“Mayor Green says she supports this move as “It is an appropriate use, hopefully it comes in less than $1.6 million, but that money is coming from the sale of lands so it won’t be coming from the taxpayers”

Okay, but what is happening with the old lands? Is it just me, or does this deal make NO SENSE WHATSOEVER unless:

1) There is already something behind the scenes planned for those lands or;
2) The entire purpose of this transaction was to sell off city property (at least I assume it’s city property) for the effective purpose of giving the PGGCC an 800K injection of money

If it’s #1, I think the people of PG have to ask what the heck is being planned. If it’s #2, I think the people of PG have to REALLY ask why the city is essentially disposing of their assets so that they can give cash to the PGGCC.

Oh and someone should ask the mayor if she’s ever heard of the term “opportunity cost”, LOL.

Oh yeah and wasn’t this parcel of land part of the area that was to fall under the planned redevelopment for the PGGCC lands? What the heck happened to those plans?

Green states. **The money will be coming from the sale of lands, so it wont be coming from taxpayers** Rather an assinine statement when you consider, that it is in fact the taxpayers that own the land. This is the problem with City Hall, they somehow beleive that they own all the land, rather than the taxpayers.

How is it that the City can make these significant changes to the Golf Course, which is a Society under the BC Societys Act. Did the members have a vote on this before the City made the deal, or will they have no choice but to rubber stamp it???

Right on Palopu. I can’t believe our mayor has the audacity to actually say “the money is coming from the sale of lands so it won’t be coming from the taxpayers.” Who the hell does she think owns the land!

I bet the money from the sale of the land (our money) could have been better used to reduce our tax hike this year or be used to pay off the cost for the Canada Games or perhaps pay off some of our growing debt. Was she misquoted or just unaware of what she was saying?

Gotta make room for more mall box retail stores so tennis gotta go.
metalman.

The PGGCC website states that they are a semi-private club, registered under the BC Societys Act, and that the club is owned and operated by its members.

So a member may in fact hold a share in the club, but the club itself is still a society and is subject to all the rules and regulations of a society.

Thats my understanding in any event.

When selling real property with a built asset on it which has to be replaced one has many costs and hopefuylly many gains.

Some are immediate financial revenues and expenses, others could be precedent costs and as well as succession costs and revenues.

In the case of tennis courts and club house, if there are to be no disruptions in playing time, the courts will have to be built in a new spot prior to the old ones being abandoned and prior to the purchaser taking ove the property to commence their development, unless they caan avoid that part of the property aquisition.

In the final analysis, to get the best net value out of the sale, one should be working both on maximizing revenues and minimizing costs.

The notion that it does not matter how much it costs to rebuild an existing built asset as long as it comes out of the sale of the land is foreing to me.

The only scanario I can possbily see is that the purchaser will purchase the land for a fixed fee plus rebuild the asset as part of the deal. That might happen if the purchaser has her own forces to rebuild.

Even then, I would want to see a deal with and without the purchaser including the construction of the tennis courts.

Finally, taking over part of the golf course lands will also cost money which needs to go on the expense side of the ledger.

The bottom line is, including every single aspect of this transaction, what will be the net gain or loss after one year, after 5 years and after ten year (remember, there shpuld be tax money coming to the City on a piece of property which was not generating any taxes.)

In the final analysis, that estimated net income will either be met or will be reduced or increased.

Now, here is the interesting part ……

Everyone is pointing fingers at IPG for costing the City money or not knowing whether improved or degraded our financial position.

It is time we looked at the City with the same scrutiny people want of IPG. We can start with this project. Let the citizens of PG audit the project financials to see how well the City handles our money.

Who cares who earns $75,000 or more and whether they deserve it. Don’t sweat the small stuff. Sweat the million dollar plus deals and follow them through based on original estimates and final project costs and incomes.

Those managers who excell can be recognized, the others can be taught how to work more effectively.