Money in the kitty?
Posted by Steven Hurdle on November 9, 2009
In a comment yesterday, “JH getting caught up on the GG” said:
I was suurprised to read:
Langford Seeks Sportsplex Funds in Wed., Nov. 4th GG p. A5
http://www.bclocalnews.com/vancouver_island_south/goldstreamgazette/news/67254962.html
I thought the deal with the Federal infrastructure stimulus spending money was “shovel-ready” projects, where the local government already had their 1/3 portion in place, would get funding. So why is Mayor Stew Young quoted as saying, “the City is trying to get future facility operator Xcalibur Bowling to pay $4.46 million to build the bowling centre.” And Councillor Lanny Seaton suggests, “If Xcalibur doesn’t come up with the funding, the City will need to go through a counter-petition or referendum process to get public permission to borrow the money.”
Since when does the City of Langford need new money, and possibly borrowed money, to complete a project that been on the books for at least 2 years?!
Once I figured out that the “GG” in “JH getting caught up on the GG” referred to “Goldstream Gazette” and not the “Governor General”, I was quite intriqued by the comment. I’ve converted it into a post because I suspect it may trigger other comments, and because “Reader News” doesn’t do it justice since the reader was making an (from what I can tell quite astute) comment. I too understood that all projects had to be shovel ready both in the sense of legislative and zoning approval in place, and the local portion of the funds already in hand and allocated, but I must admit I hadn’t made the connection when reading the Gazette article. Thank you for your comment, JH.
Steven Hurdle said
In an informal conversation with Councillor Lanny Seaton after last night’s PZ&A meeting, I was told that while you do have to show that you have all zoning, regulatory, and environmental hurdles in place for a project to get funding from the federal government, that you in fact do not have to show that you have funding in advance.
He indicated that if a deal with the private sector cannot be reached that they will go to the electorate, either through a referendum or a counter petition, to secure the millions needed for Langford’s share of the costs.
Sam Snipes said
In a perfect world we would have built up a capital reserve to fund projects such as this but that well is dry. I find it hard to believe that the Feds and the Province went to all of the effort to fund this project and announce it as the largest in the region without any hint that Langford could actually fund its share.
If this is a project that the ratepayers decide they want to fund then I would prefer to see Langford borrow from the MFA or the Feds and do it properly. Although it sounds attractive having the leaseholder loan the money to the city, you have to wonder what sort of the deal the city is going to get. If I were the operator I would demand a huge premium. There is far too much uncertainly in any new venture to try and anticipate what the outcome might be 66 years down the road. Free rent for money up front might sound good in theory, but the taxpayer will still have to maintain the facility anfor the duration of the term.