The question is not when is ‘next’… its when will the people of Prince George have a say in the matter through a referendum?

Does the mayor have plans to use the alternate approval process to ram it through? If so than IMO she doesn’t have a mandate for that and doesn’t deserve to be mayor if she can’t respect the democratic process.

Yippee!!! This is good news…keep delaying. We can’t afford it & there are way more higher priority things we need to do in PG and a PAC is not one of them.

The mayor said that she supports a new PAC as long as there is no borrowing of money by the city. So, where does the alternate approval process fit into that kind of no-money-involved scheme?

There won’t be a PAC referendum because it would never pass – politicians don’t like being told by the taxpaying voters what is “next” and what isn’t.

Mundane basic things like road, sewer, water and sidewalks rehabilitation/construction should be next, everybody knows it.

“…there is word the next P3 round will focus on water, wastewater and transportation projects as preferred applications.”

Ottawa is far away, but the Feds seem to have a better understanding of required priorities than the city of Prince George.

If the City really wants the PAC, with no borrowing of money by the city, then turn it over to a private enterprise. (preferably one without ties to he mayor and her cronies)

Even without borrowing money – which this city would need to do, we have far more pressing problems that require good use of taxpayers money.

No good having a PAC if the roads are so goddamned awful that nobody can get there.

Ya come on . We will see this waste of money defeated by petition just like our useless dike was and the way the HST was DEFEATED through the work of the people. This PAC will also be DEFEATED. There is now an army of volunteers who are just waiting for the next waste of money to be rammedthrough and we will not allow it to happen ever again. Every time one of these useless wastes of our money is rammed through, we will go door to door and get signatures and DEFEAT it. Don’t believe that? Well just try and ram a PAC through. You will see shari. You are a disgusting example of a mayor. you are worse then shooki. And soon you will be booted out of offic. So hope you hurry and get your PAC rammed through because we are just waiting. WE WILL GO DOOR TO DOOR AGAIN. Do I need to say it again now?

Politicians, local, regional, or natonal, think only in terms of photo opportunities. It is much classier to have pix of ground-breaking or ribbon-cutting ceremonies that a pix of a poltician looking at a pothole free chunk of road. If one starts looking at things the way politicians do, some of the truly dumb expeditures seem reasonable, but it doesn’t make them any less dumb.

I hear the tax payers of this City, screaming that they want $$ put into infrastructure, and then our illustrious mayor makes a statement like “For me, it is next on the list, but the question is when is ‘next’?” What part of FIX THE DAMN ROADS! does she not get? Why can’t she hear us?

“It is much classier to have pix of ground-breaking or ribbon-cutting ceremonies that a pix of a poltician looking at a pothole free chunk of road.”

If a ribbon cutting ceremony is what they want, then I would be happy to stand on the sidewalk and clap as they cut the ribbons and put a pretty plaque on a nearby pole, if they would fix the streets.

While the PAC may be nice, it is not time to have it, while the city is crumbling around us. I can’t afford to go to a nice show, AND replace the front end on my vehicle.

I’m not a bleedin heart, but, we do need a performing arts center, maybe not one with a 45 million dollar price tag.

I really think, PAC club, missed the boat by not getting it done under ‘dannyboys’ watch. I think Sherry’s going to be a bit toughter.

Our streets are needs repair, We are barely keeping up with the maintainence. I think that gas deal that Colin made many years ago, is what is funding the street repairs today. Thanks for the insight Colin.

If we are going to be serious about it, we need outside help. I think we need help from the Provincial and Federal. It could be as simple as a three years of $5 million dollars, so that we can get ahead on our maintainence cycle. We also need to look at the asphalt. We are going through a lot more freeze thaw cycles in the winter, we need to get the asphalt mix that can handle this.

“You are a nobody and you should stop calling other posters names.”

That’s just a bit hypocritical isn’t it?

I heard the mayor on the radio this morning; there’s no question as far as I’m concerned, she will be pushing and pushing hard for this thing. It’s a top priority she said.

It’s not often (if ever!) that I agree with mattyc but hopefully we can stop this thing. At least stop it at a price we can afford.

I don’t share mattyc’s method but I would certainly help him collect anti-PAC signatures! Sometimes his brand of aggressiveness is the only thing which gets attention. Reasoned argument and politeness are are too often interpreted as weaknesses! Result: no results!

Sorry, but that is the reality!

I too am anti-pac!
Being aggressive seems to be the only solution that this city council understands.
Being polite along with money and politics is just plain smug. When a lion roars, everybody stands at attention!
Every group needs a pitbull, eh matty.

Hey Gus, where are you on this. Why not give us your 800 words.
Cheers

Ladies and Gentlemen:
Some comments have been removed, as you know, Opinion250 will not tolerate bullying, so the name calling has to stop.
If you have a thought about the PAC, please share it, but slapping each other verbally does not assist in the discussion of the issue at hand.

I thank you all for taking a big deep breath and focusing your comments on the issue at hand.

Elaine Macdonald

800 words is a long read! Here are the first 8 words of how I would begin MY story: “Once upon a time there was a mayor……..”

Good point Retired, where is Gus? Inquiring minds want to know…

PAC = Pavlovian response

If Cirque can do it in a tent then why can’t the artists here do the same? Come to think of it we have a lot of artists performing at the multiplex so don’t we already have a PAC?

Gus is probably still sitting on a bar stool at the end of the bar with a posties uniform on.:) As an aside, I drove down Massey today. I think that street has too many shortcomings and should be repaved as soon as possible. Cursing a certain party’s name every time I can’t avoid hitting a pot hole isn’t nice, but sometimes I just can’t help it. Fix it.

Harb, the editor has just told us to watch our words so no cursing at those hallowed prople at city hall.

There are some alternate ruots to use. Like 10th ave is good and lower 15th is
not to bad. And use 16 W if going to college hiegths.

I notice that theym have patched 17th fromm queensway to the river but now we dontmhave holes we have

Sorry, Pushed the wrong button so have some bad spelling.

Should read: we dont have holes we have bumps.
Cheers

I guess to our mayor and council that PAC stands for

Push forward
At all
Costs

PFAAC

AFLAC

“If Cirque can do it in a tent then why can’t the artists here do the same?”

Easy….

1. Cirque received funding from the province and the feds.

2. Cirque was located in a regional urban area of some 3+ million people

3. Cirque was located in French Canada which loves its artists.

gus: “3. Cirque was located in French Canada which loves its artists.”

I don’t know about that, but I do know that French Canada loves its billions in federal transfer payments.

They should have built a baseball stadium with all the free money.

Lets slow down and read the story again. The paragraph that tells the story is.

**The Citys contribution will come from ((City land assets including the Playhouse theatre, and a downtown location))**

What this means is that the City intends to tear down the Playhouse Theatre, and sell the property. In addition they will sell off some other land, and they will donate some property downtown for the Theatre. Probably the property they bought from Norgate Auto Body, and Delorme, across from City Hall. If the City is responsible for 1/3 of the costs of the PAC, then they would have to come up with $14 Million.

The City will provide their portion as outlined above, and therefore avoid having to borrow money. Why?? Because if they borrow the money they would have to go to the Alternative Approval Process, or go directly to a referendum. They do not want to do either, hence the sale of property.

This is basically a con job. It allows a very small number of people in the City to get a PAC at the expense of a large majority of taxpayers who do not want one.

Why is it possible for the City to sell off property for this project, and not sell off property to accumulate money to repair our roads.??? Why do we end up with something we dont want, and not get something we do want??

The PAC project has been in the works for years. All sorts of meetings, and discussions taking place, applications to other levels of Government for money, etc; even though the majority of people do not want this facility at this time.

If the City Council, Administration, and some of our stellar citizens, would spend as much time and effort on roads and infrastructure, maybe we could solve some problems, however it seems that spending money on projects like the PAC is what is important to them.

Let there be no doubt in your mind. You are being conned pure and simple. The people involved in the PAC know exactly what they are doing, and what they want, and will go to any length to get it.

As the situation now stands the citizens of Prince George will not have any say what so ever on this project. It will move forward without any concern about what we think.

This type of BS goes on in Cities all over the Country, and is basically a way to circumvent the will of the people. How much longer will be allow them to treat us as a bunch of rubes???

I would suggest that if we want to stop this project, we need to find a way sooner, rather than later.

Perhaps we need some Councillors with some gonads to make a motion that any money from the sale of property must go directly to road rehabilitation before it can be spent on capital projects.

That would be a good start.

Are all eight of the Councillors in the City of Prince George in favour of this project. Do they support spending $14 Million on a not needed Capital project, when our infrastructure is in such bad shape??? If so, then let them stand up and be counted. Lets hear them specifically state their position, so that we have this information the next time we go to the polls. We already have Mayor Greens position.

Tale to the streets like the students in Quebec!! That might get some attention.

Classic case of “paralysis by analysis”.

It seems no initiative can be undertaken, no opinion given, no priority raised, and no major decision can be made until the Core Review is down. What will it provide that isn’t already known now.

Will KPMG be bringing their report down from Connaught Hill on tablets?

Our lovely mayor commenting on CKPG news on this issue stated we have everyone in city hall busy working on the core review…

I thought KPMG was doing the review for 350k…what is the total cost if we also have a ton of employees in city hall working on it too? We going to hit 500k doing a review? First recommendation by KPMG should be to have the City Manager do a review of core services every 3 years before renewing his/her contract

JohnnyBelt wrote: “I don’t know about that, but I do know that French Canada loves its billions in federal transfer payments.”

As always, JohnnyBelt shoots from his hips with little knowledge of what he is actually talking about.

Federal transfer payments for the last 8 years can be seen here:

http://www.fin.gc.ca/fedprov/mtp-eng.asp

Here is the list for this fiscal year – 2012/13. The figures shown are the per capita transfer payments starting with the highest per capita to the lowest.

1Nunavut$39,235
2NWT$25,318
3Yukon$23,089
4PEI$3,512
5New Brunswick$3,319
6Nova Scotia$3,045
7Manitoba$2,690
8Quebec$2,170
9Ontario$1,446
10Newfoundland + Labrador$1,288
11British Columbia$1,231
12Saskatchewan$1,213
13Alberta$956

In 2005, this is the way the picture looked

1Nunavut$28,257
2NWT$17,659
3Yukon$16,718
4Newfoundland + Labrador$3,011
5PEI$2,974
6New Brunswick$2,771
7Nova Scotia$2,435
8Manitoba$2,328
9Quebec$1,602
10British Columbia$1,111
11Saskatchewan$1,110
12Ontario$889
13Alberta$693

The big change from 2005 to 2012 is the move of Nfld from the province with the highest transfer payment to the province with the 7th highest transfer payments …. amazing what oil can do, eh?

Which, of course gives Alberta the edge …. oil, the luck of the geology.

So, we are supporting the Territories, the Maritimes other than Newfoundland as well as Manitoba. Manitoba is the median province and Quebec is in the lower half not the upper half of recipients.

But hey, I am sure that nased on your past actions you will continue with your prejudiced views.

There is not reason why facts would stop you now. They never do. ;-)

Slinky wrote: “First recommendation by KPMG should be to have the City Manager do a review of core services every 3 years before renewing his/her contract”

I agree that the external review should lead to setting up a system of doing internal reviews with a 3 to 5 years span.

However, the workload should be equalized for the annual staff workload, thus the various work units should be cycled through the process offset from each other.

Hopefully they will be keeping some time records, which they said they would not do, so that they can determine whether an internal review means a 2% workload increase or 3% workload increase.

5 new employees coming up to include an auditing function. ;-)

June 27th 2-12

Stockton, California, said it will file for bankruptcy after talks with bondholders and labor unions failed, making the agricultural center the biggest U.S. city to seek court protection from creditors.

“The city is fiscally insolvent and must seek chapter 9 bankruptcy protection,” Stockton said in a statement released yesterday after its council voted 6-1 to adopt a spending plan for operating under bankruptcy protection.

Well, it can happen anywhere!

“But hey, I am sure that nased on your past actions you will continue with your prejudiced views.

There is not reason why facts would stop you now. They never do.”

Aw, gus. Don’t be sore. And thanks for proving me right.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equalization_payments_in_Canada

An excerpt:

“Quebec and Ontario will receive the most from equalization payments in the 2012-2013 year…In the 2012-2013 year, the following provinces will receive equalization payments:

Quebec ($7.391 billion)
Ontario ($3.261 billion)
Manitoba ($1.671 billion)
New Brunswick ($1.495 billion)
Nova Scotia ($1.268 billion)
Prince Edward Island ($337 million)
The following provinces will not qualify for equalization payments in 2012-2013:[4]

Alberta
Saskatchewan
Newfoundland and Labrador
British Columbia”

Your turn, gus.

gus: “As always, JohnnyBelt shoots from his hips with little knowledge of what he is actually talking about.”

I’ll take your unfair statement and give you one. As always, gus uses google to search for sites that support his biased views.

So if I were to tell you that the City of Prince George collects about 90% less tax than the City of Vancouver does, do you feel that Vancouver is overtaxed? Or PG is undertaxed?

If you do not believe that a tax per capita or a grant per capita is the more rational comparison, I am sorry, there is no use in conversing with you.

I do not deal with illogical people.

So what do you take issue with gus, that my original statement was 100% correct, or that it was presented in a way that was undigestible by you?

Methinks it was the latter.

“I do not deal with illogical people.”

You don’t know what you are missing! I get a kick out of them, especially when I get caught by surprise, the surprise being that some people in very high decision making positions actually prove by their words and actions that they possess less logic than an African Grey Parrot, no offence to the animal intended, of course!

Heed the wisdom of the ancient saying: “Don’t get mad, get even!”

PG: “You don’t know what you are missing! I get a kick out of them…”

You’re saying this as if you’re logical. Sure, gus isn’t very concise… and is quite often condescending bordering on arrogant… but he is mostly logical.

First Johnny Belt writes: “I don’t know about that, but I do know that French Canada loves its billions in federal TRANSFER payments.”

I respond with respect to TRANSFER payments as reported by the Federal Government.

JohnnyBelt” responds with the following :”Quebec and Ontario will receive the most from EQUALIZATION payments…”

So we switch from TRANSFER to EQUALIZATION.

So, I am dealing with an individual (as are others) that weaves all over the place either because he does not understand the difference or wishes to obfuscate the issue.

Flippant and illogical are JohnnyBelt’s characteristic which show up loud and clear. The best way to deal with that is walk away. There is no benefit for either of us to continue it.

Sometimes the best offense is to retreat.

For those others who might be able to understand some meaningful figures when it comes to asking the question “which province has the highest percentage of EQUALIZATION payments as a portion of their total TRANSFER payments, here is the table in order of highest to lowest.

1PEI65.69%
2New Brunswick59.59%
3Manitoba49.29%
4Nova Scotia44.04%
5Quebec42.40%
6Ontario16.68%
7Newfoundland + Labrador0.00%
7British Columbia0.00%
7Saskatchewan0.00%
7Alberta0.00%

The only thing which distinguishes the last four from the first four or five is oil, gas, and potash. The luck of the draw.

Without that BC would not be much different than Quebec and Alberta and Saskatchewan much different than Manitoba. So let’s not pretend that we are superior to those eastern provinces that have not oil or gas. To do so, would be arrogant. Right JohnnyBelt? You know all about what arrogant means.

gus: “So we switch from TRANSFER to EQUALIZATION.”

That is what I meant orignally. Sorry it caused all the confusion.

gus: “To do so, would be arrogant. Right JohnnyBelt? You know all about what arrogant means.”

Hey now, no need to get snippy. Despite what you think of me, I like you gus. Every board needs a Cliff Claven. You fit the bill nicely.