Comments on The Burd Report: OK here's the deal, I am posting this for discussi...

Why is it that ANY challenge to a proposed project...

2009-06-25T12:07:36.237-04:00

Why is it that ANY challenge to a proposed project receives the absolute label of "opposition" from the ultra-cautious "supporters" who appear less than confident in their support, considering their reluctance to identify with it publicly?

Often such challenges are more about deepening the understanding of the important details, the ones where the bills get delivered, than outright opposition. It's when those details fail to be answered by the proponents, red flags go up and eventually that results in some level of opposition. That opposition can easily be turned to support by providing factual responses to the challenges that were made by "the same old people".

How long do you think it would be before the rumblings of dissatisfaction would turn to outrage by folks like you if the keepers of the coffers were allowed the freedom of unquestioned spending jags? Just what do you think would happen to the debt side of the ledger? I know, 'half-full, half-empty' but remember, the faster they empty it, the faster we have to refill it, so you first because you see nothing but blue skies and singing birds.

In the case of this project, the challenges you call "opposition" are mainly focused on the complete lack of any supportable budget numbers to operate the current proposal. Building the thing is one thing, but operating it is another whole ballgame, or hockey game or soccer game or whatever game they are playing with these huge sums. The "opposition" wants to know more before it can feel right about supporting it. If that's what you mean by 'oppose the project' your 'support' is as weak as your conviction in its viability.

One last comment. The first serious proposal for a community centre was estimated at about $2 million. This one has a price-tag of $27 million, not double, not triple, but fourteen times more, 1,400 percent more than the original. Do you remember how many "paid members" and the cost per member that were required by year 3 to make it viable? Judging by your carte-blanche support, I think that detail may have slipped your scrutiny - check it out and do the math - then come back and reaffirm your comments.

Of course we have no idea whether Born & Raise...

2009-06-25T10:12:42.789-04:00

Of course we have no idea whether Born & Raised Here actually was born & raised here. I know all of the names of those who participate on this blog -- it makes for transparency. Interests are exposed.

This is a forum for discussion that the local print media is unable to perform -- the quick exchange of kitchen table perceptions.

On the issue of the costs for a new communityy centre, I am a lurker, and this blog-exchange is right-now current.

"Born and raised here" (barh) states &qu...

2009-06-25T08:29:26.447-04:00

"Born and raised here" (barh) states "I will not now, nor ever sign my name. In a free society, that is my choice."

This is an interesting perspective. If barh were to address the council or a public meeting he/she would have to reveal their name and address. If they wrote to the newspaper they would have to give a name and address. I am not sure why a "free society", or a local issues web blog, should be expected to accord different privileges.

There is also the problem that by using the moniker "Born and raised here" the writer implies he/she feels a sense of superiority to people who were not born or raised here. A bit like belonging to the Klu Klux Klan.

I got a copy of the report at the open house last ...

2009-06-24T21:00:15.764-04:00

I got a copy of the report at the open house last week Ben. Didn't you?

Why not call town hall and ask for a copy if it concerns you that much?

As for the people here who oppose this project, go ahead and do so. That's what a democracy is all about.

Just drop this "the sky is falling" approach. You don't know if this will be a financial disaster any more than I do.

By the way, I think Anonymous 1 made a valid point which deserves a better reply than the childish one he got.

I will not now, nor ever sign my name. In a free society, that is my choice.

Therein lies the problem for all of you porers or ...

2009-06-24T20:45:09.941-04:00

Therein lies the problem for all of you porers or is it porous people. The report will be handed to councillors two days before the public gets it and that will be the night it gets voted on. Sorry folks the train has left the station!

Manfred, your sharp memory on the details regardin...

2009-06-24T20:02:59.618-04:00

Manfred, your sharp memory on the details regarding the shameful Sky Dome fiasco is much appreciated. I recall thinking how scandalous it was at the time that the Toronto and Ontario tax payers got stuck with most of that bill.

Your keen observation goes to show that if a mess like that can happen, even with the presumably sharper minds at play in Hogtown, imagine how badly our local yokels will cock it up!

We can't let them get away with any funny business, as my mother would say. We need to pore over every detail of the plans and budget before the project is approved.

My feelings about the proposed centre is that it m...

2009-06-24T17:45:48.207-04:00

My feelings about the proposed centre is that it may be good for Cobourg, and this is a unique time to get governent money to finance it. However Martin's letter raises some valid points, especially about what groups are allowed to participate, and also the question of how operating costs are to be covered.

I would like to ask the questions to the proponents:
" was a study of operating costs made before the proposal was submitted and if so can we see it?
Do the reveunue streams from the users cover operating costs?
If a study of operating costs was not made, would it not be good idea to do one before the project approval is finalized?"
and
" Before finalizing the project would it not be advisable to clarify the degree of involvement of the YMCA?"
and
"what are the plans for the heritage and other structures that are to be abandoned by users of the new centre".

Basically this would be asking the proponents to mitigate or explain the concerns.
Such questions have to be answered either before or after construction. In view of the magnitude of the projects I think they deserve to be answered before a final commitment is made.

We have to remember that Victoria Hall was a great thing for Cobourg to build, but it took 70 years from 1860 to 1930 for the town to to pay for it. Will the community centre be built to last for 70 years?

To all those that can't be bothered to read wh...

2009-06-24T16:11:41.708-04:00

To all those that can't be bothered to read what is actually written, especially 'Anonymous #?', read it again.

"Cobourg CANNOT afford a ‘Skydome’ or a ‘Montreal-type Olympic stadium’ financial disaster." That's talking about a "financial disaster' and using Skydome and Montreal Olympic stadium as the relevant examples to characterize the type of financial disaster. That's the whole point of punctuation.

Of course we're not looking at anything at that scale, that's unbelievably obvious.

As for accessibility, the plan is to convert Pad 1 into a miscellaneous use facility that would attract a far broader cross-section of people and that means extra expenditures to provide accessibility as well. Nothing would be 'saved' by building a replacement arena for that reason, so that's not even a starter in the discussion favouring a new arena.

The unsubstantiated charge that "The same people are involved whenever it comes to any type of change in this community. Especially if it will benefit young people." is a cop-out when it comes to discussing the issues raised by those "same people", issues that make no reference to "young people" or any other demographic group beyond the taxpayers, which presumably includes you, Anonymous. If it doesn't then you've got little of significance to contribute to the issue of taxes being increased to support such a colossus. Puts me in mind of an old but relevant saying "putting your money where your mouth is".

Dear anonymouses Of course you think the same peop...

2009-06-24T14:10:04.108-04:00

Dear anonymouses
Of course you think the same people are involved in opposition because they have stones to sign their real names, thereby exposing themselves to public scorn from anonymous sources - sad really we cannot know who is favour, apart from me.

I must agree with Anonymous. The same people are ...

2009-06-24T13:44:04.662-04:00

I must agree with Anonymous. The same people are involved whenever it comes to any type of change in this community. Especially if it will benefit young people.

I am sure they are NOT considering a Skydome scale community centre, come on be realistic.

Arenas are very much needed in Cobourg. Pad 1 is not accessible, the parking is inadequate. Why not combine the arenas with other much needed venues, seniors centre, gymnasium, rooms that can be rented out.

For a number of reasons, I'm far closer to agr...

2009-06-24T12:53:45.673-04:00

For a number of reasons, I'm far closer to agreeing with Martin than with whoever chickenpoop Anonymous(e)is. But if the latter has more money than they need and is willing to give it over to operate this monster, then let them say so right here. Just to put some scale to it, ol' Anon' can give us an idea of just what that might be. I'm going to go a step further here and comment on the establishing costs that will have to be dealt with even before the operating costs are guesstimated. So here's my excerpt from a recent letter to the editor.

Cobourg CANNOT afford a ‘Skydome’ or a ‘Montreal-type Olympic stadium’ financial disaster. Take Skydome, for instance. The proponents assured the politicians that very little, if any, public money would be required to realize their dream facility, and would be nothing like Drapeau’s stadium. (He sold it to the suckers as an Olympic gem that “could no more run a deficit than a man could have a baby”) As it turns out, Skydome, originally estimated at $125 million, ballooned to $278 million and then finally ended up costing almost $600 million. The kicker, of course, was that ‘almost no public money’ ended up as a $300 million millstone around the taxpayers’ necks. The final indignity and insult to the taxpayer is that the current value of that ‘gem’ has recently been established at $25 million when Rogers bought it and renamed it The Rogers Centre. (at 8% of its original cost to the taxpayer. Gems are supposed to appreciate, not the opposite.

As a side note, I believe Cobourg recently increased its long term debt to make its financial profile look cleaner. I don't think we'll ever see that amount go down in the future, especially at the rate our council likes to spread the 'wealth'. Servicing the long term debt will continue to cost a larger portion of our budget, on top of these 'exciting' operating costs for all the successful ventures they can dream up in the next 16 months or so. So dig deep ol' Anonymous, they're gonna need to avail themselves of your generosity. I'd rather pass on that.

Call it huff if you wish, but at least I use my re...

2009-06-23T22:26:35.710-04:00

Call it huff if you wish, but at least I use my real name.

Coward.

Let me guess, the same people who opposed the outd...

2009-06-23T17:28:14.308-04:00

Let me guess, the same people who opposed the outdoor rink are going to oppose the new community centre.

Well, if that effort of huff fails as miserably as last time, perhaps the community centre will be just as successful as the rink.