Cariboo Arena Vote To Take Place
Quesnel- Residents within the North Cariboo Recreation and Parks service boundary will be heading to the polls to vote on a proposed North Cariboo Arena Replacement project that would see a 1,600 seat arena with a regulation size ice surface and dry floor space to support arena programs and events. The new arena would feature a structural steel building with wood architectural elements, located adjacent to the existing arenas.
Residents will be asked the following question at the advance polls and general voting day:
“Are you in favour of the Cariboo Regional District adopting Loan Authorization Bylaw 4905 to borrow up to $7.5 million over 20 years to provide for the construction of a new arena as part of the North Cariboo Recreation and Parks Service?”
Based on 2014 assessed values, the estimated annual cost to undertake this borrowing translates to a residential tax rate of $26/$100,000 of the net taxable assessed value of land and improvements.
There are two advance voting opportunities, in addition to general voting day. Residents are encouraged to take advantage of these advance voting opportunities because there is lower voter turn-out on these days and therefore less time spent waiting in line. Both advance voting opportunities will take place in the CD Hoy Room in Quesnel City Hall on Wednesday, June 4 and Monday, June 9, from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m.
General voting day is Saturday, June 14, from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. at the following locations:
Comments
A congratulations should go out to Quesnel for taking the democratic process, rather than the undemocratic alternate approval process.
Something interesting I notice is the new arena will seat 1600 and yet only costs about 40% of what the new Kin 1 arena in PG cost?
That is because they already have approx 7 million or so in the kitty
I think there approach is to go as cheap as they can go to get another sheet of ice with fan seating.
I think they hit it out of the ball park with Kin One. It is the best ice for the fans. It is amazing what a bit of natural light does to a building like that. Like hearing the skaters carving up the ice. Good job to the architects on this one.
WHY can’t PG do the same with the PAC? Let the taxpayers have a say!
This is a borrowing bylaw not a project bylaw. As was stated, Quesnel already has money for this purpose. Depending on how much money a PAC would actually cost, and how much the City’s portion of that will eventually be, PG may not have to borrow long term money.
Take a figure between $45 to 50 million and a typical formula of 1/3 feds + 1/3 province and 1/3 community, with private fundraising to provide $5million which should be a doable figure once the thing gets finalized and sod turned, then the city will need to have access to something in the order of $15 to $17 million minus $5 million from private donors = $12 million. They may not have to borrow any money or borrow a small amount which they can do without a referendum.
Gus, unfortunately you are correct. They go ahead and build it, and we end up subsidizing the operating cost for eternity.
What they need to do is get a Company like Enbridge to loan them 200,000 shares to the PAC, thus the dividends earned from those shares, subsidize operating cost. In return Enbridge gets to put their name on it. The shares do not belong to the society, The shares is loan to them in trust, with only the dividends available for subsidizing the operation.
Gus is right. If our mayor and councilors can find public money without borrowing they can go ahead and spend millions without asking the people who are going to pay for it. Now there is accountability.
There should be a limit on how much of our money our elected officials can spend without having our approval from us poor taxpayers.
That includes any money that comes in from the sale of land that we the public own. It is a sneaky way to raise money without asking us. If money is to come to the city through a land sale, IMO it should go into paying off the debt not on any pet project, at least not without asking our permission.
Comments for this article are closed.