HawthorneVillager.com

Perkins basically supports the reasonable Smedmor analysis I previously referred to. It is interesting to note you did not mention Perkins support for world-class athletic facilities which was the remainder of the paragraph you quoted above.

I think a lot of people support the idea of high performance facilities ...

EXCEPT it should be federal (33 million people) and provincial (13 million people) taxpayer shoulders that bear 100 % (except for the $ 3.8 million of DC money and the $ 116 K of annual shortfall, consistent with a similar, standalone rec facility) of this ...

NOT narrow local (0.1 million people) taxpayer shoulders ...

AND the costs include capital AND operating costs -- the real ones, not highly-suspect, overly-optimistic, wishful numbers.

Because I chose a few quotes that summed up his message and didn't post the entire article -- it is linked for everyone's review.

And besides, you took his quote out of context. The entire context is as follows:

Thanks Bruce for your insightful analysis of the costs for building and maintaining the Velodrome. The Velodrome is an example of how government initiatives end up in the "red". Council and Town Staff, in their haste to approve the Velodrome, did not do due diligence in regard to the financial liabilities the town and taxpayer will face entering into a multimillion dollar project without having definitive sources of money for the entire project(not vague promises from fund raising, illusive in-kind donations, etc) As you point out, the 2.5M from Laurier is not forthcoming, and it appears that, at least, two of the alternatives to raise this money (contingency strategy) is creative bookkeeping and the money will come from the town(taxpayer).

At least one Councillor states that Milton is protected from escalating costs. This does not appear to be the case. The Velodrome started out with the town committing 17.6M (44% of 40M). However, this is strictly for the Capital Cost of building the Velodrome The preconstrution and post constrution costs (site work) are additional costs which the Town is totally responsible for (estimated 2.2M and perhaps more since there is no
detailed projection costs). The Sierra report warns against the dangers of escalating costs (Section 8 Risk Analysis), and this is applicable to the site work.

It is not too late for Council and, hopefully with leadership from the Mayor to reverse the potential financial nightmare Milton could face. Most of you are aware of the Star article Pan Am Games Are Running IntoToruble". The advice by Charles Smedmor, a forensic accountant, should be heeded by Council, and Council should step forward to alleviate the financial pressures on Pan Am 2015 and assure the success of the games by promoting the move of the Velodrome to the CNE. The Milton Taxpayer could be in for a double "wammy"--covering the costs for the Velodrome here in Milton and paying for the Pan Am Games deficit. There is only one taxpayer.

Thank you Joan. The numbers make for dull reading but they are my take on where things are headed. It's a travesty that we don't have transparent details from town staff and worse yet, that the council is unable or unwilling to provide appropriate oversight. They are gambling with our money and the deck us stacked against us. I see this (disconcerting numbers and opaque and/or deliberately misleading processes) all the time in my day job.

Over the next few days I hope to provide further analysis on other items.

Hi Joan,

I don't know who you are, but you have expressed my concern.

For a town of 70,000 tax payers to be burden has me GREATLY concerned. Don't they have enough work to do, keeping us in good fiscal shape during this economic slowdown?

Keepin' it real with insights that prove that everything is not necessarily as it meets the eye.

The Pan Am games people have made prominent Curt Harnett's support of Milton's decision to go ahead with the velodrome. The Milton Champion also trumpeted Curt's pronouncement.

Curt's an ex-track cycling legend and so would be happy at the prospect of having somewhere to ride ...

... but maybe his wife Victoria Winter -- a Pan Am games director -- put him up to it. Either that or he sleeps on the couch.

Just wondering if Curt and Victoria live in Milton. I would guess not. They wouldn't want to live in a community where taxes will increase to pay for building the Velodrome and then for operating the facility.

It doesn't take long for costs to increase when talking about the Velodrome. On Dec. 5, 2011 Town Staff requested a capital budget be established to undertake the Business Plan and any other related analysis and this budget was not to exceed $95 000. On January 30th, Town Staff asked that this budget be increased by another $120 000, making the total monies put toward the Velodrome at $215 000. This is a 125% increase, and Council readily approved this increase. Is this an example of the cost overruns referred to in the Sierra Report? Just wondering if Town Staff and Council have projected the potential cost overruns on the pre and post construction costs, and other costs which are not considered capital costs to build the Veldorome. The figure for site work is 2.2M and if there is a 125% cost overrun Milton taxpayers are on the hook for a frightening 4.95M. I'm hoping Council will see the potential cost dangers to the Milton Taxpayer and seriously work with Pan Am 2015 to moving the Velodrome to the CNE grounds.

badger / Charles,

Very interesting information. Not a general fan of travelling to downtown Toronto (especially anywhere near the Rogers Centre) and so only thing I question is island location (though I did like the nod to Ned Hanlan).

As you point out, this process has zero transparency. At least on that point, it's unfortunately a good fit with Milton.

Regards,

Bruce Sharp

posted today:

CANADA RISING TO WORLD POWER STATUS IN TRACK CYCLING

http://www.tsn.ca/olympics/story/?id=388527

Milton politicians ignore broad negative sentiment ... "we know better ... than the people who elected us" ...

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorialopinion/article/1135373--why-can-t-voters-fire-toronto-mayor-rob-ford

Bruce, so far the majority of people I spoke with in ward 7 on the topic after talking about the costs, benefits and risks have been for it. You can also see the slim majority on the online poll here.

From what I heard, the public meeting some councillors held had a similar result.

.

Hey Rick when you spoke to these people did you also explain to them that it could end up costing the Town of Milton millions of dollars should the fund raising not be as successful as anticipated or if there were cost overuns in the construction, and did you also explain to them that we would be responsible for the operating costs for the next 20 years even if this facility proves to be a money loser. Or did you just repeat the overly optimistic staff recommendation. As for the online poll 4 votes difference despite the pro velo drome slant of the question ?

I was at that public meeting and I can tell you the majority of those who attended were opposed, you neglected to mention the town web site poll that showed more than 60 percent of respondents were opposed vs 30 per cent in favor the balance undecided and that is with a very pro velodrome slant provided as information on the town web site.

Rick Malboeuf
Councillor Ward 4

Yeah, and the majority of people Tony Lambert talks to are for photo radar.

Push polling at its best ....