HawthorneVillager.com

Zeeshan, let me bridge the cultural divide. When I was a kid growing up in Milton, playing ball hockey on the street was technically illegal so being the law abiding teenagers we were we played ball hockey on the Rotary Park tennis courts. Not sure if they are still there but that is what we primarily used them for. Hey, just wondering if any ball hockey rinks exist in Milton (a slab of concrete surrounded by a low wall [or fence similar to the tennis courts] to keep the majority of wayward shots from slowing down play) or if they even exist? Methinks they would be cheap to build and maintain.

Did you say golf?

A municipal curling rink would also be a great idea

Is there a Milton recreational department that would hire me I'm on a roll tonight.

The $ 19.8 is the total Milton share of this project. $ 17.6 Million for the construction and another $2.2 Million for the land and servicing. As for the private sector 13.5 you mention, as of yet there are no signed commitments from anyone in the private sector for that amount, all we have to date are letters of support and promises to assist in fund raising for that amount. When the Mayor signs the MOU and the Multi-Party Agreement he is signing on behalf of the Town of Milton and the town will be responsible for the $ 19.8. Not The Mattamy Group, not the TD Bank or the various cycling clubs.

As for all the other comments from you and KCG about my questioning the decisions previously made on different facilities and whether the benefits derived justifies the expense or whether municipalities should be involved in providing services that may be better served by the private sector I am only asking the questions that I believe an elected official should be asking before committing millions of tax payers dollars to fund such projects. Had these questions been asked by previous councils maybe some of the decisions would have been diffferent. Shooting the messenger as you like to do doesn't change the message.

Rick Malboeuf
Councillor Ward 4

1. It sounds like the probability of Mattamy and TD reneging on their commitment is very high. If that is the case then the Town of Milton should give Mattamy the gears (pun intended) when they seek permission for further zoning approvals.
2. Rick, I have no issues with you or other Councillors questioning the best use for any facilities that Milton builds.

Is there not a master plan that recommends the number and types of recreational facilities, number of fire halls, etc. per capita for the town based on other successful communities in Canada, USA, etc.? There are so many impacts of building these facilities (standard of living, health, culture, etc.) in a community that they should be planned out well in advance instead of just being debated upon piecemeal by Council based on costs alone. The Velodrome was an unanticipated opportunity but the need for the other buildings should have been foreseen.

KCG, John Tonelli arena's being used for Milton Minor Ball Hockey in the spring/early summer now as well as box lacrosse. Multi-use facilities! When they don't have ice in for hockey, use them for ball hockey and box lacrosse! Just enrolled my son for ball hockey starting in April.

The courts are still at Rotary park. I've never understand the municipal tennis courts thing either personally but I've been surprised how much use they actually get for tennis when I've been there. The basketball court at Bristol Park wouldn't be a bad place to play pick-up ball hockey. It's surrounded by earth berms that would keep you from running to kingdom come for wayward balls. Or the tennis court at Optimist Park .

Yes, there's a master plan for recreational facilities (and fire, parks, etc..)
http://www.milton.ca/en/townhall/resour ... _dec08.pdf

The service area master plans in general are located here:
http://www.milton.ca/en/townhall/servic ... rplans.asp

Development of life the universe and everything is guided by the town official plan (450+ pages without the schedules).
http://www.milton.ca/en/build/officialplan.asp

Jeez Rick! Next you will be pushing budgeting into a second meeting, directing the disposition of the annual surplus, evaluating the long-term capital plan, debating the disposition of funds from surplus property sales, demanding a documented process for senior salary management, supporting Rick D’s open data motion, …....

Where will it all end? All that due diligence and transparency is sure to upset the system.

As long as it does not increase our taxes, I agree that it is a GREAT IDEA.

I apologize for using caps, I was not aware that it meant YELLLING.
I have reset the settings so the quotes will "normal", I hope,

KGC, it would be apprecaited if you would stop the "put downs" since it is a form of bullying. Everyone has the right to express their opinion and that opinion should be received with respect. You can disagree, but when you accuse others of driving you crazy and of lying, you have stepped "over the line".

I need to address the accusation that I do not understand that DC charges of $3.8M can only be used for recreational facilities such as the Veldorome.
I think you have inferred from my statements that I was suggestig that the $3.8M should be directed from the Velodrome to hospital expansion. This inference would be wrong. Misguided legislation will not allow the collection of DC charges for hospital expansion due to growth. The ministry has removed the ability of municipalities to raise monies for hosptial expansion and placed hosptial funding under the Public Hospital Act. The appropriateness of this is a discussion for another time.

The other issue is one of semantics which I would like to clear up and this is my reference to "taxpayer money". My definition of "taxpayer money" is that it includes all revenue sources for the Town. These revenue sources can be taxes, slot money, money collected from fines, and even DC charges. All of these revenue streams come into the Town, and the Town (staff and Councillors in consultation with their constituents) spend this money for the benefit of the local community. DC money is no different. It is money received by the town to be spent in certain designated areas such as roads, related public works, fire protection, library, transit, parking, parks, recreation, administration and area specifi charges. My contention is that these monies are "taxpayer money" as well. It is in this context, that I refer to the $3.8M for the Velodrome as "taxpayer money". There may be some who disagree with my definition of "taxpayer money", and you are entitled to disagree.

1. Joan, thanks for finally fixing your settings and not writing in caps.
2. When you quote MP who mentions our healthcare is more important than the needs of cyclists and then you say well put and immediately start talking about the hospital and how lives could be saved in the Velodrome thread what else are we to infer? Your explanation (re: DC charges for hospital expansion), while it may have merit, could in no way have been inferred based on MP's quote and your original comment. If you had explained your position this way originally then I would not have found your comment to be so upsetting.
3. DC charges are taxes/not taxes, semantics, whatever.
4. Hey, at least I read your posts.

There is no way this is true.

Hello Egocentric:
I should have added from DC charges. When Mississauga experienced their building boom they could raise money for the hospital expansion using DC charges. Due to the successful lobbying from the building industry, the Ministry took away from the Municipalities this revenue source for hospital expansion. Why should a Municipality be able to raise money for recreational facilities, fire facilities, etc. which are needed because of growth and not be able to raise money from DC charges for a needed hospital expansion due to growth?

There has been some question raised as to why the Milton Hospital expansion is mentioned within the context of the Velodrome. When people hear that millions of dollars are being spent on the Velodrome by Council, it is easy to undertand why some residents would be upset to hear this, especially, when Council refused to put town money toward a hospital expansion reserve fund for the last 10 years since rapid growth started in Milton. Instead in 2010 Council passed a surtax. Council had other options which they could have used to start a hospital reserve fund as far back as 2000 when the building boom began -- slot money, 2M received from Hydro on a yearly basis, or redirect money from the yearly tax increase which has been in the range of 2-3%. Instead, they added a surtax to raise money for the hospital. Just as recreational DC money is potentially being redirected from Sherwood to the Velodrome, money could have been redirected from Town revenue sources for the hospital.

Can anyone clarify the following statements which are in Schedule D Velodrome Financial Sustainability Strategy :
C1 Land endowment of 5 acres from Milton IV Lands For Velodrome (current value vs Serviced) --Land Donation previously identified by partner
C4 Benefiting partners road constrution @ 50% of costs--These funds will be recovered from adjacent property associated with building the access
road to the site from Tremaine Road, set up as long term receivables

+1 I agree.

+1 again

Which money did you have in mind?? The town doesn't have a comparable DC bucket similar to what's there from recreation Dev charges that can be used for the velodrome. If you look at the budget, Milton hydro, gta pooling, slot revenue are all already allocated to a good portion of ongoing maintenance items - fixing roads, buildings, bridges etc. If you reallocate those funds you either have to raise taxes by the same amount you took or make a decision on what cuts you want to make in operations or capital, keeping in mind cuts to any DC driven capital projects won't help you. Money we get from slots, hydro, gta pooling help keep our prop taxes low artificially relatively speaking to similar sized towns. If those revenues go away or get moved then property taxes go up. To use your argument, it's all taxpayers money even when it comes from Milton Hydro's dividend.

Ps cuts were made. I actually voted down (along with 5 other members) the 2012 budget the first time just so we could revote on two items and get spending lower.

If you look at the past budget doc it shows how $$ like slots, Milton hydro div, got directed to town expenses which otherwise would have required tax increases or postponement of repairs or reduction of services, etc.

Joan,

C1, the land endowment is essentially a donation of property (a common practice) to an educational institution, likely Wilfrid Laurier University. I'm assuming the donation offsets part of the costs of the capital project.

C4, I understand that to mean that 100% of the road to the Velodrome must be built and that 50% of the cost of this road construction will be recovered in the future when the adjacent lands are developed, hence it will be set up as a long term receivable.

The arguments suggest there is a difference of opinion that makes for good debate. My only concern is regardless of who says whom is contributing what from where, it ultimately comes out of only one pocket, YOURS! I vote healthcare, not a Velodrome.
Its Friday and time to relax!

It's not an either or argument, otherwise a hospital is a no brainer. It's basically a $3.8 million recreational facility or a $40 million Velodrome with a larger recreational facility for $3.8 million.