HawthorneVillager.com

A certain commenter on this topic has directed criticism at my op-ed pieces in the Hamilton Spectator and Toronto Star. Probably unbeknownst to him, it also appears at The Hamiltonian. Here's the links:

http://www.thespec.com/opinion/columns/article/669193--milton-helps-hamilton-dodge-velodrome-bullet

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorialopinion/article/1131457--pan-am-velodrome-could-cost-milton-millions

http://www.thehamiltonian.net/2012/02/did-we-dodge-velodrome-bullet.html

I have no problem with criticism but I'm pretty intolerant of it if it's demeaning and/or dismissive -- particularly in an empty way. That type of twaddle doesn't warrant repeating, which is why I'm going to start by NOT directly quoting this person's posts. After all, why give him the air time ?

Rest assured though that I will address his (mostly empty) criticisms, provide ANALYTICAL DETAILS related to my pieces and provide other insights. And if along the way people raise points that cause me to change my mind, so be it.

I thought Joan was angry when she used to post in all caps, but Bruce, you take it to the next level and beyond. Typically people reserve this type of anger for when they are personally vested in something.

You really seem to be angry with Peter and Howard. It actually comes across as jealousy more then anything else.

You should find an outlet to release this anger. I find riding a bike really helps me.

One common thread I seem to read in this thread, is that those most adamantly against the velodrome seem to be deeply involved in hospital fundraising. I question if the reality of the situation is that they have petitioned and worked hard to fund raise for the expansion of the hospital over a number of years, and feel cheated because within weeks as it were, the velodrome was approved with support from major corporations in the form of significant donations that the hospital committees never saw.

Just my opinion, no facts to back it up, much the blog post that Bruce submitted to the publications.

Bruce Sharp, welcome to the forum!



I might try using some of your colourful/emotional language at Toastmasters! Using it in an analytical article without providing an actual realistic analysis is what I find offensive. The article I posted for Malboeuf is a significantly better article as it avoids the emotional language and focuses on analysis and recommendations. However, that article focuses more on the management of the Pan Am games by TO2015, the Provincial and Federal governments which is a different issue or a larger argument that should be separated from a Velodrome specific thread.
A few challenges;
1. If you know Infrastructure Ontario's record for delivering projects on budget please let us know and include meaningful numbers like the percentage of cost overruns when/if they do go over budget so meaningful conclusions can be drawn.
2. Please provide evidence of the $80,000 salary being a low-ball for the head Velodrome position.
3. How many multi-million dollar fundraising efforts result in zero dollars being raised? Or what percentage of them fall short and to what degree?




I suspect everyone is for good ideas and against bad ideas. You may want to define what good ideas are versus bad ideas as that is a pretty generic statement? Along those lines I am for good analysis and against bad analysis (bad analysis would be gut feel, made up numbers, unrealistic assumptions intended to instill FUD while good analysis is based on comparison of similar factors or situations, using proper estimating methodologies, etc. as used in the Business Case.)




A few people who I have exchange PM's with "know" me. However, since I am searching for work it would not be wise to give potential employers reasons not to hire me such as my disdain for Tim Horton's Latte's and their lasagna casserole, etc. Unfortunately honesty is not always the best policy for getting hired.

Bruce, I'm flattered. I found your whole article empty and dismissive. Your analysis of the Financial Sustainability Strategy was simply this is "funny money". How is that not demeaning/dismissive/empty? I at least tried to give you some partial credit where credit was due.

Notice that in the article I posted for Malboeuf that I mentioned I have no problem if the Velodrome does not get built if TO2015, the Federal/Provincial governments choose to reign in their spending by building a temporary Velodrome. If you really want to kill the Velodrome project perhaps you should be focusing your efforts at the organizers of the PanAm Games since our Municipal Councillors seem to be doing a better job of managing budgets and risk, governing with transparency, etc. The Provincial/Federal level is where the majority of the tax risks lie.

Honestly, I look forward to any Milton Velodrome analysis you put forward (although it would have been significantly more useful prior to the decision being made). I gave a couple of suggestions in my previous post if you need a place to start.

Great articles, Bruce.

It's enlightening to read that an influential town developer is jet-setting cyclists around the world where they're learning such velodrome-planning gems as "Focus on cycling first. Try to do too much and the concept gets diluted." ... but meanwhile back at the ranch our councilors are busy appropriating 3.8M in DC funds that would otherwise have built general purpose gyms for real Miltonians.



Keep fighting the good fight, we're behind you all the way!

Is everyone here out to lunch?

We don't need another playground for the Milton elite!

There are a few of us "average joes" out here trying to make a living in tough economic times. What we DON'T need is any more "white elephants" in Milton. Keep it to the basics. Keep our taxes at a reasonable level.

Another one, Point me in the direction of the other ones.

Zeeshan

How do we know whether a business case exists for the Milton Velodrome? I may have missed it but do not recall that any of the work done by Council, staff and consultants considered if a business case existed. As far as I can ascertain the velodrome in San Francisco was built by a Limited Liability Corporation (LLC) so obviously a business case existed there. I realise we are not SF in terms of demographics and climate however perhaps some work should have been done to determine if a "for profit" business case does exist.

I raise this point for one purpose only and that is to ensure that if this Velodrome does overcome the zoning issues and actually gets built you and your fellow Councillors will at least consider putting the management of the Velodrome out to tender as a possible alternative to creating a not for profit company owned by the Town to manage it!

In another post you stated that " It can cost $200 million for all we care, our risk is capped". I realise that you used exaggeration to make the point as I am sure that you do care on at least 2 levels, firstly as a provincial taxpayer and secondly as a local Councillor who appreciates that there is a link between Capital cost and operating cost! In the latter I refer, at the very least, to depreciation, or as the report terms it "infrastructure reserve".

I also assume that you and your fellow Councillors will ensure that the trips taken by your private sector "partners" to research velodromes (as posted by Bruce Sharp) are not treated as "contributions in kind" to the project.

Martin

_________________
Martin Capper

HVRA member

www.cappercares.ca
www.MartinCapper.com

This project will have a $2.9 million dollar annual impact on the economy. Perhaps you may want to try to kill the Main Street underpass which will cost Milton Taxpayers significantly more and have essentially no economic impact when it is finished other than reducing traffic tie ups when a train passes.

Also, the whole point of this Velodrome proposal is that it keeps Milton taxes at essentially the same level. The risk of increased taxes primarily lies with the Provincial Government and TO2015's handling of the Pan Am Games as a whole. So if municipal taxes stay the same and our Provincial taxes increase to pay for the games I would rather the Velodrome be built in Milton where Milton benefits from the economic impact of the Velodrome instead of Hamilton getting all the benefit. If taxes are your concern direct your complaints to the Pan Am committee.

I think I'll have pizza for lunch.

Martin, first of all I think you provide the most thoughtful comments from the "anti-Velodrome" perspective (I use that term loosely since I am neither pro or anti-Velodrome).

Putting a management tender out sounds like a good idea to me. I don't know the pro's and con's but on the surface it sounds good.

Zeeshan and the other Councillors are doing a good job at mitigating risk for the town by capping the town's risk. I assume nobody wants to see the project go over budget at any level. As you point out and as I've pointed out via the article I posted for Rick Malboeuf, the risk to taxpayers predominantly lies at the Provincial level.

I do agree there is a link between capital cost and operating cost but I did end up disagreeing with you on the depreciation some posts ago, if that is what you are referring to.

Hello folks:

Back to battle the "neutral", anti-anti-velodrome crowd ...

Subject: Op-ed Headline / Lead-In

Question: Why lead with your total claimed amount of $ 18.7 million (total Milton taxpayer dollars -- to be paid, at risk or of otherwise questionable value) and then also inflate it – to $ 100 million in the case of the Hamilton Spectator article and $ 500 million in the case of the Toronto Star article ?

Answer 1: “Don’t bury your lead” -- an old newspaper writing axiom and one that applies to all writing. Also consistent with the admonishment to “tell them what you’re going to tell them, tell them and then tell them what you told them”. Of course there are many other distractions these days and so one should give people a reason to keep reading, rather than lull them to sleep with a slow build-up.

Answer 2: These op-ed pieces appeared in two newspapers (actually only one in print and online, the other just online) with significantly larger populations than Milton. The idea was to give those local readers a proportionate sense of the financial risk. So, a $ 100 million taxpayer whammy in Hamilton or a $ 500 million taxpayer whammy in Toronto is the same as a $ 18.7 million taxpayer whammy in Milton.

Hello folks:

Back to battle the "neutral", anti-anti-velodrome crowd ...

Subject: comments concerning Milton politicians

I would say that in general the whole velodrome process has been ridiculous: a rushed timeframe, hefty report delivered at last second, many loose ends not addressed in advance of the decision, very little consultation, topped off by wilful ignorance of negative taxpayer sentiment. All of this was perpetrated by or going on under the watchful view of senior staff and our elected officials, with the latter all making loud claims of how they’d done their due diligence. So, if our politicians happen to say some less-than-genius things along the way, people should hear about it.

Comparing our mayor to Jean Drapeau: Sure it was a little dramatic but I did say “directionally similar to”. If you think I’m defending myself with semantics, fine. Consider that if you were in attendance at the meeting, you would have heard him say (paraphrasing very slightly), “There is no risk of this costing Milton taxpayers any money”. Sounded like a guarantee … maybe not the “110 %” one a pro hockey player might make but a guarantee nonetheless --- even when everyone already knew that the $ 2.5 million of Milton Educational Village money was not materializing. (More on that later.)

Velodromes could increase (not lighten) load on Milton health care: Well, my source claims to have ridden at three velodrome in western Canada and his safety anecdote comes from his experiences at the Calgary track. Also consider that many of the people using the track and sampling our local health care won’t be locals. Perhaps the philanthropic home builder and his private-jet-setting guests would care to pass on (authentic) anecdotes they heard on their whirlwind tour of the European velodromes.

“What do we know that they don’t know ? The difference is Milton delivers”.: This comment concerned the likelihood of the project coming in on budget – a process Milton will have little or no role in, given that it is Infrastructure Ontario’s responsibility. The only thing demonstrated by that comment was a (hopefully) irrelevant over-confidence.

Hello folks:

Back to battle the "neutral", anti-anti-velodrome crowd ...

Subject: Operating costs - salaries

In my operating cost summary to follow, I will include an additional estimated operating shortfall of $ 61,000. This post provides details on this item.

The town’s salary estimates can be found on page 178 of the report part II PDF file (add link) -- Community Legacy Stream, Scenario 2.

Here’s report part 2:

http://www.milton.ca/MeetingDocuments/Council/agendas2012/rpts2012/Milestone%20005-001-12%20Velodrome_%20Part%20II.pdf

Here’s report part 1:

http://www.milton.ca/MeetingDocuments/Council/agendas2012/rpts2012/Milestone%20005-001-12%20Velodrome.pdf

Total annual salaries (burdened but excluding payroll and direct programming costs) are projected at $ 606,331.

I believe this will be low by at least 10%, i.e. $ 61,000. Here’s why:

Facility Manager / Sales Manager:

This position is by far the most important; it has a nominal salary of $ 80,000. I feel this is quite low, for a number of reasons:

Required specialization: The job requires a high degree of specialization, i.e. not someone who just fell off the back of a turnip truck. This is outlined at least twice in the report, as follows:

Part 1, PDF page 157: “The examples of other velodromes demonstrate that the management of facilities requires specialist expertise – particularly in regard to track management and the ability to meet the needs of the wider range of training, development, community and competition functions”.

Part 1, PDF page 158: “The following principles of management recruitment and operation are important to the success of the facility in operational terms:

1. Recruit management staff with prior experience in operating Velodrome – this may include a
flexible contract provision and expenses involved in relocation of the successful individual;

2. Recruitment of track managers with high level of prior experience in working with national cycling
bodies and the accommodation of elite training and competition needs;

3. Be willing to operate the facility as a National Cycling Centre and not a generic multi-use facility
whereby track and infield are given equal weight and management expertise is limited in the
development of the core function of the building;”

Scarcity: This is reflected by the fact that the consultant stated in his presentation that international search would likely be required to fill this role. Also, there’s only one other Class I (based on the track) track in North America (California). The track manger will therefore have to be poached from that track or a track off the continent or perhaps an assistant manager from another major velodrome can fill the role.

Comparable town salaries: As of 2010, town managers for “Parks and Open Spaces” and “Community Programs” were paid a minimum of $ 106,000 per year. Adjusting at a conservative 2.25 % per year, these 2012 salaries would be $ 111,000. Post-games, 2016 salaries would be $ 121,000. If the track manager is either at this level or reports to this level and also has specialized qualifications, this salary could easily topping $ 100,000.

(Additional points of interest: Other, estimated inflation-adjusted salaries for 2012 include: Chief Administrative Officer @ $ 243,000, Director, Corporate Services and Treasurer @ $ 162,000 and Director, Community Services @ $ 162,000; 2010 salary details can be found at http://www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/publications/salarydisclosure/2011/munic11.pdf)

Commonality of public sector positions paying in excess of this: The 2011/12 salary for an Ontario secondary school teacher with ten years of experience ranges from $ 76,000 to $ 95,000. Elementary school teachers are paid almost as much, with top earners making $ 93,000. For teachers not at the top pay rate, the two months off each summer affords them the opportunity to undertake the course work required to achieve the top pay rate. There are tens of thousands of such roles in the province and this is just one example.

As for the other velodrome positions, unless the facility is a completely separate, non-union shop, the inexorable march of public-sector salary increases will take place. At 2.25 % per year, the 2012 – 2016 compounded increase is 9.3%. It’s also worth noting that the business plan shows salaries not increasing from operation year 1 to year 2.

All Canadians can use it so I suggest it is really a $6.8 Billion dollar velodrome for Canada
And people from all over the world may compete here so really it is a $1.4 Trillion dollar velodrome for citizens of the World