Meisner Gets Chill Over Ice Oval: One Man's Opinion

Tuesday, February 28, 2006 01:46 PM

-by Ben Meisner

The only issues to be dealt with are:
who is responsible for the statement on the Train In P.G. website saying we are building an artificial Ice oval
and why is it still there?

Train in PG publicized on its site to the world ,and every athlete who read it , “planned for construction in 2006, Prince George is developing plans to replace the existing 400 meter natural ice outdoor speed skating oval, with a permanent oval with artificial ice. Alongside the outdoor rink in a pristine setting will be 4000 sq ft. building. Comprising of two stories and providing space for equipment storage, team meeting rooms, washrooms and concessions.” The site is hosted by Events Prince George.

Now Initiatives PG’s Gerry Offet ,under whose umbrella Events Prince George falls, accuses me of muck raking for raising the issue, he also took a swing at the people who write comments on Opinion 250 saying they should be made to identify themselves. The reply from Opinion 250 Publisher Elaine Macdonald was right on the money. "Many people who comment are fearful of reprisal “.

That says it all.

But back to the topic at hand. Who gave Initiatives Prince George the right to make such a claim?

Was it the city of Prince George or the Mayor on his own initiative, in which case the City Council should have been asked if it supports the Ice Oval. Afterall, it is Council that will make the final decision.

City Councilor Don Zurowski says,” I doubt very much that I would support it, sometimes the capital expenditure is the cheapest and the operating costs are the on going problem “. Zurowski says,” No we haven’t approved anything to do with that oval beyond Council putting up $31,300 for a study. I voted against even that" he said "because I didn’t want to give off the wrong signals “.

Councilor Brian Skakun meantime says "I am surprised that we are making this sort of claim without Council even having a look at it. It casts a bad light on this city because people around the world end up not believing what you say."

According to figures provided by the group last year, the cost of the Oval is estimated to be about $5 million dollars. They were to secure financing and have fundraising complete by April 30th of this year. The present Oval costs the city taxpayers about $35,000 a year and ,says Zurowski, "any survey done has shown that an Ice oval is not a high priority in this city".

As for the comments by Offet accusing me of muck racking , the facts Gerry , nothing but the facts. Who gave you the right to say that we are building an Ice Oval? When is that untruthful information, promoting (in six different languages) an as yet unapproved skating oval in this city going to be removed fron that site?

I’m Meisner and that’s one man’s opinion .

Previous Story - Next Story

Email |

Print |

Facebook |

Twitter |

Digg |

Del.icio.us

Posted on Tuesday, February 28, 2006 01:46 PM in Views by Ben Meisner

Return to Home

Comments

Posted by: realitycheck on February 28 2006 2:37 PM

Selectively choosing the facts once again I see....I read the "offending page" and listened to the media player footage and it specifically states the oval is "proposed" or "planned" in every place except for one where it says "Construction on the Oval would start in 2006" obviously referring to if the proposal goes ahead. I agree it may need to be clarified better in the ONE spot but to accuse someone of deliberatly trying to mislead is indeed "raking the muck".

Posted by: fedup on February 28 2006 3:18 PM

More money for a study give me a break lets get on with something we have more to gain from like the inland port.

Posted by: Chadermando on February 28 2006 5:00 PM

Excellent investigative journalism Ben. We need more of that in this town to keep those guys like Offet and Kinsly in check.

Posted by: spanky on February 28 2006 7:51 PM

I find it interesting that out of all of this, old Offet (if that is how you spell, because i could care less) would like the names of the chaps blogging on the 250. Why does he care who Spanky, or owl or gypsy is? If he was doing a decent job then he would not have to be looking over his shoulder. Gerry buddy you need to give it up dude. you said paranoid and dilusional, and I am feeling a little embarassed for you buddy.

Posted by: Foo738 on February 28 2006 8:08 PM

"the support of 80'000 people behind it." I don't recall being asked, if I am one of the 80,000!

Posted by: Marty on February 28 2006 11:49 PM

SIGH....Reality....you need to find reality buddy.

Read it again...I did, in fact 3 times....sure seemed to me that it sounds like a done deal,and construction is starting soon.
But to get others readings, i sent the link to 8 pals and family members....Yup, they all got the same idea I did from the article.

Gerry,
If you want my full name etc. no problem, just post here letting me know.
Heck i will meet ya at Timmy's for a coffee and give you my business card at the same time; and maybe we can even have a chance to discuss issues.

But why was i not polled as a PG'er...nor anyone i know?

Where exactly are these 80K people from?

Another dudes opinion!

Signed Marty Orland

Posted by: owl on March 1 2006 4:07 AM

Why is it that we are allowed and have the right to vote anonymously, but when providing an evaluation of an idea brought forward by an individual in public office, or in a decision making position which is funded directly by the taxpayer, one is expected to "come forward like a man" or some such a "macho" innuendo?

In my opinion, these debates are ones of differences of opinion not ad hominem attacks

For instance, I am not for or against this individual or that individual. I am for or against this idea or that idea.

I feel anyone who is in the public eye and does not understand that each and every one of the proposals they put forward, or actions they take, will be supported by some, but not by others, lives in a world to themselves. If they feel that they are attacked when their idea is attacked, so be it. There is nothing I or anyone else can do to change the nature of that individual. I will certainly not refrain from expressing my opinion on issues. That is not only a right, it is actually a responsibility we all have to ensure that the trust we place in such individuals is not misplaced.

Teachers get evaluated by their students anonymously. Whenever I go to public events put on by a facilitator, the evaluation is anonymous. Anonymous evaluations are the norm when one really thinks about it.

Anonymous evaluations, to me, have several positive features which open evaluations do not have.

One of the key ones is that the individual being evaluated can only deal with the point being made and cannot weight it based on who is the source of the evaluation.

We all suffer from often giving the source of the evaluation more or less weight than we ought to. Forums such as this, and other anonymous evaluation systems give equal weight to prominent city persons and a plain old citizen of the community ... an old person, a young person, a male, a female, a person of a particular ethnic group, they all have more or less equal footing.

That is a courtesy not typically given by the individual being evaluated.

The internet can be a great equalizer.

Posted by: diplomat on March 1 2006 8:33 AM

>"....Gerry Offet ,under whose umbrella Events Prince George falls, accuses me of muck raking for raising the issue, he also took a swing at the people who write comments on Opinion 250 saying they should be made to identify themselves."<

Nice going! This comes from people who refuse to IDENTIFY "the many representatives of many different countries" who supposedly expressed an interest in Torino to make Prince George their training headquarters for the 2010 Olympics!?

In the words of Lou Dobbs: "It really is amazing!"