Adelaide Oval management to challenge $80m hike in valuation, which has forced up its emergency services levy

Adelaide Oval is worth how much? A hike in valuation has sent its Emergency Services Bill soaring – but Oval management is not taking it lying down.

Adelaide Oval’s emergency services levy bill has increased nearly six-fold to $592,000.

Adelaide Oval is at loggerheads with the state’s valuer general over the valuation of the arena, which has sent its emergency services levy bill soaring.

The oval’s Stadium Management Authority’s ESL liability has copped a $140,000 – or 31 per cent – increase in ESL this financial year to $592,000, with the bill rising nearly 500 per cent in less than a decade.

The latest spike comes on the back of an $80m hike in the capital value of the Oval and its new Oval Hotel to $430m, despite the SMA’s profits being hammered by Covid-19.

The SMA’s ESL bill has skyrocketed from $103,808 in 2014 – the year after its $535m redevelopment – to $592,000 this financial year.

The SMA is challenging valuations in the South Australian Civil and Administrative Tribunal and has sought an explanation from SA Valuer-General Kathrerine Bartolo as to how the figure was calculated.

“Specifically, it is our contention that the rate of increase applied to the capital value far exceeds the state average and this is leading to very significant rises in our ESL commitments,” the SMA said in a statement to The Advertiser.

“If this valuation trend remains unchallenged, we are anticipating our ESL for 2022 will increase from $592,000 to $720,000.

“As the matter is before the tribunal, it is not appropriate to make any further comment at this time.”

27/11/15 - Aerial photos of Adelaide Oval at 4:15 on day one of the first ever day/night test cricket match between New Zealand and Australia. Photo Naomi Jellicoe

The SMA’s application for review, filed with the tribunal in March, pertains to capital valuations in 2018 and 2019 of $340m and $350m respectively to which the SMA had objected.

In its application, filed by the SMA’s agent Liquid Pacific Asset Consultants, it claims that the Valuer-General had “refused documentation as to how the value for Jan 1, 2019 was derived and the evidence used to support the value”.

It says they received a response from the Valuer-General on February 12, 2021 some 17 months after lodging an objection to their 2019 valuation and only after they had lodged an objection to the January 2020 valuation.

“The VG has advised they have also completed a review of the applicant’s January 1, 2020 capital objection but for unknown reasons will not issue their advice,” SMA’s application, lodged in March this year, says.

The Valuer-General’s office has declined to comment on the matter while it is before the tribunal.

The matter is listed for a further directions hearing on December 12.

The tribunal heard in October that both parties were seeking to get valuation reports on the Oval.

“That may take some time to tee that up given the complex nature of the land in question,” a representative for the Valuer-General said.

Financial statements lodged with ASIC reveal the SMA posted a $5.9m loss in the 12 months to October, as food, drink and other sales were slashed from $46.2m to just $23.3m.

This followed a $3.9m loss in 2019.

The SMA does not pay council rates on the property.

The SMA’s annual $3m obligation towards a sinking fund – set aside for infrastructure work at the stadium – was deferred last year, while the state government has agreed to cover $2m of this year’s contribution.