courts in that time.

But more than 100 years of history will be lost if a decision, described by tennis officials as "greedy, unwanted and unprecedented", stands.

The tennis centre was assessed by the office of the Valuer General when nine courts were replaced and other repair work was completed in 2008 after the June 2007 floods. Notice of the levies was served in 2009.

Once the property was valued it gave council the right to charge levies that dated back to April 1, 2000, when the lease was signed by the (NDTA).

"Legally the council has the right to levy rates now and we can live with that," NDTA member Gavin Smith said.

"But to back-date those rates 10 years is just grossly unfair, greedy, unwanted and unprecedented.

"We have accepted a payment plan but in all reality we will never be able to pay it back.

"The short answer is we're gone if we have to pay it back."

Mr Smith will speak on behalf of the association in front of Newcastle councillors next Tuesday night and plead for the decision to be overturned.

The tennis centre is on Crown land, but the NDTA is a non-profit organisation that puts all money raised from the licensed club and centre managers into replacing courts and general maintenance.

Replacing worn courts is a 10-year cycle that costs about $30,000 per court. The association said it was trying to re-surface two of its 24 courts but had enough money only to do one.

"Under the government act we can't waiver or write off the rates," Newcastle City Council director of city assets Steve Edmonds said.

"We have offered the [NDTA] a 20-year repayment period which works out at $1400 a quarter.

"There is also the provision to waive any interest rates in the time and we chose to do that.

"Technically we could have gone right back because they've been leasing it for 80 years, but we've only gone back to when this lease agreement was signed."

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
Keep digging that big hole council and we will then be able to put all you you fools in it and refill it.They are a nonprofit asset to our community but alas council just doesn't care about anything anymore.God i'm glad i have money so i don't have to put up with any of this council s--t
Posted by Sport, 7/09/2010 6:59:27 AM, on The Herald
have i got this right? the council wants to increase the clubs rates and also back date them for ten years? you can't do that....
Posted by judgedredd, 7/09/2010 8:40:29 AM, on The Herald
Geez, now our pre match watering hole is facing the threat of closure. Is there anything else that can be thrown at us Jets fans.
Posted by Evo, 7/09/2010 8:58:17 AM, on The Herald
Dam it the council should be subsidizing the tennis not the other way around. If you have more people playing sport of any description the social knit of the community becomes stronger and larger, consequently your antisocial behavior would be reduced. These social and sporting clubs play an important mentoring role in teaching youth what is acceptable and what is unacceptable behavior. The $1400 per quarter is a cheap price for the council to have such a facility available. If the council were to run a tennis centre (as if ) it would cost them considerably more, look at the tennis courts at Carrington, council run and under maintained and under resourced, and as a result under utilised.
Posted by old fart, 7/09/2010 9:13:36 AM, on The Herald
All land owners should pay rates. That includes churches, schools and even the Council itself. That places everyone on a level playing field so to speak. The Council has to be funded and all should pay.
Posted by Bigfeller, 7/09/2010 9:22:19 AM, on The Herald
If the lease was signed in 2000 and there were not rates then - or minimal rates paid - then surely a new assessment cannot be backdated that far? Where does that leave any rate payer?? That sounds legally dubious!
Posted by Rose- Lake Macquarie, 7/09/2010 9:29:41 AM, on The Herald
Support the Tennis Club and support the Jets. The 'tenzo' is filled with character and is the pre-match venue for the Squadron and other Jets fans and we walk across the fields to the stadium. Lets pack the place next Friday and show our support for our local community. ONE GOAL! FRIDAY 17.09.2010. JETS V PERTH.
Posted by One Goal, 7/09/2010 10:01:59 AM, on The Herald
Under the constitution councils are not recognised nor are they able to raise taxes (rates). If council argues that rate are not tax but fee for service then they must have a signed individual contracts with rate payers which they don't. The Government act referred to is invalid under the constitution. In fact a recent high court decision has revealed that Federal Govt is not allowed under the constitution to fund councils directly and that all councils may have to pay back any Federal Govt funding received from their inception. The club may defer payment of rates until any High court decision is made on the legality of local councils to levy rates. www.alga.asn.au/constitutionalrec ognition P.S. Council can only sell property after 5 years of unpaid rates (also illegal)
Posted by Progressive Thinker, 7/09/2010 10:08:30 AM, on The Herald
The NCC wont loose money they WANT money remember they want a lot of things to happen so someone has to pay. Its a pity Councils don't get looked into more of what they do with monies.
Posted by Money Money Money, 7/09/2010 10:09:13 AM, on The Herald
Good ol' Newcastle council and some short sighted money grabbing, who'd have thought it. Why not levy some back rates on the local rugby club or surf life saving club while you're at it? You can then repossess the land when they can't pay and sell it off to developers! Then we can all live in a highly profitable but barren cultural landscape with lots of people with nothing to do.
Posted by stu, 7/09/2010 10:26:11 AM, on The Herald
1 | 2 | 3  |  next >

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.
BLEAK FUTURE: Newcastle District Tennis Association member Gavin Smith and Top Spin Tennis operator Will O'Neil. - Picture by Ryan Osland
BLEAK FUTURE: Newcastle District Tennis Association member Gavin Smith and Top Spin Tennis operator Will O'Neil. - Picture by Ryan Osland
Related Coverage
POLL
Q: Should the Newcastle District Tennis Association have to backpay rates for the past 10 years to Newcastle City Council?

Yes
(32.7%)

No
(67.3%)

Total Votes: 376
Poll Date: 06 September, 2010

Most popular articles


 
Balance Health Club-Wests Tower
 
Bounce
 
Landcom Sanctuary


Newcastle Herald







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Classifieds

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2012. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...