In what can be only mildly described as just another chapter in Janesville's long-running ice arena soap opera, the fundraising group involved in foisting a new ice arena on Janesville taxpayers have essentially and defiantly thumbed their noses at the city council's outrageously generous offer of $2 million and free land in an industrial park off Beloit Avenue on the city's far south side. As reported in the Janesville Gazette, they started negotiations on their own to purchase the privately owned old Janesville Tennis Club building near Target on the city's North side.
The private fundraising group (donors? investors?), acknowledging they are unable to meet the Dec. 31st deadline to raise $2 million in matching funds, appear to be reshaping a new proposal with new math unilaterally through the media as news of this latest ploy by the group broke first in the fund-raising friendly Gazette.
Although a new arena is viewed as a fiscal boondoggle by many, including myself, some still think a new arena has the potential to make money to offset the city's subsidy. When in truth the facility, if privately owned, would likely not even cover it's own property taxes.
Showing posts with label ice arena. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ice arena. Show all posts
Wednesday, December 01, 2010
Thursday, September 16, 2010
City Officials Update Privileged Ice Arena Group
Headlines here!…read all about it! City Council extends $2 million to privileged leisure group!!… read all about it!!… Food pantry use on the rise while donations are down!!.. Get your news now and read all about it... read all about it!! School board member says worst economy since Hoover, community can’t afford teachers!! Headlines here!…read all about it! City Council extends $2 million to privileged….
Ahh, life is good …iddin it?
Don't look now folks, but Janesville city officials at Monday's city council meeting appeared to be testing the winds when they openly discussed the idea of giving away city facility naming rights so a privileged group of city hall insiders can sell it in order to help meet their $2 million commitment to build a private-partnered ice rink - instead of the city leasing the intellectual property as a means of paying down the taxpayer's burden and subsidy for the current arena. Apparently, the fund-raising group ran out of their own cookies and donuts to sell - they now want ours.
The city manager favors the idea because he considers the private group an extension of the city's efforts to raise capital for a new arena. Council member Russ Steeber agreed.
Other tidbits from the Monday's Janesville city council meeting:
* The city manager said the location of the current ice rink is a sufficient, but not an ideal location for a new fire station.
* Council member Yuri Rashkin noted that no representative from the fund-raising group bothered to attend the council meeting. Instead, the city's ice arena advisory Committee Chairman, Steve Walker, who also happens to be a VP of the Janesville Hockey Club apparently spoke on their behalf. The city's ice arena advisory committee by the way, is weighted down with pro-hockey arena expansion advocates - and not by chance. City officials want it tilted that way.
Despite mentioning at least four solid reasons why the new arena project should not move forward, among them location problems, unknown costs, the city budget, the fund-raisers shortfall and the declining local economy - Rashkin tossed those concerns to the wind and voted to re-commit $2 million and extend the group's deadline to Dec. 31, 2010.
* Overheard through the chatter that 10 acres of vacant land in the city should cost $350,000 despite earlier fear-promoting remarks from the city administration and council that vacant land for a new fire station would cost $1 million or more. This lower figure brings the cost of land acquisition for a new fire station more in line with reality. In addition, why the city would need 10 acres of land for a new fire station is anybody's guess.
* That the cost of an additional sheet of ice for an arena expansion in Eau Claire is pegged at $5.5 million, which is more than double the costs projected for Janesville's second sheet. Eau Claire's expansion figure calls into question all of the cost projections for Janesville's new ice arena boondoggle.
* GOP operative and businessman Bill McCoshen made a request to clarify and change portions of a sugar-coated lease that allows his business, the Janesville Jets junior hockey team, to skip out on paying the office rental fee at the city facility if the average attendance falls below 600. He wants the contract to read only paid attendance will be counted with the trade-off lowered to 500.
* The council approved McCoshen's request without having an accurate record of paid and unpaid attendance figures or establishing a set of rules to follow for promotional and free give-away tickets. As it now stands, the Jets could free ticket-give-away their way out of paying monthly rent.
One thing I have to add is the commentary and vote by council member Tom McDonald. He was the only member to get it right and vote against the $2 million/deadline extension boondoggle (I think this is the third deadline). Bravo!
First of all, renovating the current community ice rink facility is said to cost about one million which means the city won't spend the entire $2 million they set aside. This means the city saves one million. That's not too complicated to understand. The city can then look for a new fire station location equally not as ideal as the Beloit/Tyler location for probably $250,000 or less. Remember, they don't need ten acres. Plus, the city won't pave over the southside green field they originally earmarked for the new ice arena. We end up saving about $750,000 that we can actually hold and count. The city (without a middle-man) can then bid away the naming rights lease for an annual paydown subsidy fee. Start the bidding at $100,000 annual. Win-win-win.
The ice arena fund-raising group, God bless their hearts, claim they have raised $700,000 of which they could give $350,000 to pay for the latest sound and lighting system, jumbotron, etc. for the newly renovated community ice rink. We could post a plaque in their honor in the ice arena main lobby. The other $350,000 could be divided among ECHO, Salvation Army, community food pantries and homeless shelters. This way they will have partnered their good will efforts for the entire community - just like they've always intended.
Ahh, life is good …iddin it?
Don't look now folks, but Janesville city officials at Monday's city council meeting appeared to be testing the winds when they openly discussed the idea of giving away city facility naming rights so a privileged group of city hall insiders can sell it in order to help meet their $2 million commitment to build a private-partnered ice rink - instead of the city leasing the intellectual property as a means of paying down the taxpayer's burden and subsidy for the current arena. Apparently, the fund-raising group ran out of their own cookies and donuts to sell - they now want ours.
The city manager favors the idea because he considers the private group an extension of the city's efforts to raise capital for a new arena. Council member Russ Steeber agreed.
Other tidbits from the Monday's Janesville city council meeting:
* The city manager said the location of the current ice rink is a sufficient, but not an ideal location for a new fire station.
* Council member Yuri Rashkin noted that no representative from the fund-raising group bothered to attend the council meeting. Instead, the city's ice arena advisory Committee Chairman, Steve Walker, who also happens to be a VP of the Janesville Hockey Club apparently spoke on their behalf. The city's ice arena advisory committee by the way, is weighted down with pro-hockey arena expansion advocates - and not by chance. City officials want it tilted that way.
Despite mentioning at least four solid reasons why the new arena project should not move forward, among them location problems, unknown costs, the city budget, the fund-raisers shortfall and the declining local economy - Rashkin tossed those concerns to the wind and voted to re-commit $2 million and extend the group's deadline to Dec. 31, 2010.
* Overheard through the chatter that 10 acres of vacant land in the city should cost $350,000 despite earlier fear-promoting remarks from the city administration and council that vacant land for a new fire station would cost $1 million or more. This lower figure brings the cost of land acquisition for a new fire station more in line with reality. In addition, why the city would need 10 acres of land for a new fire station is anybody's guess.
* That the cost of an additional sheet of ice for an arena expansion in Eau Claire is pegged at $5.5 million, which is more than double the costs projected for Janesville's second sheet. Eau Claire's expansion figure calls into question all of the cost projections for Janesville's new ice arena boondoggle.
* GOP operative and businessman Bill McCoshen made a request to clarify and change portions of a sugar-coated lease that allows his business, the Janesville Jets junior hockey team, to skip out on paying the office rental fee at the city facility if the average attendance falls below 600. He wants the contract to read only paid attendance will be counted with the trade-off lowered to 500.
* The council approved McCoshen's request without having an accurate record of paid and unpaid attendance figures or establishing a set of rules to follow for promotional and free give-away tickets. As it now stands, the Jets could free ticket-give-away their way out of paying monthly rent.
One thing I have to add is the commentary and vote by council member Tom McDonald. He was the only member to get it right and vote against the $2 million/deadline extension boondoggle (I think this is the third deadline). Bravo!
Janesville Gazette Editorial Excerpt:The Conservatives new fiscal conservatism - you have to demolish a $1 million facility and SPEND another $2 million in order to eventually save $1 million? The Gazette's been regurgitating and pawning off those distortions from ice arena advocates since the beginning to help sell the new facility.
(Titled - Ice Arena Plan Makes Sense)
Besides, by pledging $2 million in tax money in hopes of getting a new rink, the city could save up to $1 million in repairs to the current rink and another $1 million by not having to buy land for a new central fire station.
First of all, renovating the current community ice rink facility is said to cost about one million which means the city won't spend the entire $2 million they set aside. This means the city saves one million. That's not too complicated to understand. The city can then look for a new fire station location equally not as ideal as the Beloit/Tyler location for probably $250,000 or less. Remember, they don't need ten acres. Plus, the city won't pave over the southside green field they originally earmarked for the new ice arena. We end up saving about $750,000 that we can actually hold and count. The city (without a middle-man) can then bid away the naming rights lease for an annual paydown subsidy fee. Start the bidding at $100,000 annual. Win-win-win.
The ice arena fund-raising group, God bless their hearts, claim they have raised $700,000 of which they could give $350,000 to pay for the latest sound and lighting system, jumbotron, etc. for the newly renovated community ice rink. We could post a plaque in their honor in the ice arena main lobby. The other $350,000 could be divided among ECHO, Salvation Army, community food pantries and homeless shelters. This way they will have partnered their good will efforts for the entire community - just like they've always intended.
Monday, July 26, 2010
More Taxpayer "Skin" Expected In Hockey Arena Boondoggle
The Janesville City Manager, Eric Levitt, is requesting the approval of a concessions contract at the current ice arena with Janesville Youth Hockey that is expected to bring in $1,400 less annually for the city, based on a percentage of last year's sales figures.
In this article from the Janesville Gazette, the Director of Administrative Services Jay Winzenz said the decision to take a portion of profits (percentaged based instead of a flat fee) was made to capitalize on increased sales they expect from Janesville Jets games. However, the figures posted at the Janesville City Website (page 13), which are what the $1,400 loss is based on, already takes in a great portion of revenues collected from last season's Janesville Jets games. The figures are fiscal year ending 3/31/2010.
Yet, according to the Janesville City Web Site (page 2), the city administration expects to make up for the lost revenue by shifting other revenues due to the taxpayers from concessions contracted out in the facility's warming room.
Either way, Janesville taxpayers are expected to see an even smaller return on their investment which must eventually be made up with increased subsidies. All the while special interests profit more.
At the last Janesville city council meeting, a pro-hockey-arena "neutral" consultant hired by the pro-hockey-arena city administration had this to say about re-evaluating existing contracts at the arena.
What a racket.
City of Janesville Web Site:12.5% of net proceeds instead of a $5,000 flat fee produces the loss of $1,400.
The City Manager is requesting consideration of approval of the City’s agreement with Janesville Youth Hockey Association (JYHA) for operations of the concessions at the Janesville Ice Rink located on Beloit Avenue. The fee for the operation would be for the City to receive 12.5% of net proceeds.
In this article from the Janesville Gazette, the Director of Administrative Services Jay Winzenz said the decision to take a portion of profits (percentaged based instead of a flat fee) was made to capitalize on increased sales they expect from Janesville Jets games. However, the figures posted at the Janesville City Website (page 13), which are what the $1,400 loss is based on, already takes in a great portion of revenues collected from last season's Janesville Jets games. The figures are fiscal year ending 3/31/2010.
Yet, according to the Janesville City Web Site (page 2), the city administration expects to make up for the lost revenue by shifting other revenues due to the taxpayers from concessions contracted out in the facility's warming room.
Either way, Janesville taxpayers are expected to see an even smaller return on their investment which must eventually be made up with increased subsidies. All the while special interests profit more.
At the last Janesville city council meeting, a pro-hockey-arena "neutral" consultant hired by the pro-hockey-arena city administration had this to say about re-evaluating existing contracts at the arena.
Council Meeting Excerpt:Whether we're talking about $5,000 or $5,000,000, the more money city taxpayers pour into our once-upon-a-time "community" ice arena, the more "skin" Janesville taxpayers will have to give up to the privileged special interests that are pushing the boondoggle in the first place. Contrary to all the basic principles of free market risk, competition and supply and demand, we (taxpayers) will pay even more to the very folks that make sure our investment never pays off.
"If you were to construct a new facility, like all of your existing contracts it would be prudent to go back and re-evaluate those, particularly on the attendance side of things, selling tickets, to be sure that they're going to to fill that new arena that would be built for them ...that there would be a little more skin in the game for them - to keep them around." -- Rink Consultant speaking to the Janesville City Council
What a racket.
Sunday, February 21, 2010
Ice Arena Study Obviously A Stall Tactic
One week away from the moment of truth, the Janesville city manager proposes an ice arena study!!
But wait, what am I saying? We're not dealing with normal reasonable people here. These are local banksters, political operatives and marketing profiteers.
I'm not trying to kid myself or anyone else for that matter. These folks are organized and committed to capture the $2.5 million tax payer subsidy any which way they can under any circumstances. They already have a Website up and running, have a pliable city council and administration AND most importantly, they have zero organized opposition. At this point, the $2.5 million already belongs to them, it's theirs for the losing.
I'm posting this perspective only to provide for a Sunday funny.
City Website Excerpt: (Page 4)Why waste $100 or $10,000 on a study since the March 1st fundraising deadline is fast approaching? Don't proceed with the study until you know the private donors have their $1.5 million vouched for. It's only one week away. If the ice arena group can wait for the study, the city should be able to wait one more week for their committment.
At this time we have raised almost $690,000 from the private sector, but with the outcome of the study unknown, we feel it would be more appropriate to wait until the report is provided to the city before pursuing additional fundraising efforts. -- Ice Arena "Community Donors"
But wait, what am I saying? We're not dealing with normal reasonable people here. These are local banksters, political operatives and marketing profiteers.
I'm not trying to kid myself or anyone else for that matter. These folks are organized and committed to capture the $2.5 million tax payer subsidy any which way they can under any circumstances. They already have a Website up and running, have a pliable city council and administration AND most importantly, they have zero organized opposition. At this point, the $2.5 million already belongs to them, it's theirs for the losing.
I'm posting this perspective only to provide for a Sunday funny.
Thursday, February 04, 2010
From White Elephant To Hot Potato To Boondoggle
While watching last week's Janesville city council discussion about the ice arena, I was both flabbergasted and insulted by at least two council members readiness to throw Janesville taxpayers under a bus, or to imply that tough economic times means taxpayers must expect to sacrifice even more.
Nearly every council member spoke about "time" and how they need to do all they can to get the ball rolling on a new ice arena. After listening to the back and forth banter, it turns out it's the council who can't track the the ice arena fast enough. As far as selling the naming rights to the public facility were concerned, the council refused to vote on the proposal at hand and instead pushed the matter back onto the city manager.
The City Manager Eric Levitt in my opinion gave the quote of the session when he said this about literally giving the donor group $2 million dollars to build and maintain their own facility, just so the city can unload the entire boondoggle...
Of course, the hand-out reeks from one end to the other. I don't really know where to begin. Should I start that the suggestion is actually an admission that the city council screwed up royally when they approved of that totally obnoxious concessions/advertizing lease with the for-profit WHP?
Or that despite all the "community" talk from the private donors, none of these proposals would even exist had the council not approved the WHP lease in the first place? It all revolves around the WHP group. That is a widely held observation.
Or, how about the idea that in order to save around $1 to $1.5 million to renovate the current community ice arena into a state-of-the-art facility, the city will tear it down and literally give a private group of wealthy individuals $2 million in taxpayer cash AND a parcel of land worth approximately $1 million to go build their own arena?
Was this entire scheme hatched just so the city can save $1 million on land acquisition for a new fire station? If it is, someone needs to tell the administration and council to please... stop trying to save us money! All the while the city loses a community facility when public use was just beginning to peak before the Jets arrived on the scene.
Or how about the thought that the new arena will be property tax free while it's primary tenant is a for-profit business group?
Or how about the idea that the private group will charge the residents/taxpayers for usage and keep all proceeds?
Or how about the thought that the naming rights to the proposed city owned facility and ice sheets were worth about a million to the private donors, while the taxpayers $2 million will be lucky to buy itself a plaque on the wall.
Or how about the math that $2 million should be able to buy Janesville taxpayers $50,000 worth of skate time for 40 years. Hmmmm, at $500 per event, the privately owned and operated facility can hold 100 open skate events per year for Janesville residents - for free.
Or how about the fact that had a senator, congressman or state legislator propose a $2 million earmark for a special interest group to build and privatize their own ice arena, they would likely be burned at the stake. But at least they'd pay property taxes.
Or about the fact that while the city of Janesville contemplates giving away $2 million to a hockey club, Janesville public schools are asking for donations to meet its bills.
Or how about the notion that as soon as it seems a public asset or community facility might show any promise of turning a profit, the asset is turned over to private interests?
Gee, where should I begin?
More Ice Arena Fumbles
It's a "good ol'boys club."
Nearly every council member spoke about "time" and how they need to do all they can to get the ball rolling on a new ice arena. After listening to the back and forth banter, it turns out it's the council who can't track the the ice arena fast enough. As far as selling the naming rights to the public facility were concerned, the council refused to vote on the proposal at hand and instead pushed the matter back onto the city manager.
The City Manager Eric Levitt in my opinion gave the quote of the session when he said this about literally giving the donor group $2 million dollars to build and maintain their own facility, just so the city can unload the entire boondoggle...
City Council Meeting:In short, the city would be better off giving away $2 million and walking away from the ice arena altogether. That was quite a statement.
"it would save long-term the city many dollars operationally, and save the city many dollars capital-wise long-term, so the investment would pay back the city over the next twenty years more so than if the city ran the facility." -- Janesville City Manager Eric Levitt
Of course, the hand-out reeks from one end to the other. I don't really know where to begin. Should I start that the suggestion is actually an admission that the city council screwed up royally when they approved of that totally obnoxious concessions/advertizing lease with the for-profit WHP?
Or that despite all the "community" talk from the private donors, none of these proposals would even exist had the council not approved the WHP lease in the first place? It all revolves around the WHP group. That is a widely held observation.
Or, how about the idea that in order to save around $1 to $1.5 million to renovate the current community ice arena into a state-of-the-art facility, the city will tear it down and literally give a private group of wealthy individuals $2 million in taxpayer cash AND a parcel of land worth approximately $1 million to go build their own arena?
Was this entire scheme hatched just so the city can save $1 million on land acquisition for a new fire station? If it is, someone needs to tell the administration and council to please... stop trying to save us money! All the while the city loses a community facility when public use was just beginning to peak before the Jets arrived on the scene.
Or how about the thought that the new arena will be property tax free while it's primary tenant is a for-profit business group?
Or how about the idea that the private group will charge the residents/taxpayers for usage and keep all proceeds?
Or how about the thought that the naming rights to the proposed city owned facility and ice sheets were worth about a million to the private donors, while the taxpayers $2 million will be lucky to buy itself a plaque on the wall.
Or how about the math that $2 million should be able to buy Janesville taxpayers $50,000 worth of skate time for 40 years. Hmmmm, at $500 per event, the privately owned and operated facility can hold 100 open skate events per year for Janesville residents - for free.
Or how about the fact that had a senator, congressman or state legislator propose a $2 million earmark for a special interest group to build and privatize their own ice arena, they would likely be burned at the stake. But at least they'd pay property taxes.
Or about the fact that while the city of Janesville contemplates giving away $2 million to a hockey club, Janesville public schools are asking for donations to meet its bills.
Or how about the notion that as soon as it seems a public asset or community facility might show any promise of turning a profit, the asset is turned over to private interests?
Gee, where should I begin?
More Ice Arena Fumbles
It's a "good ol'boys club."
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Media Effort Underway To Destabilize Majority On Ice Arena Boondoggle
After reading the Gazette's Tuesday article about the Janesville ice arena boondoggle, I found the newspaper's ramped up story-line reminiscent of past publishing activities the newspaper undertook to pass the school referendum or to sell the wealthy investor's county land-swap deal to an unsuspecting public. In addition, the Gazette published two major editorials on their arena position in four days.
In Tuesday's city council article, the paper makes no reference to Council member Yuri Rashkin’s well contrived blizzard of common sense he displayed for explaining his opposition vote of the administration’s arena plan. Not one word. I don't want to make too much of it, but his position was not only unique from the others, it was built on startlingly profound judgement. Now, if you're a regular visitor here, you'd know that doesn't come easy for me to say, particularly about someone who I have had very little to agree with on. So please don't think I'm in the tank here. Rashkin did mention the word “grassroots” somewhere in his logic and that alone could be enough to get excommunicated from the country club set here in Janesville. For obvious reasons, the Gazette so far has shut down all opposition talk in their so-called objectively written articles on the ice arena.
But it really hit home when I watched the short 6PM news report on Channel 15-WMTV out of Madison (Channel 5 Charter) about the Janesville Ice Arena on Wednesday. They described the ice arena debate as a controversy but proceeded to televise a very one-sided account absent of any real controversy! Rashkin was not given any face time to respond for the 6PM newscast and had a short uneventful moment at 10PM. Instead they put a pro-hockey spokesperson on camera and proceeded to oversimplify the deal as a positive development and about sending a message that Janesville is looking out for it's kids.
In a related article in today's (Thursday) Gazette titled, "We need to pull together" is another timely piece by the newspaper to sway public opinion towards the socialized losses incurred from public-private partnerships. The article contains an interesting list of local people from what can be viewed as the area's Bilderburg group."
For small town politics, this is big-time stagecraft.
Read WMTV's report and view video here. The video broadcast on television was 1 min. 28 sec. long.
Some additional Boondoggle notes
* The two sheet ice arena is now being marketed as a regional facility primarily to attract non-Janesville users from Beloit and Walworth County. In exchange, Janesville will lose its public-use community centered ice rink.
* The land site of the new arena has an approximate value at least equivalent to the price thrown around for land acquisition for the fire station - around $1 million dollars. The land value puts the city's share at $3.5 million instead of the reported $2.5 million and it will not generate property taxes over the lifespan of the arena.
* The old ice arena has a replacement cost value of at least $2 million in its current condition. The structure is expected to be bull-dozed.
* The date (March 1st) is arbitrarily set by the city administration. It holds little power or importance to the actual deal and will be changed or extended anytime to fit the requirements of the private investment group. My guess is they will be given all the way to 2011 or 2012 to raise the money.
* The plan to move the ice arena to the southern edge of the city will remove another community facility from the city's central core and will help steer more traffic away from the downtown district. In other words, it is consistent with the city's comprehensive growth plan.
* During the WHP contract discussions, the handful of previous ice arena user groups were promised little disruption of their use schedules - according to the media. Now they've suddenly become a group that's clamoring for ice time and in need of a home - according to the media.
* The current ice arena subsidies and attendance figures have been unfairly compared to other public use facilities in Janesville such as the Senior Center and the Hedberg Library. The ice arena is the only one that has been privatized for profits while socializing the capital investment, operating losses and maintenance onto the taxpayers.
* The next inner-city facility expected to fall at the hands of the country club set are the batting cages on Jackson Street.
* The astro-turf group behind the regional two sheet ice arena are the same folks who succeeded to foist (with help from the Gazette) a $70.5 million tax hike upon Janesville school district taxpayers.
This list will be expanded and reposted as more information becomes available.
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
City Council Gives Cold Shoulder To Public Opinion
As expected, the ice arena funding involving a taxpayer commitment of $2.5 million was fast-tracked through the Janesville city council during yesterday's meeting. It passed by a vote of 5-2 with Councilman Rashkin and Frank Perrotto voting against.
It is worth noting that Councilman Yuri Rashkin made an unusual (unusual for a JVL council member), but very reasonable if not convincing argument on behalf of the silent majority of Janesville taxpayers. Well, convincing for everyone except those already in the tank. Judging from polls, emails, reactions and comments against the greasy deal, why on Earth would the majority of the city council ignore public opinion?
While several council members agreed to disagree with Rashkin, they thought it important to prove that the new arena was not being pursued for the for-profit Janesville Jets junior hockey organization. Since the Jets are the furthest reason to commit millions (as one council member claimed) for improvements, why then would Janesville need 2 sheets without the Janesville Jets? Why would the Janesville Gazette spend a quarter-barrel of ink promoting the Jets as the fundamental reason to go forward with a new arena? And most importantly, why would the private sector arena group, you know the guys who are only looking out for the best wishes of the community, make it clear that they want no part of a single sheet community ice arena built near the center of the community? Remember, without the Jets making an appearance, this entire debate began with a centrally located community ice arena with an aging ice-maker and a leaky roof - there were no millionaires involved.
I hate to say it but it's clear Janesville taxpayers have been played for fools. And the sad truth is this: Without the Jets, who would this council be willing to put millions in improvements into the ice arena for? The general public they chose to ignore? Please - don't make me laugh.
It is worth noting that Councilman Yuri Rashkin made an unusual (unusual for a JVL council member), but very reasonable if not convincing argument on behalf of the silent majority of Janesville taxpayers. Well, convincing for everyone except those already in the tank. Judging from polls, emails, reactions and comments against the greasy deal, why on Earth would the majority of the city council ignore public opinion?
While several council members agreed to disagree with Rashkin, they thought it important to prove that the new arena was not being pursued for the for-profit Janesville Jets junior hockey organization. Since the Jets are the furthest reason to commit millions (as one council member claimed) for improvements, why then would Janesville need 2 sheets without the Janesville Jets? Why would the Janesville Gazette spend a quarter-barrel of ink promoting the Jets as the fundamental reason to go forward with a new arena? And most importantly, why would the private sector arena group, you know the guys who are only looking out for the best wishes of the community, make it clear that they want no part of a single sheet community ice arena built near the center of the community? Remember, without the Jets making an appearance, this entire debate began with a centrally located community ice arena with an aging ice-maker and a leaky roof - there were no millionaires involved.
I hate to say it but it's clear Janesville taxpayers have been played for fools. And the sad truth is this: Without the Jets, who would this council be willing to put millions in improvements into the ice arena for? The general public they chose to ignore? Please - don't make me laugh.
Suggested slogan for the WHP and private ice arena group.And when did we hear that before?
"We're only here for you. But if we don't get everything - we have nothing to give."
Monday, October 26, 2009
Gazette Readers Overwhelmingly Against Ice Arena Plan
Gazette Poll #1
Should the Janesville City Council support construction of a new ice arena or spend money on the existing arena?
Support new arena --- 34% --- 369 votes
Renovate existing arena --- 65% --- 696 votes
Gazette Poll #2
Would you support a junior A hockey team in Janesville?
Yes --- 26% --- 496 votes
No --- 73% --- 1348 votes
In Janesville, democracy ends right after the election.
Should the Janesville City Council support construction of a new ice arena or spend money on the existing arena?
Support new arena --- 34% --- 369 votes
Renovate existing arena --- 65% --- 696 votes
Gazette Poll #2
Would you support a junior A hockey team in Janesville?
Yes --- 26% --- 496 votes
No --- 73% --- 1348 votes
In Janesville, democracy ends right after the election.
Newspaper Burning Taxpayers At Both Ends
It's the same old story being presented by our monopolized media. On the front page of Sunday's Janesville Gazette, their paid writers show they are fully capable of digging into the underbelly of local fiscal finances when it comes to school teachers wages. They'll selectively turn over just the right stones to present a salary chart loaded with circled talking points and sharpened arrows picking out all the details to promote their point of view. Next to the article in the hard copy, they re-enforced their point of objectivity with another story titled, "City Employee Pay frozen, but many still get raises." Got that? When it comes to the public sector or school teachers getting a raise - it's practically scandalous.
The trouble is, the ideologues at the newspaper have been doing this to the school teachers even during the roaring GM years - budget crisis or not. History tells me their chronic opposition is politically driven.
Yet, who can argue these are very different and much tougher economic times, so the paper implying city budget managers tighten the numbers on public service sector wages actually has some merit for the first time in decades. So you know they're going to eat that up and run with it. But flip over to their editorial and the newspaper writes generously about the reasons why the devastated taxpaying community should consider forking over $2 million+ to build a new ice arena for afor-profit group of wealthy investors junior hockey team.
City management with help from the Gazette also have been working over public opinion by presenting a false set of benefits and assumptions to justify tearing down and moving the current ice arena. In their view, the nearby downtown and residential riverfront properties will gain an economic boost by arbitrarily moving the ice arena even further away and building a new fire station at the current arena's site.
I'm thoroughly convinced these plans are a continuation of the "old growth" plans that have played a leading role in devaluing and depopulating Janesville's central core, but they'll say whatever they can to make it fit - and they'll make it fit. It is business as usual.
Read different story - same conclusion. Milwaukee Bucks Stadium Swindle.
Should cities pay for sports facilities?
The trouble is, the ideologues at the newspaper have been doing this to the school teachers even during the roaring GM years - budget crisis or not. History tells me their chronic opposition is politically driven.
Yet, who can argue these are very different and much tougher economic times, so the paper implying city budget managers tighten the numbers on public service sector wages actually has some merit for the first time in decades. So you know they're going to eat that up and run with it. But flip over to their editorial and the newspaper writes generously about the reasons why the devastated taxpaying community should consider forking over $2 million+ to build a new ice arena for a
City management with help from the Gazette also have been working over public opinion by presenting a false set of benefits and assumptions to justify tearing down and moving the current ice arena. In their view, the nearby downtown and residential riverfront properties will gain an economic boost by arbitrarily moving the ice arena even further away and building a new fire station at the current arena's site.
I'm thoroughly convinced these plans are a continuation of the "old growth" plans that have played a leading role in devaluing and depopulating Janesville's central core, but they'll say whatever they can to make it fit - and they'll make it fit. It is business as usual.
Sporting Event Impact Studies Excerpt:
The best recommendation is simply for cities to view with extreme caution any economic impact estimates provided by sports franchises, sponsoring leagues, or event-organizing committees.
Read different story - same conclusion. Milwaukee Bucks Stadium Swindle.
Should cities pay for sports facilities?
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Janesville Patriotic Society Stiff-Armed By City Council
The Janesville City Council was approached by two different special interest groups during Tuesday night’s meeting with very different proposals that were however, in nearly identical preliminary planning stages.
Basically both groups wanted to share their ideas and know whether or not to proceed beyond the initial stage. One group, the Janesville Patriotic Society requested the council’s approval and administrative cooperation for the group to further explore a project to move several military monuments from around Janesville and consolidate them in Traxler park. The representative of this proposal was left unceremoniously bewildered with only verbal remarks to come back later with more information. No motion was made to vote on whether the group should proceed or not with their plans.
The second group, represented by two local businessmen also wanted the council’s approval and administrative cooperation for the group to further explore a project to build a new indoor ice arena using taxpayer dollars. Despite a sketchy plan (actually just a letter) and many unanswered questions, they however were treated quite differently as one council member, Russ Steeber, made a motion for an up-or-down vote to assert their approval for the exploratory work and city cooperation. The council then voted unanimously in agreement for the ice arena group to proceed to the next phase of their plan.
It pays to have connections.
Basically both groups wanted to share their ideas and know whether or not to proceed beyond the initial stage. One group, the Janesville Patriotic Society requested the council’s approval and administrative cooperation for the group to further explore a project to move several military monuments from around Janesville and consolidate them in Traxler park. The representative of this proposal was left unceremoniously bewildered with only verbal remarks to come back later with more information. No motion was made to vote on whether the group should proceed or not with their plans.
The second group, represented by two local businessmen also wanted the council’s approval and administrative cooperation for the group to further explore a project to build a new indoor ice arena using taxpayer dollars. Despite a sketchy plan (actually just a letter) and many unanswered questions, they however were treated quite differently as one council member, Russ Steeber, made a motion for an up-or-down vote to assert their approval for the exploratory work and city cooperation. The council then voted unanimously in agreement for the ice arena group to proceed to the next phase of their plan.
It pays to have connections.
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Double-Standard Leases At City Facilities
During Monday’s Janesville city council meeting, the council sounded as if they were willing to scrooge Janesville Youth Baseball out of the batting cage lease at the Jackson Street location. After being presented with three different contract scenarios by the city administration, council members scrutinized the options with the non-profit community organization (JYB is a non-stock, non-profit, apolitical organization) and seemed bothered that the batting cage facility still might cost the city a few thousand dollars to operate in 2009.
The city collections at the batting cage facility provided in the lease (no revenue sharing from admissions) are still short in my view, but it doesn't even compare to the disgraceful city give-away to the for-profit WHP. Yet the batting cages are a much needed public participant sporting activity for Janesville youth.
The Janesville city council’s double-standard towards the primary groups representing each facility should sicken the average taxpayer and raise suspicions on whether the city council received a quid pro quo from the politically connected hockey group. Their attitude towards the non-profit youth community group just doesn't add up.
Adding more fuel to the fire is a new report showing the $200,000 in ice arena improvements may actually cost closer to $350,000. What will the fickle city council do now?
The obvious question: Why is a city facility leased by a controlling user group expected to break even, if the primary user is non-profit? Yet it is acceptable to operate at a loss if the primary user is for-profit.
The city council decision on the batting cage lease has been postponed to the next meeting in two weeks.
Note: This posting is the independent perspective and opinion of its author, and does not imply an affiliation to any of the individuals or organizations mentioned.
JG Excerpt:This directive (not to lose money on the deal) came just a few weeks after the council literally gave away primary use and control of another city-owned facility to a for-profit private investment junior hockey venture. With the hockey group, city taxpayers still expect to cover a loss of at least $65,000 a year at the ice arena facility. And unlike the WHP, revenue collected by the JYB helps with expenses at the Janesville Sports Complex instead of padding profits. In addition, the baseball group has accepted equipment maintenance and utility bill obligations of the batting cage facility.
The council - delayed renewing a lease with Janesville Youth Baseball to operate Swinger's batting cages. The council wants staff to come back with a lease that makes sure the city doesn't lose money on the deal. In 2008, the city covered a loss of $2,929.
The city collections at the batting cage facility provided in the lease (no revenue sharing from admissions) are still short in my view, but it doesn't even compare to the disgraceful city give-away to the for-profit WHP. Yet the batting cages are a much needed public participant sporting activity for Janesville youth.
The Janesville city council’s double-standard towards the primary groups representing each facility should sicken the average taxpayer and raise suspicions on whether the city council received a quid pro quo from the politically connected hockey group. Their attitude towards the non-profit youth community group just doesn't add up.
Adding more fuel to the fire is a new report showing the $200,000 in ice arena improvements may actually cost closer to $350,000. What will the fickle city council do now?
The obvious question: Why is a city facility leased by a controlling user group expected to break even, if the primary user is non-profit? Yet it is acceptable to operate at a loss if the primary user is for-profit.
The city council decision on the batting cage lease has been postponed to the next meeting in two weeks.
Note: This posting is the independent perspective and opinion of its author, and does not imply an affiliation to any of the individuals or organizations mentioned.
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Newspaper, Council Pretend Alcohol Debate Continues
Last week, the Janesville Gazette made another effort to make it look like Janesville city government was still busy debating over whether or not to allow alcohol to be served at the Janesville Ice Arena. This article about Janesville’s Alcohol License Advisory Committee carried the usual false concerns from committee members, as if they were toiling over some complex problems and the private investment hockey group was navigating their greased skid through difficult city governmental hurdles. What a joke.
But that didn’t stop the council’s carnival of comedy at the Monday night’s meeting. Some concerned residents continued to speak out against the alcohol as if it mattered, and were led to believe the council was still grappling over whether or not the city can justify selling alcohol at youth oriented hockey games. No way, not with this city council. They are way beyond that now.
Believe it or not, the alcohol issue became contentious only after a council member suggested restricting the type of alcohol sold at the arena to beer only. Oh the outrage! Talk about a change in pursuit.
Yet, concerned residents are still being fed this load of crap, and the Gazette continued to dump more yesterday when they implied that the new council member, Frank Perrotto, might eventually hold the deciding vote on the license.
Probably the best decision or sign the hockey team received in the past few weeks from the city of Janesville were the election results showing that the residents really don't care about the issues when they voted all the incumbents back into office. The city council received a 'confidence' mandate to pretty much do as they please.
JG Excerpt:THAT is the final authority on the deal. All the talk and debate from the city council and administration over concerns about alcohol are phony arguments meant to look like they care. Once the council approved of the contract on March 23rd, they agreed in principle to alcohol sales and all the other contingencies and demands in the contract. Everything else became uselessly rudimentary.
The contract signed between the council and Wisconsin Hockey Partners allows the partners to terminate the contract if it does not get a liquor license.
But that didn’t stop the council’s carnival of comedy at the Monday night’s meeting. Some concerned residents continued to speak out against the alcohol as if it mattered, and were led to believe the council was still grappling over whether or not the city can justify selling alcohol at youth oriented hockey games. No way, not with this city council. They are way beyond that now.
Believe it or not, the alcohol issue became contentious only after a council member suggested restricting the type of alcohol sold at the arena to beer only. Oh the outrage! Talk about a change in pursuit.
Yet, concerned residents are still being fed this load of crap, and the Gazette continued to dump more yesterday when they implied that the new council member, Frank Perrotto, might eventually hold the deciding vote on the license.
JG Excerpt:Uh - oh. Looks like we got more of the same with Frank Perrotto. How many times have you heard council members say, "I don't like the idea about blah, blah, blah, or " I'm concerned about blah, blah and blah" only to turn around and vote against their concerns! Do we need more council members who "courageously" vote against their principles? Well, don't look now. Regardless, I highly doubt Perrotto will hold the power to deny the hockey group's liquor license among this group of waffling wafflers. To imply he does just keeps this charade alive.
After Monday's meeting, Perrotto said he didn't think it was appropriate to say how he would vote until he could share his opinion as a member of the council. He will be seated Monday, April 27.
Probably the best decision or sign the hockey team received in the past few weeks from the city of Janesville were the election results showing that the residents really don't care about the issues when they voted all the incumbents back into office. The city council received a 'confidence' mandate to pretty much do as they please.
JG Excerpt:Well, that makes a lot of sense. EVERYTHING depends on whether they get the beer license and they're implying it's the council who is waiting to see how the summer camps work? Before they apply for the license? Who do they think they're kidding? Wait....don't tell me.
McCoshen doubted if Wisconsin Hockey Partners would immediately apply for a liquor license because it's not needed right away. The partners might wait to let the council see how the summer camps work and then come back to request a license, he said.
Monday, March 23, 2009
Invest In Public Use Facility - Not Corporatism
Saturday's Janesville Gazette was the last big push by the newspaper before the Janesville city council takes action tonight on the Ice Arena proposal. The paper contained two articles and an editorial about the arena apparently designed to soothe taxpayers on the maintenance repairs and cost, and garner support for the hockey team lease agreement.
The Janesville City manager also believes future repair costs at the arena could be brought down by capturing stimulus dollars from the federal Recovery Act.
But we can't say the same thing for the Ice Arena, especially if the city council approves of the agreement with the Wisconsin Hockey Partners. It might be a tough sell as it is as a recreational facility to qualify for stimulus funds. The President has warned against using recovery money for amenities such as parks or to pay down old debt. By approving the lease agreement with the WHP, the city will relinquish primary control of the facility, changing the end-use from public to private. It would be a safe guess here that the Obama Administration would probably frown upon funneling tax dollars into Ice Arena improvements to benefit a for-profit primary user. The taxpayers relationship with the arena will be nothing more than serving as a proxy for the WHP, draining subsidy dollars for brick and mortar operations, while the end-user keeps the profits.
Tonight, the Janesville City Council is expected to take action on the Ice Arena proposal. I encourage residents to re-think their position on the bicycle tunnel and direct their attention towards the Ice Arena and demand the city council not surrender control of this public-use facility.
The Janesville City manager also believes future repair costs at the arena could be brought down by capturing stimulus dollars from the federal Recovery Act.
JG Editorial Excerpt:That is questionable.
He also suggests the city might save local tax dollars by tapping federal stimulus money to replace the Freon system because of likely energy savings.
Reuters Excerpt:Believe it or not folks, the bicycle tunnel that some folks in Janesville are opposed to, qualifies for federal dollars under the recovery stimulus act. It is a public works project, shovel ready, transportation related and has safety as its primary purpose. I would agree that it is not at the top of Janesville’s priorities, but that shouldn't be an excuse not to bring the capital injection into Janesville. We'll be paying the same federal stimulus tax dollars, with or without the tunnel. The Jackson Street bridge is another qualifying project, except it's not shovel-ready believe it or not.
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act money, to be distributed through federal, state and regional agencies, is meant to create jobs and help complete local transportation and public safety projects.
But we can't say the same thing for the Ice Arena, especially if the city council approves of the agreement with the Wisconsin Hockey Partners. It might be a tough sell as it is as a recreational facility to qualify for stimulus funds. The President has warned against using recovery money for amenities such as parks or to pay down old debt. By approving the lease agreement with the WHP, the city will relinquish primary control of the facility, changing the end-use from public to private. It would be a safe guess here that the Obama Administration would probably frown upon funneling tax dollars into Ice Arena improvements to benefit a for-profit primary user. The taxpayers relationship with the arena will be nothing more than serving as a proxy for the WHP, draining subsidy dollars for brick and mortar operations, while the end-user keeps the profits.
Tonight, the Janesville City Council is expected to take action on the Ice Arena proposal. I encourage residents to re-think their position on the bicycle tunnel and direct their attention towards the Ice Arena and demand the city council not surrender control of this public-use facility.
Saturday, March 21, 2009
Hockey Proposal Privatizes Profits - Socializes Losses
After reading Saturday's Janesville Gazette, I'm convinced that if the Ice Arena isn't turned into a high-tech community convention center, taxpayers should invest the necessary dollars to keep the facility as a public-use ice arena. And I say public-use because if the WHP get their way and the city council ignores the majority of the resident's on this issue, the facility will no longer be for the public. The city manager is recommending that the WHP be given primary control of use to over-ride all others, and that means it's no longer a public facility. This is wrong.
It turns out over 26 groups and at least 3,000 people use the Janesville Ice Arena, far more than I thought. Which actually means that more members of the community will lose out if the WHP takes control. You just can't occupy the same space at the same time. The hockey group can say they will work with all user groups, but if push comes to shove, the smaller user groups lose out - the contract says so. I don't want my tax dollars paying for that, but that's not even close to the heart of my opposition.
There's something wrong here. Our city administration should be defending taxpayers full control and use of our public assets. Relinquishing those rights should come at a far higher premium than what the administration has put together. Taxpayers should not be viewed as the opposition. Whether or not this agreement is approved almost doesn't matter at this point. As a taxpaying resident of Janesville, I find this contract not only insulting, but an embarrassment of our city officials. Things have got to change. An election is coming up.
I've written extensively in opposition of turning the public facility over to the for-profit hockey group during the past couple of months and little if anything has changed contractually with the Janesville city/hockey team proposal. Yet, I'm not the only one who thinks this is a bad deal for Janesville interests. The Gazette ran a Web Poll on the issue.
Yet, some council members will say they got 10 emails in favor and two against the hockey team deal, so that’s what really matters. If the council approves of this proposal, they should just be honest and tell the truth, "We really don't care what you or anyone thinks or wants, it's our way or the highway."
If a group of private individuals think starting up a Junior A hockey team in Janesville is a good thing – that’s good. I don't blame the WHP for this at all - I say bring it on. But legislating the taxpayers to carry their water while they are the only ones drinking from the trough is privatizing profits and socializing losses - it's corporate welfare in its most insidious form - and I am against it.
But it's up to the city council to decide.
Read previous commentary and opinion on City/Hockey proposal below.
Can Deal Pass The Swap Test?
Council Buys More Time With Hockey Proposal.
Information Short On Details
NOTE: This was written before city posted contract on the Web.
WHP Group a Republican Tool?
Reversal of Pursuit Is Key To Council Rubber Stamp.
Council Okays Beer and Tax Giv-away For Junior Hockey.
Getting Snow-Jobbed At The Ice Arena.
Will Hockey Group Skate Right In?
It turns out over 26 groups and at least 3,000 people use the Janesville Ice Arena, far more than I thought. Which actually means that more members of the community will lose out if the WHP takes control. You just can't occupy the same space at the same time. The hockey group can say they will work with all user groups, but if push comes to shove, the smaller user groups lose out - the contract says so. I don't want my tax dollars paying for that, but that's not even close to the heart of my opposition.
The main sell-out points of the contractCan I get permission to bend over? So, after the drive to give away the ice arena is nearly over, this is the bottom line...
Page 10 is the Contract Index.
The City grants WHP the exclusive right to sell and keep all revenue from the sales of admission tickets, team merchandise, advertising space and novelties (Page 13)
The City grants WHP the privilege to sell and keep all revenue from the sales of alcoholic beverages allowed in a Class B license. (Page 14)
JYHA must provide reasonable and consistent customer service to the satisfaction of WHP and the City.(Page 15)
The city is charging the team ($440) for each exhibition or game event. Monthly rental stands at $350 a month.(Page 16)
Hockey Proposal Page 3:I didn't put that in bold, the city did. They are willing to hand over a taxpayer funded public-use facility for the grand prize of a subsidy reduction, from $85,000 to $70,000. You've got to be kidding! I would rather pay the taxes.
If the Junior team came to the City it would reduce the property tax subsidy by approximately $15,000 to $20,000 (all other factors remaining stable.)
There's something wrong here. Our city administration should be defending taxpayers full control and use of our public assets. Relinquishing those rights should come at a far higher premium than what the administration has put together. Taxpayers should not be viewed as the opposition. Whether or not this agreement is approved almost doesn't matter at this point. As a taxpaying resident of Janesville, I find this contract not only insulting, but an embarrassment of our city officials. Things have got to change. An election is coming up.
I've written extensively in opposition of turning the public facility over to the for-profit hockey group during the past couple of months and little if anything has changed contractually with the Janesville city/hockey team proposal. Yet, I'm not the only one who thinks this is a bad deal for Janesville interests. The Gazette ran a Web Poll on the issue.
Excerpt:Of course the question should have been “Would you renovate the ice arena using tax dollars to pad the expenses of a private business venture in Janesville? But the Gazette poll is good enough for me. I'm convinced.
Would you support a hockey team in Janesville?
Response Percent Votes
Yes........26%... 496
No.......73%... 1,348
1844 total votes
Yet, some council members will say they got 10 emails in favor and two against the hockey team deal, so that’s what really matters. If the council approves of this proposal, they should just be honest and tell the truth, "We really don't care what you or anyone thinks or wants, it's our way or the highway."
If a group of private individuals think starting up a Junior A hockey team in Janesville is a good thing – that’s good. I don't blame the WHP for this at all - I say bring it on. But legislating the taxpayers to carry their water while they are the only ones drinking from the trough is privatizing profits and socializing losses - it's corporate welfare in its most insidious form - and I am against it.
But it's up to the city council to decide.
Read previous commentary and opinion on City/Hockey proposal below.
Can Deal Pass The Swap Test?
Council Buys More Time With Hockey Proposal.
Information Short On Details
NOTE: This was written before city posted contract on the Web.
WHP Group a Republican Tool?
Reversal of Pursuit Is Key To Council Rubber Stamp.
Council Okays Beer and Tax Giv-away For Junior Hockey.
Getting Snow-Jobbed At The Ice Arena.
Will Hockey Group Skate Right In?
Sunday, March 15, 2009
Can City’s Hockey Deal Pass The Swap Test?
With all the commotion in Janesville over a venture capitalist group gaining the inside track to a taxpayer built and operated facility for a junior hockey team, would the owners of a privately owned and operated indoor ice arena offer the same contract to the city?
For starters, nobody is stopping the hockey investment group from coming to Janesville and setting up shop for business. The WHP are at will to do as they please. We have several local banks who would probably be glad to give them a commercial loan for whatever amount they need. They can build their own hockey facility and pay all the utility bills, maintenance and property taxes on it like everyone else – the hockey group shouldn’t let anyone stop them from doing this.
With any luck, the City Of Janesville can then rent the new facility from the hockey investment group for school youth hockey and skate nights at a cost of $450 per event. Of course the City can keep all the admissions, concessions and dollars paid for billboards and advertising as per contract. The arena owners could prepare the contract at their own expense and act as the city's agent in the deal. The owners could also put the city’s logo under the ice and keep the parking lot clear of snow in the winter. The city wouldn't need to rent the office space so we could save on the monthly rent. With that, the city could save over $35,000 a year in subsidies paid to the current Ice Arena. We could let someone else worry about the ice and all the other bills. Why not? This is almost the same deal the city administration has been spending taxpayer funded hours on preparing to agree to with now. It's just as fair - we can call it a public/private partnership.
What to do with the current ice arena? That's easy. Since we would no longer need the ice, the city could decommission the ice-making system and leave the concrete intact. Then upgrade the arena with a new roof and some video and audio electronics for a lot less than the $1.5 million they claim it will need anyways in a few years, and turn the place into a multi-purpose community and business-use convention center. This is something the city does not have but will desperately need in the coming years in order to sell itself for economic development.
Of course, don't bet on any of this to happen. There is no way the local elites would allow city taxpayers to own and operate such a unique and profitable facility.
Saturday's Gazette contained an article about the 52nd annual Mid-West Blind Bowlers Tournament held at the RiversEdge Bowl on South River Street in Janesville.
Surprise - Surprise!!
Janesville Veto Not Meant For Janesville
For starters, nobody is stopping the hockey investment group from coming to Janesville and setting up shop for business. The WHP are at will to do as they please. We have several local banks who would probably be glad to give them a commercial loan for whatever amount they need. They can build their own hockey facility and pay all the utility bills, maintenance and property taxes on it like everyone else – the hockey group shouldn’t let anyone stop them from doing this.
With any luck, the City Of Janesville can then rent the new facility from the hockey investment group for school youth hockey and skate nights at a cost of $450 per event. Of course the City can keep all the admissions, concessions and dollars paid for billboards and advertising as per contract. The arena owners could prepare the contract at their own expense and act as the city's agent in the deal. The owners could also put the city’s logo under the ice and keep the parking lot clear of snow in the winter. The city wouldn't need to rent the office space so we could save on the monthly rent. With that, the city could save over $35,000 a year in subsidies paid to the current Ice Arena. We could let someone else worry about the ice and all the other bills. Why not? This is almost the same deal the city administration has been spending taxpayer funded hours on preparing to agree to with now. It's just as fair - we can call it a public/private partnership.
What to do with the current ice arena? That's easy. Since we would no longer need the ice, the city could decommission the ice-making system and leave the concrete intact. Then upgrade the arena with a new roof and some video and audio electronics for a lot less than the $1.5 million they claim it will need anyways in a few years, and turn the place into a multi-purpose community and business-use convention center. This is something the city does not have but will desperately need in the coming years in order to sell itself for economic development.
Of course, don't bet on any of this to happen. There is no way the local elites would allow city taxpayers to own and operate such a unique and profitable facility.
Saturday's Gazette contained an article about the 52nd annual Mid-West Blind Bowlers Tournament held at the RiversEdge Bowl on South River Street in Janesville.
JG Excerpt:This little piece of information buried in what otherwise was a good article about the event wouldn’t be some sly but still cheesy attempt to sway public opinion in favor of socializing the losses involved in supporting a private investment group’s hockey venture into Janesville – now would it?
The Janesville Area Convention & Visitors Bureau estimated that the three-day event will result in $110,250 being spent at Janesville restaurants, hotels and retailers.
Surprise - Surprise!!
Janesville Veto Not Meant For Janesville
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)