While any development has the capacity and ability to promote jobs and economic growth within our city, any development that involves a private group or person using a public asset to further their own interests should be carefully considered by council.

Comberton Grange (the proposed site for the Buddhist Temple) was purchased by Council in the late 1970s as an investment. It was always intended that this property would one day be sold and the proceeds would be directed towards the construction of a Cultural Convention Centre. We are currently preparing to build a Cultural Convention Centre and to this day Comberton Grange remains a public asset.

The mayor has floated the concept of a lease arrangement over this property between council and the Shaolin Buddhists but to this date he has not ruled out the possibility of proposing a peppercorn arrangement ($1 per year). All I have ever asked is that when dealing with public land owned by residents that council aims to attract the maximum benefit for the residents of this city.

Regardless of who decides to build on this public space, I feel that the wider community has a right to know what the mayor intends to propose in this Memorandum of Understanding over an asset owned by this community between our council and what is essentially a group of private individuals seeking to advance their own interests. Any sensible business when proposing to lease one of its assets would always invite expressions of interest to get the best deal possible. Why should our council be any different?

It would be easy to suggest that any opposition to a Buddhist Temple is an act of bigotry or racism. However, I think that most sensible people will support a common principle that when dealing with an asset owned by the community in the context of permitting private use, our council should always aim to achieve the best possible value for the ratepayers of our city irrespective of any other emotion attachments that one might attempt to hang.

Cr Gareth Ward

Shoalhaven City Council