1947 replies to this topic

[Midnightly]

considering the new rec center will most likely take up more ground space then the current center, adding housing will only eat in at the green space/play space, underground parking is smart people have been saying that for years, but ontop of that structure could very easily be green space/play space over housing it could be a place to put the tennis courts or basketball courts or kids play structure all items that are very actively used.. and if you add 6 stories of housing what about the parking for those people living in the structure...

[spanky123]

Interesting info in the agenda for the upcoming council meeting on Thursday. https://pub-victoria...ocumentId=16036

 

If you skip down to page 250 you can read the various responses to the Mayor's numerous funding requests for Crystal Pool. Every one has been REJECTED.

 

There was an interesting paragraph in the response from the Province.

 

 In your follow-up letter, you have indicated that the City has no plans to initiate a referendum on external borrowing. While the City has the authority to make such a decision, large-scale projects that demonstrate both public and financial support through a referendum (or some form of public approval process) are identified as lower risk under the program assessment

 

So Helps has no plans for a referendum yet other than a contingent $6M from the feds she has no other sources of funding. Be interesting to see how this plays out and if she continues to spend millions on planning and design.

Edited by spanky123, 13 June 2018 - 06:23 AM.

[Kungsberg]

^ I like the letter on page 232, too. I would agree with the opinion of not losing overall park space, and would have signed that petition like 305 other people did...

[spanky123]

^ I like the letter on page 232, too. I would agree with the opinion of not losing overall park space, and would have signed that petition like 305 other people did...

 

Typical complaint about a complete lack of engagement and respect for stakeholders.

 

It is clear what is happening. The Mayor has a series of projects that she wants to enact and the strategy is to ram them through and apologize after the fact. Clearly she believes that once the bridge, no barrier housing, bike lanes and pool are built, people will be happy (or at least accept the fate) and the criticism will fade. 

[Mike K.]

It's three ministries that rejected the funding, right? One provincial and two federal?

[nagel]

Looking at the 3 letters, none of them are actually rejections.  2 pass the buck back to the province, who runs the program with fed funding, and the province admits they aren't ready to process applications yet.

[spanky123]

Looking at the 3 letters, none of them are actually rejections.  2 pass the buck back to the province, who runs the program with fed funding, and the province admits they aren't ready to process applications yet.

 

In politics it is called the "slow no". Nobody wants to hurt feelings or offend a potential supporter so they don't say no but you will never get to a yes either.

 

Like the letter that suggests the City apply for an alternate funding option that expired the same day the letter was received!

 

You have to wonder how many of these rejections are a result of the Mayor's hardball tactics with the Province and Feds on the homeless file. 

Edited by spanky123, 13 June 2018 - 07:47 AM.

[spanky123]

It's three ministries that rejected the funding, right? One provincial and two federal?

 

Correct and from what I gather one of these ($1M) showed on the most recent quarterly report as "pending".

Edited by spanky123, 13 June 2018 - 07:46 AM.

[Mike K.]

That's it, just $1 million?

[nagel]

In politics it is called the "slow no". Nobody wants to hurt feelings or offend a potential supporter so they don't say no but you will never get to a yes either.

 

Like the letter that suggests the City apply for an alternate funding option that expired the same day the letter was received!

 

You have to wonder how many of these rejections are a result of the Mayor's hardball tactics with the Province and Feds on the homeless file. 

I didn't take it as a slow no but the result is essentially the same.  The provincial rejection due to their program not being up and running is the death nail for this before the election.  It will be on a new mayor and council to take it forward now.

[spanky123]

That's it, just $1 million?

 

They have a conditional $6M from the gas tax fund but that was tied to Provincial funding which does not appear to be forthcoming. The $6M for the bikes lanes was also rejected so there is no bait and switch available here. The quarterly reporting only showed one pending application for $1M which now also appears to be off the table. It looks like the City has been applying for other programs as well and at least two of those have now replied. 

 

Bottom line is that there appears to be no unconditional grants or funds for the pool so at this point in time the City would have to cough up the full amount. 

 

I am happy to be corrected in this assumption, enough people read VV that I am sure that info is readily available to refute me if I am wrong. My immediate concern is the $5M-$6M we are paying to design, consult and plan a pool for which there appears to be no chance of building without a referendum which the Mayor has in writing to the Province ruled out.

Edited by spanky123, 13 June 2018 - 08:05 AM.

[Nparker]

...Bottom line is that there appear to be no unconditional grants or funds for the pool so at this point in time the City would have to cough up the full amount...

As much as a new recreation facility would be nice (especially less than 5 minutes from my home) there is no way the local taxpayers should be burdened with this sort of expense after the fiasco that was the JSB project. It's a hard NO from me if this ever gets to referendum.

[spanky123]

As much as a new recreation facility would be nice (especially less than 5 minutes from my home) there is no way the local taxpayers should be burdened with this sort of expense after the fiasco that was the JSB project. It's a hard NO from me if this ever gets to referendum.

 

And I think that is exactly why the Mayor has said that it won't go to a referendum. The worst thing for her political career would be to champion an effort and then have it fail. If she thought she could push it through then we would be having it this fall as originally planned. I think that plan B was to spend $5M -$10M, get some 3rd party money and then have a referendum on a smaller amount using the argument that we have already spent x so why not y. With funding falling apart even that plan won't fly. Plan C seems to be to get money for affordable / no barrier housing and then try and pinch some of that to fund the pool and rec centre as part of a multi-use project.

 

What is really interesting about the letter / petition that Kungsberg references is that even the locals who use the facility state that they would accept an interruption in service in order to keep the park. I think that really reflects priorities and how much the facility is valued. Essentially people like the pool and would rather have one than not, but it is not on the top of their list of things to spend big bucks on.

Edited by spanky123, 13 June 2018 - 08:20 AM.

[Citified.ca]

Thank you for the heads-up, spanky123. We've created a recap of the provincial and federal ministry responses to the City's funding requests.

 

 

Victoria's $70 million Crystal Pool replacement not on government funding radar

https://victoria.cit...-funding-radar/

[spanky123]

You are a machine Mike! Great article in such a short period of time.

[Mike K.]

[Nparker]

Ironic that "final plans" are being put in place even as all sources of funding seem to be washing away.

[SgtNeonPanda]

Perhaps the Province is waiting to see how municipal elections shake out before funding any big capital projects, lest local priorities change? 

[Mike K.]

Exactly! And with the 2019 federal election the Liberals’ funding announcements will need to be critically strategic and timed with precision. But then what happens if they lose?

In a roundabout way the province and the feds have forced Helps and council to make this upcoming election about yet another major issue, and you can bet the comment from Robinson over Victoria’s decision to skip a referendum was not a slight of hand or an innocent aside, it was a very clear message, perhaps even a directive.

[Nparker]

Unless the CoV has some sort of secret cash reserves, if no other level of government funding is received, they cannot borrow this much money without taxpayer approval - correct?

...Long-term borrowing by local governments cannot be undertaken without...elector approval...in a majority of cases when a local government seeks to engage in a long-term liability. Elector approval can be sought in one of two ways. One way is to receive the approval of electors by holding a referendum. The second option is to hold an “alternative approval process.”...

http://www.cscd.gov....e/borrowing.htm