This is good news for those people who are trying to organize and get 5000 signatures to force this issue to a referendum. The 30 day time period is somewhat disengeneous because you cannot access City Hall on the week-ends to sign the petition, and if you work 9 to 5 the same hours as the City, then basically you have to get to City Hall during the week-end.

You can print the petition off the Citys website after which you have the option of mailing it in, or hand delivering it to City Hall, however you cannot send it in by email.

People should keep in mind that this particular Alternate Approval is to allow the City to borrow $13,821,000.00 they already have previous approval for $23,917,000.00 so in effect they will be borrowing approx $36 Million. This is a huge number and with an interest rate of 5% over 20 years you are looking at approx $1.6 Million per year in interest alone.

Total cost of the Police Station over 20 years including interest on borrowing, will be in the area of $68 Million.

Dont be misled by the statement that it will cost you $66.00 a year on a home valued at $200,000.00. This statement may be true, however on more expensive homes you will pay more, and of course business and industry will pay much more.

The Citys debt at present is somewhere in the area of $116 Million, and with the Police Station, Winter Games, etc; it will be going up significantly. So will our taxes.

While all this borrowing and expenditures are taking place the City is telling us that they do not have money to properly clear our snow, fix our roads, repair our sewer and water systems, etc; I wonder why??

People should make every effort to sign this petition. The Alternate Approval Process requires 5237 signatures to be successful. 10% of 52,173 electors.

If they get the 5237 this forces the City to hold a referendum on this issue and the taxpayers of Prince George will have a chance to say yes or no on the borrowing. If less than 5237 signatures are collected, the City is automatically allowed to borrow the money.

Make no mistake about it. If we do not take action to slow down or stop this inane spending at City Hall they will basically put us and our children into debt for the next 20 to 30 years, without a hope in hell of digging out.

We need to have a serious look at this Police station, its location, and its cost, before we give the City a blank cheque.

PS. First paragraph should read **basically you have to get to City Hall during your lunch hour**

Its to early in the morning.

Prince George people you are being tricked!

After the 2nd notice council has to allow 30 days from the date of the second notice. If the 2nd notice was Dec 16th the the deadline to dissent would be January 15th.

Don't be fooled it is no coincidence this process is being done during Christmas holidays. Keep your eyes on them!


I have pasted the qualifying information from the BC Community Charter below:

"A local government must publish a notice in a newspaper outlining the purposes of a proposed bylaw, agreement, or other matter where the approval of the electors is required. After the second of two notices is advertised, electors have 30 days in which to advise their local government that in their opinion, the matter is of such significance that a referendum should be held. "

Where is Andyfreeze?

Yeah, waste a bunch of money on a referendum so this can drag out for another year and cost us a lot more money.

Just ask the residents of summerland.

Palopu,

Can you provide the link to the alternate approval process form on the city website. No luck in finding it.

Hi Palopu:
Try Googling: LGD Alternate Approval and it should pull up the Ministry page.

Glad you are following up! post again if you can't get it. Thanks.

Hi again Paopu,
Here is the link :www.cd.gov.bc.ca/lgd/.../alternative_approval_process.htm

Go to the City website www.city.pg.bc.ca then click on RCMP Facility Project, and scroll down till you come to the Alternative Aproval process Elector Response Form Bylaw No. 8316.

This is the document you must sign. It contains all the information in regards to the amount to be borrowed etc;

Have a nice day.

We need a new RCMP building. We don't need a PAC. I will not be signing any petition against a new RCMP building. Those that are considering it should tour the old building—wear your hard hat as it is crumbling down. Support your local RCMP.

Well Junco, thats drywall your talking about, I say we redo the drywall. These criminals dont need fancy round shaped buildings. Nope no new police building. Ummmmm where do we go to sign? These buildings are desighned to last a hundred years, maybe more. What the heck are people doing tearing them down just to build another. We could revamp the one on fourth for about 2 million.

There is no drywall in that building. There is no insulation either - just crumbling concrete.

I challenge any of you that say that the RCMP building doesn't need to be replaced to go on a tour of the detachment and while you are there - go lean on the wall that is stained with the feces leaking from the toilets in cells. Then go climb into the tiny elevator with a violent prisoner with every disease know to man. And don't forget to go into one of the offices that has mold growing in the corners and breathe deeply. And the go hang out in the exhibits room and breathe in the noxious fumes and insecticides from the last drug bust.

I am not a cop but I used to work in that building. I had to quit because the building made me so sick. It's inhumane and should be condemned.

onemansthoughts We need a new RCMP building because the old one is salvageable. We need a new building because the building is toxic. If they could have revamped that building they would have years ago, unfortunately the design is not up to specs for this day and age. We need a new building because RCMP and civilians who work to keep PG safe deserve better working conditions,don your hard hat and face mask and have a look around the rabbit warren that is the current RCMP building.Tight spaces, toxic corners, crumbling concrete, mold, leaks, it does not qualify as a worksafe building.

"not salvageable"

Junco. I agree that we probably need a major renovation to the present building, or a new building. The problem is we dont need a $38 Million building on the corner of 4th and Victoria finianced over 20 years at a interest rate of 5% for a total cost of $68 Million.

Why not a basic, functional building, say at 4th and Scotia, East of Queensway on the property that the City owns.(Old Williams Moving and Storage Bldg) With surface parking covered by a roof and fenced in. This building would be out of the way of downtown traffic.

We dont need a fancy, high priced building that is being proposed here. This is a prime example of City Hall, Planners, etc; getting carried away spending our money.

If we could reduce the cost to about $30 Million and try to borrow less, we would be better off in the long run.

Insofar as the building on Brunswick street is concerned, lets not get carried away about the condition of this building. It was built in 1972 and approved by the City and the RCMP of the day. Its their design, not ours. I suspect that proper maintenance hasnt been done over the years which would explain why after a mere 38 years it is no longer functional.

Are we to beleive that all the problems attributed to this building, insofar as feces, urine, etc; etc; will stop because we built a new building?? Or will we have the same problem in a high class police station 38 years from now????

Palopu I agree that costs should be kept in check and other solutions considered. At first glance I thought that the Chances Bingo Hall on Quebec would have made a perfect RCMP building, lots of space and underground parking etc. The city could have got it for a song. That being said it is hard to swallow a lot of decisions that council makes or do not make however this is a warranted expense and hopefully there will be some cost effective solutions.

1972 seems like a long time ago to me—think bell bottoms, snoop boots, fringed leather jackets. American Pie on the top 100 and Dave Barrett just elected premier of BC.

However, I do get it. It does seem like a building that was built 38 years ago should be still viable and maybe if its function had been a different one with different tenants and regular upgrades it would have been a peach for other occupants. Although the building was approved by the city and RCMP of the day, standards have changed and the population has grown. Regular maintenance may have made the difference in the condition of the building but it does not address the fact that it is bursting at the seams.

"I will not be signing any petition against a new RCMP building. Those that are considering it should tour the old building�wear your hard hat as it is crumbling down"

So tell me, if it is that dangerous, how come the RCMP workplace safety committee has not shut the place down?

Exaggerating will not help the cause to build a new building.

The building would be viable if the city didn't neglect it for so long. It's no different then a house, if you neglect it for too long there becomes a point where it has to be torn down. If it weren't for the fact that the inspecters work for the city - it would have been condemned by now.

If you were to completely scrap all of the plans and change the location and plans at this point, you are literally burning millions of dollars. Your going to spend 30 million to design and build another station at another location and add to the ugliness of downtown PG. Meanwhile the province will buy the lot on Victoria Street and turn it into another homeless shelter - because nobody esle wants it. That lot and building sat on the market for years before the city bought it.

If the city and it's residents aren't willing to invest in the downtown - why would anyone else? Put up or shut up.

You know whats real funny, The city will likely move Studio 2880 to the old cop shop. We will spend another 5 million dollars giving it a updew.

It hurts so much, its funny.

Well, I think, the city should start issueing bonds to raise the money. Bonds are issued to people and businesses that own properties with in the city limits and are current on their taxes. If the city is willing to pay 5% to the banks, why not to the residence.

Come on guys, if were not going to payu 45 million dollars for something useful like a new copshop, how the heck is Dan going to convince us to spend 52 million dollars on a performing arts complex.

I think shooting down Discovery Place 25 years ago, was a mistake.

So whats wrong with this idea? we do need a new one, the on downtown looks horrible, and i mean for the 2015 games, hey it will look nice. besides we're going to need a new one in the near future so why not now? and if the the stats say we are the most dangerous city in Canada, then shouldn't we have a bigger up to date high-tech one? also that i may point out, what about kids? like me, hell were gonna be runnin the show in a few years when most of you guys are in senior residents... IMO

"So tell me, if it is that dangerous, how come the RCMP workplace safety committee has not shut the place down?"

OMG!! Seriously!! Your talking about people that chase crack heads, intentionaly run towards gun fights and deal with every dagerous situation know to man kind and you think a workplace safety committe can shut them down?

Hillarious.

I emailed the city and asked if this was their deviant way to deter us from voting on this issue. Funny, I didn't recieve a response yet.

That old RCMP building isn't fit for pigs.

Tyson. The last laugh will be on you when the old guys are gone. At this point in time they are paying a large portion of the taxes to the doughheads at City Hall.

The City debt at this time is around $116 Million, and you will have to add on the $38 Million for this building, then you will have an additional $10 to $15 Million for the 2015 Winter Games, plus God knows what else. At the very minimum by 2015 you will have $170 Million in debt, and it will go up from there. For your information the City projects that the cost of servicing its debt by will be in the range of $30 Million per year by 2019.

While the debt and the cost of servicing this debt is rising. The tax base is shrinking. In addition more and more people are retiring and their incomes are being reduced by as much as 50% but their taxes keep going up.

Anyone who thinks that this amount of debt should be acceptable or encouraged, is obviously very misinformed.

The Police Station was slated to be replaced in 1997, however it has just got to this stage now. How is it that after knowing that they were going to build a new police station for the past 13 years that the City was only able to set aside approx $2 Million for this project and has to borrow the other $36 Million?

Could it be because they pissed away every tax dollar they got their hands on during those years, with the full intention of borrowing this money, and driving us further in debt.

The reason we have to go to referendum is because we have to bring this Council and City to their senses. We cannot keep driving up debt and taxes, without having some serious consequences. The Alternative Approval Process is a legal requirement for the City. If 10% of the voters in Prince George (5237) sign the petition, then the City must go to a referendum, and get the approval of the taxpayers to spend this money.

Why are people afraid to allow the people who are paying their taxes the right to a referendum, are they afraid that they might be called to task for their reckless spending.

We have to stop all levels of Government from wasting our tax dollars, and we need to start now, not at some nebulous **later date**

The taxpayer is not an unlimited source of revenue. I cannot beleive how many people never take the bloody time to figure our how the system works, and how they are continously being screwed by Government.

Lets get some fiscal responsibility back into Government and come down to earth on spending.

When your Council has to raise your Garbage rate, your house taxes, your dog licences, cut back on your snow removal,because they have no money, and at the same time give themselves huge raises in salary, take trips to exotic places like China, build state of the art buildings for huge mega bucks , community energy systems (useless) etc; all on borrowed money and pay huge amounts of interest, someone better wake up and smell the roses.

To support this type of action is akin to giving your debit card and pin number to a crook, with the expectation that he will not take your money.

Talk is CHEAP this is a time for action.

Someone once said

It is not enough to need to change
It is not enough to want to change
We need to experience change.

What that means is if we want to make any changes (especially at City Hall) then we have to do things differently.

Have a nice day.

To Palopu,
Thank you for posting. I am having trouble finding the form. I went to the city site. clicked on the rcmp facility page and still can't find the form. Are you sure it is still there. Thank you for helping.

I have some questions about this process.

1)
What if the Petition form gets lost?
If petitions start trickling in for 44 days, (from the date of first notice), how are we sure that the petition gets to the clerk in charge of counting the petitions?

What if a clerk accepts a petition, puts it on her desk and after some time, forgets to give the petition to the clerk responsible?

Who would scrutinize for 44 days?

Should a receipt be issued to the person that signs the petition and a parallel counting process be established to keep track the number of petitions received? Who would be responsible for this?

2)
Possible legal loophole?
What if the petitions are considered invalid?


As per the Ministry website:

“After the second of two notices is advertised, electors have 30 days in which to advise their local government that in their opinion, the matter is of such significance that a referendum should be held. If more than 10% of the electors hold this opinion, then the local government cannot proceed with the proposed bylaw, agreement, or other matter without holding a referendum.”


Should this not be defined as a 44 day process? The Council Report seems to indicate a process longer than 30 days?

What forms were made available to the public as of Nov 6th upon the publishing of first notice?

Were the petition forms as attached to the Council Report on November 15th available,or altered to forms that may or may not have been available as of November 6th?


3)

The process allows for multiple projects. Example, the city might use 2 different projects in the Alternate approval process. By signing a petition you may be in favor of borrowing for an arena and a separate community center.

But what if you support borrowing funds for the arena but you are not in favor of funding for a community centre?

The process allows for multiple projects. The citizen is then bound to both projects.

Is this a way for Cities to make the process more convoluted?

Referendums cost money, so they will have to take the money from somewhere else to have a referendum. Where will they take it from? Snow removal? Pothole repairs? Wherever they take it from - the same crowd that wanted a referndum will be on here complaining about it and the building will be built anyways.

Count the fors to the against arguements - a number that will favor the building even more once people realize how much an entire new design and relocation would still cost at least another 30 millions dollars.

Look at Summerland - they have 9 police officers and it cost 4.5 million dollars to build their building and it has a population of about 12,000 people - a lot smaller then PG.

So to be comparable - that is 30.7 million to build a PG detachment - that is just building the thing, not all the planning, property aquisition, and required assesments.

If you think picking a different design and location at this point is going to save money - you have your heads in the clouds. You might as well have just thrown a few million in the fire and watched it burn.

Here's an idea. If a referendum is forced and the citizens vote to build the building anyways - how about everyone that signed the petition pay a fine for wasting the taxpayers money on the referendum.

here's something:

Why was the first alternate approval with a deadline date of Dec 16th not published as should be on November 2nd?

Then the next required notice gets "lost" and isn't published as it should have been on November 13th?

Here's something else:

If the first notice was "delayed' and not published on the 2nd of Nov and in fact was published on the 6th Nov, then why was the deadline date not changed then for the 30 day process to happen? Why was it published with out the deadline date having been extended at that time?

something else:

Upon publishing the alternate approval notice on Nov 6th, what petition forms were available at that date?

If council only gave approval to amend the dateline on the the form on Nov. 15th?

So, what date was on those original petition forms?

Was there ever such a thing?

so was there a petition form with a deadline date of Dec 23rd available on the 6th of Nov?

That would be in accordance with the first publication of Nov 6th, a "presumed" second notice publication one week later being No 13th and therefore a deadline date of Dec 23rd?

something else:

How did they come up with a deadline date in the first place of Dec 16th?


Would that have meant the first notice should have been published on Nov 9th?

As per Ministry it should be a deadline of 30 days from second notice.

Or is that more to include another Holiday?

If it had been published on the 9th it would have included Remembrance Day?

something else:

If this part of the process is so contrary how will the rest of it play out?

It is incredible?