WOW....there thinking right,not like here!

Reality is a great leveller.......

They???? ... "they" are the publisher of the local paper, not government. What is the story from the municipal governments?

Are they thinking right as well? .....

Excuse me? Did you use the words government and thinking in the same sentence? whatcha bin smokin? Government doen'nt think, they react. Their idea of planning involves independent "experts" and plotting for the best time to make announcements, like the next election date. We should have two layers to all government, one to do what little they do now, with no actual power to do any harm, another to get some work done.
Do these people have rocks in their heads? How can they possibly expect to support one arena of that magnitude, let alone two.
Even a city the size of P.G. might not be able to efficiently utilize an arena with two NHL sized rinks. You gotta walk before you can run.
metalman.

You got that right metalman. Even Prince George with a population of 77,000 people cannot fully support our Multiplex. After all the venues and the Cougers games the City has to subsidize this facility to the tune of approx $500,000.00 per year. Why would anyone expect that facilities in Dawson Creek, or Ft St John would ever be able to operate without the Citys paying millions to keep them running.

Once again we see prime examples of out of control spending by Municipal Governments. (Among others)

Their eyes were bigger than their stomachs (bank accounts)

The cost of building has gone so far up because of the scarceity of trades. Moreover, a great deal of the population up there is transient - they are there to make their money in the oil and gas fields and then leave.

Correction: The awareness campaign put on by the city for the Enerplex referendum in Fort St. John was NOT a "VOTE YES" campaign... it was an awareness campaign, and while the city obviously supported the project, they never advertised it as a VOTE YES campaign. It was an awareness effort to educate the voters about the enerplex proposal.

"Even a city the size of P.G. might not be able to efficiently utilize an arena with two NHL sized rinks"

????? ... Kin Centre ... now connected to the multiplex ..... one olympic sized rink plus 3 NHL sized rinks .... plus Colisseum ....

So, what is the latest with the outdoor refrigerated ice oval in PG ..... the olympics are getting close ... have we signed anyone up yet to come train for two weeks in PG on the elusive project?

Can we get an update on a few of these projects?

Housing on north west corner of 7th and Victoria; housing on 4th and Quebec; ice oval; duchess park school; senior facility on 18th and Victoria; Sandman on 16 west; foodteller; golf course; burned down corner of 3rd and George; Brick’s move from downtown; PAC; the Inn’s expansion they were talking about recently; and so on.

Gaming seems to be working well though.

Andrew .... You say they never advertised it as a vote yes campaign????

then what does this say?

http://www.fortstjohn.ca/pdf/news_enerplex_openhouse.pdf

sure sounds to me like a vote on a referendum to borrow money ....

"City residents are being asked to vote on June 24th to approve borrowing of up to $15 million dollars for the City’s portion of costs to construct the Enerplex. The proposed multi-events facility has
already received $12.5 million dollars in funding from the province.

The facility would feature two hockey ice surfaces, a speed skating oval, a running track and other fitness facilities."

If you have that wrong, I wonder how many others got it wrong.

I just noticed that the article above states:

"In addition to the speed skating oval, the Ft St John facility includes 2 NHL sized skating rinks."

Actually, I notice that it included one Olympic and one NHL sized rinks.

Here is the concept drawing:

http://www.cityfsj.com/Enerplex.html

I can think of worse things to spend public funding on than a sport facility. But if indeed it is too much, let's see a comparison with other public projects in terms of how much they cost vs user contributions. No-one asks how much a pool costs to maintain, or public schools for that matter, where no-one that attends contributes a dime out side their taxes. Or how about our car centred infrastructure while we run out of time to address global warming. Oh sorry, that's going to hurt the economy. Right. Like climate change won't... But anyway, how about some comparisons before slagging such a project.

Do we not need more care facilities for our aging population? More low cost housing for the less fortunate? A higher minimum wage for those who have not or did not pursue post secondary education? Paying down the existing debts we are already on the hook for? Living within our means? Improving our infrastructure like roads and rail in our province? Improve our city streets and our air quality?

It amazes me how financially irresponsible our leaders are. And their behavior is an example for the rest of the citizens to learn from. Fiscal responsibility should be the foundation for making decisions that affect our community, our province and our country.

Olympic sized hockey rinks and skating ovals are not a necessity. And we are not building these things with surplus funds. Prince George, with a population of 77,000 plus cannot operate a Multiplex without subsidizing it, how do smaller communities think they can afford it? Why is it so difficult to learn from the experiences of others? Chester

No recreation facility operates without subsidies, nor should they. I guess it depends whether you think our society should do more for those who have failed, or more to prevent others from failing, as one might characterize sport facilites for youth versus help for the poor. I don't mean to be cruel, but poor older folks had their chance to save. Young people are still deciding if they can make a go of it or will have to ask for help. Recreation is not a luxury. Just ask those folks trying to cover the huge health cost of our out of shape boomers.

"Recreation is not a luxury. Just ask those folks trying to cover the huge health cost of our out of shape boomers."

Out of shape boomers ....

Too much fast food of the wrong variety. So they spend money on eating food delivered through a drive through window at $10 per day per person rather than $5 per person if they were going to buy food from a grocer and prepare it themselves.

So, each time they did that, they could spend the $5 at the Y or the pool or the skating rink or the tennis club or not spend it and go for a free walk or jog or bike ride.

So, a wrong and expensive choice of what we ingest in the name of food means we have to subsidize the recreation which is supposed to be the remedy to overeating and lack of exercise in the first place?

Something is wrong with this picture. If we “subsidize” anything, it should be the things people cannot do well on their own at no cost – attending live performances, for instance.

For the rest, a continuing and much more aggressive awareness campaign.

BTW, while a spectator activity, such as watching others participate in sports or watching a theatrical play or music performance, is recreation, it is not the kind of active recreation which leads to physically healthier beings. What cost is there to a skating oval using the natural weather to freeze the surface? A walkway along a river or through the woods? A hill to take mountain bikes to? A lake to swim in? Minimal with some, and virtually nothing with others. For those who are active, a Kin Centre like arena will do the trick if we can afford that luxury. The aboriginals of Australia and the traditional First Nations in North America could not afford the luxury. Neither could they afford drive up windows. They were healthier for that.

Letsthinkthisthrough.

Dont confuse recreational facilities with the CN Centre (Multiplex) I dont think anyone has a problem in subsidizing the Coliseum, Kin 1 or 2 the Ice Rink in the Hart Highway area, and other facilities such as swimming pools, soccer fields, etc; These facilites are used by the familys of taxpayers in Prince George and are an acceptable way to spend some tax dollars, as long as it doesnt get of hand.

Now lets look at the CN Centre (Multiplex)

Firstly very little time is available in this facility for local people. Why? Because it is leased out to the Cougers for at least 32 Home games and some exibition games, plus practice time etc;, In addition it is used by the City to host various venues such as BB King, Bud the Spud, Bare Naked Ladies, etc;

The City generates some revenue from the various venues that use this facility through out the year, and they get 12% of the gross revenue from the Couger games. At the end of the day this leaves them with a shortfall of $500,000.00 per year.

Now if this facility is being utilized 90% by Private Business, (Dont kid yourself) Entertainment, and the Cougers are Private Business's then how can you argue that I and others like me as taxpayers should subsidize a BB King show or a Cougers game.

Those entertainers that perform at the CN Centre leave Prince George with money in their pockets. The owners of the Cougers make a profit (or should) by renting the CN Centre and playing their team here.

This is all well and good but it has absolutely nothing to do with the everyday taxpayer, and we shouldnt have to subsidize this facility the same as Librarys, Art Centres, etc; because they are not the same.

People who go to see the Bare Naked Ladies, or who go to see the Cougers Play Hockey should pay enough for their tickets, to pay for their entertainment. There is absolutely no case to be made that taxpayers should subsidize some of its Citizens so they can sit on their butts and watch a Hockey game.

The CN Centre has already cost this City 3 to 4 Million dollars since it was built, and there is nothing to indicate that this will change in the near future.

If ever there was a clear case for a **User Pay** fee this would be it.

Palopu - Every city which builds a major stadium in their city has the same problem as you define with respect to the so-called CN Centre. Yet they keep building them and tearing them down and rebuilding them after as little as 20 or 30 years in some cases, always with tax monies involved.

The rationale used typically is associated with bringing business into town, urban renewal, civic pride, and whatever else. As we saw in the Katrina situation, both in New Orleans and in Houston, such facilities can be used as emergency shelters even.

Whether that was given consideration in our case, I do not know. Obviously, however, it is far away from rail and other dangerous goods transport areas. It is not out of the bowl which could trap emissions from a major chemical emergency if it occurred during an inversion.

The question is, would private enterprise ever build such a facility? They will put a pittance up to name it, they will enter into rental agreements, they will enter into operating agreements, but they will not take on the risk of getting stuck with what is essentially a single purpose building which, in the event of financial failure, can be used for very little else.

As far as operating such a facility goes, the same holds true for operating a small or a large facility .... there is a fine line in determining ticket prices to hit a price point which will get in the optimum number of people so that multiplying ticket price by the number of people will gain the largest income … $40/ticket at 2,000 for $80,000 gross income or $30/ticket at 3,000 people for a $90,000 …. Will a 25% drop in ticket price increase the number of people attending by 50% (now there is something someone will have to explain to Moose … ;-)

On a related note, since I suspect some will say that we should get a 3P agreement in place with the CN Centre. Two recreation centres similar in some ways to the UNBC Sport Centre have just announced that they have hit financial problems and the City of Ottawa is picking up the tab since they covered the risk.

http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/letters/story.html?id=915263dd-2356-4aeb-91a8-a1a8402820e1

A letter to the editor of the Ottawa Citizen which we should heed in PG with respect to future 3P proposals. There is a suggestion that Duchess Park be one of those now.

The failure of two City of Ottawa public- private partnerships ( P3), leading to the city takeover of the Ray Friel Recreation Complex and the $ 1.6 million bailout to the Bell Sensplex, should provoke a rethink of this methods of building public facilities. One myth that P3 proponents promote is that this permits the private sector to build facilities that the city cannot afford to do. This is bosh.
........

The P3 premise is that the private sector takes on risk providing services in exchange for opportunity to make profits. The irony in the city’s P3 ventures is that the financing comes from city- guaranteed debt, eliminating this risk and giving the private sector an advantage it would not ordinarily enjoy, based on lower interest rates the city can obtain. This is on top of other city concessions — waiving building permit fees and development charges, waiving property taxes, guaranteed purchase of services by the city, and other subsidies.

How were the city’s public facilities built and paid for in the past? When the new city was formed from the amalgamation of 11 municipalities and regional government it inherited 33 libraries, 37 arenas, 37 swimming pools, and 73 recreation or community centres. Nearly all were built and paid for through public funds, not P3s.

Those councils of yesteryear faced the same fiscal challenges as today’s council, yet clearly had the will to build what the community needed. Today’s city has much greater financial capacity than its predecessors, but perhaps less political will.

ALEX CULLEN, Ottawa,
Councillor, Bay Ward

Owl. I agree with most of what you say however when it comes to the CN Centre (Multiplex) we have a difference of opinion.

Firstly. We already have the Coliseum and the Spruce Kings, plus Kin 1 Kin 2 the Hart Hiway Rink, and various and sundry outdoor rinks (If we choose)

Secondly. Insofar as buildings to go to in case of pollution problems etc; Lets see what we have.
(1) Civic Centre
(2) Public Library
(3) Two Large Swimming Pools
(4) Kin 1,2, and the Coliseum, and Hart Hiway Rink.
(5) We will now have the Sports Plex
(6) Scads of space at the University.
(7) Numerous Schools.

There is not a good argument that can be made for the City building this facility to accomodate the Private Enterprise WHL (Couger) franchise. You could make some argument for a facility that would accomodate the other venues, but only if it was apparent that they couldnt be accommodated in the other facilities. In other words, we might build a facility that would be sufficient for the PGSO, however we would not be expected to build one that would accomodate the New York Philharmonic Orchestra.

We suffer from a serious case of **Big Shotism in this town**

Lets put the concept of the Multiplex in context.

I want to build a restaurant that sells great hamburgers, however I dont want to invest any of my own money, so I approach City Hall and suggest that they build me a restaurant and I will bring in my cooks, and waitress's and we will cook and sell hamburgers for $5.00 each. We will give the City 12% of the gross sales, and they can look after the maintenance, etc; and if they wish they can use the restaurant for other purposes during the times that I am not using it. This will allow them to generate additional revenue.

Now at the end of the year I have made a profit on the sale of burgers, but the City has lost thousands of dollars of taxpayers money. In order for the City to make money we have to either get more people to eat hamburgers, or to increase the price of the burgers to $10.00 per burger. At $10.00 noboby will come.

At the end of the day we have two choices. Continue to lose money which we will get from the taxpayers, or shut down the burger stand.

One thing for certain. We will never hear a Politician ever state that this Multiplex was a bad idea, and we will continue to pay through the nose for this fiasco until hell freezes over.

One thing that will get our attention is if the Cougers have another bad year, and decide to leave Prince George. We will then be in a position where we have two large rinks and one Hockey Team. Assuming the Spruce Kings are still viable. What do we do then??