City Centre Park Bowling Centre pared back; BM “on the map”
Posted by Steven Hurdle on June 22, 2010
The Goldstream Gazette is reporting that the “Langford bowling centre [has been] pared back to fit budget.”
New estimates of the design apparently concluded it could not be done for the originally anticipated cost. The number of bowling lanes has been scaled back, and a planned restaurant scuttled entirely. The original plan had federal stimulus money being pared with money Langford had collected, and about $4 million more that the City would borrow. The intention was that the operator of the bowling alley and restaurant would pay the loan. Negotiations continue on whether that can now be accomplished on the scaled-back design. The original operator, a Surrey-based company, has also apparently had unrelated financial troubles recently.
Meanwhile, the Times Colonist is reporting that Bear Mountain now officially ‘on the map’.
Margaret said
Would like any comments or articles related to the bowling alley progress in langford
Sam Snipes said
Within months of Langford council deciding to loan developers funds to build the Spencer Road interchange, BM was defaulting on its debts to HSBC and other creditors. Although one would have to believe that council completed zero due diligence on the loan, at least they can argue that they had no prior knowledge of BM’s finances.
In the case of Xcalibur, I and many other bloggers pointed out that Xcalibur had very public financial difficulties before council decided that loaning them $4M was a smart thing to do.
channel flipper said
Seaton said, “The likely but tentative plan is to build 14 10-pin lanes and six lanes of “boutique bowling” that will either be five-pin, 10-pin or convertible between both.”
How come more 10 pin when all the “bowling action” I ever see on TSN – and they cover what’s hot, right, is 5 pin?
Donald Seaton said
Mr. Snipes could be more clear on what point are you trying to make?
My spin on it, it just proves the Langford has more fiscal Responsibility than you average person. I am sure that most of the other “bloggers” on this site, and possibly you have mortgages, car loans Etc that the banks lent you, and I am sure they did a credit check. Of course it is possible that the City of Langford has also protected themselves. So instead of Shooting your mouth off I would advise get all the facts first before making bold statements.
Sam Snipes said
Donald,
Perhaps the City “protected” themselves but it doesn’t seem that PWC shares that opinion. According to court documents the City is NOT a secured creditor of Bear Mountain and as result would be entitled to trade their millions of dollars in loans, unpaid property taxes and antyhing else outstanding for the grad sum of $500 and a signed release.
If you can point me to anything to support your opinion then I would be happy to see it.
Donald Seaton said
Okay my question to you Mr. Snipe is what does Bear Mountain Have to do with the bowling arena?
Tick Tock said
Sam, i haven’t been following the BM fiasco as closely as you but if your correct and the City is NOT a secured creditor as communicated earlier to all the Langford citizens by the current Mayor and Council then i would assume that there will likely be an investigation into this serious matter .
I’m sure i remember the Mayor stating that we needn’t worry about the loan since if BM defaulted the City of Langford would obtain ownership of some of BM properties to offset the amount owing???
tick tock
Steven Hurdle said
My understanding from the mayor debating detractors of the Spencer Road Interchange loan in Council Chambers was that security would come indirectly, from the City’s ability to put tax liens on Skirt Mountain properties and to force potential buyers to pay those before properties can be sold off. My concern at the time was that tax liens make a property less attractive to a buyer, and therefore harder to sell. I think we may have seen some of that in the many failed attempts to bring in new investors to the Bear Mountain development, the tax liability will surely come up when doing their due diligence. However, in all fairness, it is worth noting that if the mayor is correct the City could conceivably recoup some of our money despite not being a secured creditor, presuming I understood him correctly, and presuming his statements were accurate.
Anonymous said
My understanding is that Langord falls into the category of a preferred creditor now that BM has been placed into bankruptcy. Preferred creditors rank second in priority to secured creditors and it sounds like they fall into the general creditor grouping defined on the PWC website. If this is correct, I would not think that Langford would be able to place a tax lien on any properties owned by any of the bankrupted companies.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bankruptcy_in_Canada
I have not seen the contract between Langford and the Spencer Road participants so it is quite possible that each is liable for the entire amount of any funds advanced which would mean then that Ms. Kramer and/or the other Skirt Mountain developers would pay the outstanding amounts.
I realize that the Mayor said a while ago that Langford taxpayers would not be on the hook for any amounts owing by Bear Mountain but given the recent bankruptcy announcement I would like too see some re-iteration of the same or at least disclosure of the financial statements and loan repayment status.
Anonymous II said
I believe that the process for unpaid property taxes is fairly straightforward. After a certain date following the deadline to pay your property tax, any properties with unpaid taxes owning go to a Tax Sale, and anyone can bid on that property. The property owner then has something like 12 months to pay the back taxes or else the property is transferred to the person who has successfully bid and is willing to pay the taxes. Obviously, it would be terrible financial planning to let a million dollar property be sold for the back taxes owing, so I would imagine that HSBC would ensure that all BM property taxes are paid before this happens.
Tick Tock said
Aren’t we talking about 2 separate but tied issues. There is the money owing to the citizens of Langford for the loan on the Bridge to Nowwhere and the money owing to us from unpaid taxes, i believe, on both BM and Skirt Montain properties. I think that the Mayor should immediately issue a clear and lengthy explanation on what this all means to the tazpayers of Langford. And failing that that the Goldstream Gazette provided a needed service to our community by producing an investigative report on this significant matter.
tick tock tick tock
anonymous II said
If there were/are unpaid taxes, then we should read about it in the Gazette when the City publishes notice of its Tax Sale.
no longer shocked said
Seriously, do you ever see any objective reporting on Langford political issues done by the Goldstream Gazette?
Sam Snipes said
I think the point that Anonymous was trying to make was that in the event of a bankruptcy, taxes outstanding are discharged.
I don’t know if that is the case or not. I remember back in the fall when the two BM properties were put for sale because of outstanding taxes and nobody made an offer on them. At the time I thought that it was funny as the worst case would be that the buyer received their money back plus interest. Perhaps there is truth to the comment then.
Anonymous II said
Sam – what I see in Anonymous’s July 9th post and throughout this thread is the suggestion that the taxpayers of Langford will never see property taxes owing if the person/corporation who owes the taxes is in bankruptcy. This is ridiculous. There is nothing in the wikipedia article cited that speaks to either property taxes or corporate bankruptcy. I am almost certain that as Bear Mountain is dissolved into bankruptcy that any outstanding taxes (this includes property taxes and PST/GST/HST payments) are to be paid in full. I have never heard of a government being left holding the bag on outstanding taxes because of bankruptcy.
Sam Snipes said
Anonymous II
One of the reason HSBC gave for wanting to bankrupt the companies right away was because the Federal Government had imposed a $3.5M GST assessment. It sounds like PWC believes that the GST owing would revert to an unsecured claim during a bankruptcy.
You can verify this by reading section 7.8 of the Monitors 3rd report.
Jebby Deringer said
Great we’re on the map! Why do we want to be on the map again? Maybe we should make a music video proclaiming how great we are. We’ll drive around in hummers with giant chrome rims and throw money at each other.
Anonymous said
The new BM CEO was quoted in the TC as saying that they have now paid the current year property taxes and some of the amounts outstanding.
Anonymous said
As I surf this site once every couple of months and read all the negative comments over and over by the same group of posters, I often wonder if these people will ever get a life and contribute something positive to this community. It seems that they waste a lot of time continuously bashing the MAYOR & Council and a few of the Developer’s who actually have made significant efforts and contributions to improve this beautiful community.
no longer shocked said
As I surf this site once very so often, and read the few negative comments directed towards people interested enough to be concerned about Langford and voice their opinion, I often wonder why more people do not get involved in their own community.It seems too many people trust elected officials to have everyone’s best interests at heart, instead of a few elite developers. Many, many people make significant efforts and contributions to this beautiful community which do not include logging and blasting. Beauty is not cement and blacktop. Too bad “anonymous” wastes a lot of time continuing to bash these people who have an alternative point of view.