Interesting that Mayor Green is wondering why Northern Health isn’t paying the bill for fluoridation.
Astonishingly enough, City Councils have been given the power to do what no Health Authority, Dr or Dentist can do – force people to take medication. That includes fluoride.

The core review cost over one third of a million dollars. Will the recommendations, if acted upon, recover this cost as well as effectively reducing the tax burden on the property owners of PG? I would like the various media to address this situation. Presently, the City Council is increasing the costs to property owners in leaps and bounds. Is this saying that the Council had little faith in the core review? I hope we will see a final accounting of this exercise, in the very near future.

The core review cost more than the entire pay for the mayor for her whole term… the cost of marketing her agenda IMO. I don’t think its about reducing property taxes one bit… she seems kind of eager about seizing property to make them pay.

One piece of good news though would be the referendum on fluoride in the city water. I support that… and if a referendum on fluoride then why not major capital expenditures as well?

so mayor green wants to stick it to hockey players and raise our ice rates?

I joined the group that worked to put her in power cause I was told she would get us a new arena and now she wants to jack up our already high rental rates. Man talk about a stab in the back.

If she and councilor stolz think we should be paying the same as Kamloops, maybe she would also be in favor of balancing the taxes businesses pay so they are the same as Kamloops.

I was told businesses in Kamloops pays 50% more than in PG and that means we as homeowners have to pay more to cover the difference. Now those who love to lace up the blades will also have to pay more. Nice move. Five minutes for checking from behind I say.

Haha lol…talk about reap what you sow. The shortsightedness of the ‘hockey’ crowd that got their collective panties in a knot and stuck it to ole Dan the man over his handling of the ‘new’ rink are whining now! Shoulda actually put some serious thought and research into who should be mayor!! I guess Dan wasn’t that bad after all eh? Enjoy….

We really really need a “quote button” on this site. Anyway, here we go.

posted by mitch2 quote (so mayor green wants to stick it to hockey players and raise our ice rates?

I joined the group that worked to put her in power cause I was told she would get us a new arena and now she wants to jack up our already high rental rates. )end quote

I am for one happy to see someone do the right thing and become an activist. Stand up and work for what you believe in and all that.

( I was told businesses in Kamloops pays 50% more than in PG and that means we as homeowners have to pay more to cover the difference. )end quote

So you were told, got a link to that? enough with the “I was told BS” put up some facts, it’s not rocket science. Where are the facts?

At the end of the day it costs XXX amount of money to run whatever venue you want to play in but here’s the rub you can do it for less.

Within the winter sports community here there are many who own land, land that could be very well turned into a rink or whatever.

So here is where the debate begins, lay it out and make a rink, volunteer to clean the snow off and flood it from time to time and above all else play the game.

This could be and has been done at little cost to all those who choose to do so.

What is posted above is “almost free” but it does take some time out of your life to volunteer for this.

Wanna send a message, boycott the city owned properties and do your own thing on outdoor rinks.

Who want’s to lay money down on a reply basically saying “I ain’t got time for that” to them who say it, or post it and think it is………

You gotta pay to play.

Seems that Green wants to cherry pick when it comes to ice fees. A better approach would be to check fees charged in northern communities like Vanderhoof, McBride, Smithers, Burns Lake, McKenzie, and see what their ice rental rates are.
Council is always fast on the draw to compare a more expensive facility elsewhere to justify raising taxes or user fees for the home owner. Maybe it is time for council to look around at facilities that cost less elsewhere and justify why it cost more in PG.
If council was really concerned with controlling costs things like the PG hotel purchase, energy system, cop shop, downtown property purchases, trips to China, river road dike, FCM, would never have been considered.

Resident: “A better approach would be to check fees charged in northern communities like Vanderhoof, McBride, Smithers, Burns Lake, McKenzie, and see what their ice rental rates are.”

Who cares what their rates are? The fees have to make up for the cost of operating the facility, no matter where it is.

This comment goes out the posters complaining that ice rental fees might go up.

Why should taxpayers subsidize adult hockey or exercise? I am all for subsidizing youth activities, hockey, etc, because we as a society should support the youth of our city — if only because some youth may not otherwise be exposed to these activities.

But why should city taxpayer’s support an adult’s activity? Should the city to this to promote Physical activity as one person suggested? If you accept that argument then the city should be subsidizing gym memberships or perhaps golf memberships…..where do you stop? No, hockey in a city facility for physical activity is a choice. It shouldn’t be subsidized, there are choices for physical activity that can be undertaken for free — walking, jogging, or, as someone suggested, playing hockey on your own outdoor rink. Perhaps, someone could enlighten me, but I can’t find a reason that taxpayer’s should support sharing the cost of an adult’s ice time.

Frankly, whatever it costs the city per hour to operate an arena should be the cost that adults pay to rent that arena.

This comment goes out the posters complaining that ice rental fees might go up.

Why should taxpayers subsidize adult hockey or exercise? I am all for subsidizing youth activities, hockey, etc, because we as a society should support the youth of our city — if only because some youth may not otherwise be exposed to these activities.

But why should city taxpayer’s support an adult’s activity? Should the city to this to promote Physical activity as one person suggested? If you accept that argument then the city should be subsidizing gym memberships or perhaps golf memberships…..where do you stop? No, hockey in a city facility for physical activity is a choice. It shouldn’t be subsidized, there are choices for physical activity that can be undertaken for free — walking, jogging, or, as someone suggested, playing hockey on your own outdoor rink. Perhaps, someone could enlighten me, but I can’t find a reason that taxpayer’s should support sharing the cost of an adult’s ice time.

Frankly, whatever it costs the city per hour to operate an arena should be the cost that adults pay to rent that arena.