HawthorneVillager.com

yep. definitely 'good times'
Here's a link to an unrelated story about Federal and Provincial budgets.

http://www.cfib-fcei.ca/english/article ... -mark.html

If you assume 5.5% of people in Milton actually do play tennis, the activity is divided among many tennis courts around Milton. Nassagewaya Tennis Club, for example, has < 300 members and four tennis courts, for an average of 75 members per court. The walking track, which cost less than a single court, has 3500 members. That's a 45x use. Not to mention the walking track will be used year-round, tennis courts are used a few months a year.

Zeeshan Hamid

Zeeshan Hamid
Instead of using numbers and facts to support your argument, can you try just using passionate and emotional words to support your argument? Numbers and facts make it difficult for me to refute your argument.

prayagrajexpress
How would you define success?
From Statscan (to assist you with your definition).
Participation in sport declined from 45% in 1992 to 28% in 2005 in Canada.
Out of nearly 100 sports played in Canada, participation is highly concentrated in about 20 sports led by golf (20%), ice hockey (18%), swimming (10%), soccer (10%), basketball (8%), baseball (7%), volleyball (7%), skiing (6%), cycling (6%) and tennis (5%).

The point is that the fact that less than 5% of the population is using a facility is being termed a success. If it was a private business it would never breakeven. This is quite sad. The %age will actually go down as the initial excitement dies down when time comes to renew the pass.

I see, its not 20% of people play golf...... its 20% of those 28% of people that play sports, that play golf.

So 5.6% of the population play golf.

Now that makes more sense.

Shelve indoor velodrome plans. Milton is ready to commit to $45 million for a 250-metre indoor velodrome. However, an indoor velodrome operation is costly; North America has only one other of similar size. TO2015 needs to consider a cheaper outdoor composite-track velodrome at the CNE/Ontario Place.

With respect, this whole "this will never happen in private sector" argument is getting really old. Most private businesses are small businesses that serve a significantly smaller proportion of the entire market.

A/c to Stats Canada, 75% of all Canadian businesses have < 10 employees.

Zeeshan Hamid

Zeeshan- You are completely missing the point. The private business targets a small %age of population their own definition of market segment. Car dealers are there to serve car owners, besides they use their own money to target this segment.


In this case town offered its services by collecting taxes from 100% of the households that was only of interest to 5% of the population and you call is success?

prayagrajexpress it is you who is COMPLETELY missing the point.
Using your logic;
The town should only provide services that 100% of it's citizens use. So close down the fire stations, Arts Centre, hockey rinks, conservation areas, public transportation, etc. The private sector will take care of these needs. Also, pretty much every service should then be charged a fee for use such as adding tolls to roads, private health care, schools (why should my taxes go to schools since I do not have any children), etc.

100% of households use town services, they just don't use exact same ones. You picked one specific thing and said "only 5% use this one specific thing in this one specific location out of everything the town does". I guarantee you that less than 5% of people in Milton use the section of the street you live in (unless you live in an arterial road). With your argument, that street is a waste.

I am not saying 5% of people use recreational programs. Or even 5% use the Sports Centre. Or even 5% use the new part of the Sports Centre. I said 5% use that one specific walking track in the latest expansion of one specific athletic facility out of all the facilities we have.

If I go up to my (private sector) employer tomorrow and propose a new product that 5% of users in the market will use and can be done relatively inexpensively, I will be looking at an amazing bonus.

Finally, I can't stress this enough, we dont build recreational facilities with property tax dollars. We build them using development charges that developers pay. And many of our recreational programs are actually profitable, not subsidized. So your argument doesn't apply there.

Zeeshan Hamid

The point is that the fact that less than 5% of the population is using a facility is being termed a success. If it was a private business it would never breakeven. This is quite sad. The %age will actually go down as the initial excitement dies down when time comes to renew the pass.

No.

Town should focus on essential services. The argument is the money is being spent on things which are not essential and have limited returns