Pyramid Recreation Centre Scandal

Pyramid Recreation Centre Cost To Taxpayers

2006-09-02T08:38:00.000-07:00

At the August 22, 2005 council meeting the St Marys Association for Responsible Town Government presented following estimates for the Pyramid Recreation Centre

$ 1.4 million each year
of added expenditure to the ratepayers, made up of:

$ 1,000,000 per year net capital cost
- the capital cost will be about $ 1.2 million annually assuming a 5.5% interest rate and no cost overruns
- the Town will collect $ 200,000 per year in donations ($4 million in total donations over the 20 year term of the loan)

$ 400,000 per year operating deficit, based on the Goderich and Aylmer experience

$ 1.4 million represents a 20% tax increase as current tax revenues are about $ 6.9 million.

St Marys Association for Responsible Town Government

2006-09-01T07:48:00.000-07:00

At the August 22, 2005 council meeting the following reasons were given for forming the St Marys Association for Responsible Town Government and what its role will be:

Council’s indifference to the petitions led to a group meeting and a decision to create a ratepayers association. The goal is monitor Council’s performance, review and comment on Council initiatives before they go forward and suggest action plans to Council. The perception the ratepayers have is that their concerns were largely ignored in the Pyramid Centre decision so the association will allow a powerful unified voice. The next council term is four years and as our review of the Municipal Act shows, Council receives a blank cheque book as soon as they are elected. The ratepayers association is an essential check on Council decision making.

Pyramid Centre's Lack of Community Support

2006-08-22T07:21:00.000-07:00

In the August 16, 2006 issue of the St Marys Journal Argus

St Marys Ontario Town Council (Mayor Tony Winter, Councillors David Cunningham, Robert Edney, Margaret Luna, Bill Osbourne, Bruce Symons and Gerry Teahen) wrote:

A survey that Council commissioned told us that 94% of residents were aware of the recreation centre proposal, with the majority in favour of the expansion.

Mel King corrected St Marys Council:

The survey is by Monteith Brown Planning Consultants.

On page 13 of their June 2005 report the consultants wrote:

"42% of those residents who were aware of the proposal spoke in favour of the expansion in some form or another while 37% were unsure. 22% of the residents who were familar with the proposal did not support the proposed expansion."

The 42% in favour in some form or another would include those who just want a second ice pad.

Andrew Atlin and John Munro added:

Council never had clear mandate from the people and the 1,175 petitions received to date confirm this statement.

The Pyramid Centre's Financing

2006-08-21T18:15:00.000-07:00

In the August 16, 2006 issue of the St Marys Journal Argus

St Marys Town Council wrote:

We asked an independent accounting firm Deloitte & Touche to take a look at the Town’s finances and obligations. They created a viable financial strategy to pay for the upgrades, which ensures we have money to continue our regular work, move forward with other projects and meet future commitments. Deloitte & Touche also evaluated the cost of the building, the cost to run it, and how to pay for it. The responsible plan they put together was presented to the public on March 9, 2006.

Andrew Atlin / John Munro's ratepayer group wrote in reply:

Deloitte Touche never recommended that you go forward. Their report solely considered where Council what funds would be required to allow the project to go forward and where the Town might be able to access these funds. The Town had an operating loss of $ 341,000 from the 2005 FIR. All the surplus monies Deloitte Touche identified were used to fund current operations in 2005 and still were not enough to keep the Town from red ink.

Town debt payments from the project will require the taxpayers to pay at least $ 1 million per year for 20 years even with current fundraising considered. Aylmer and Goderich data show that the operating loss will be at least $ 400,000 per year more than our current level. Therefore, the total cost of the project to the municipality will be at least $ 1.4 million per year. The Town will raise $ 6.9 million in taxes in 2006 so the tax increase for every year from 2008 onwards will be at least 20% per year. Council has no evidence to the contrary.

The Pyramid Centre's Lack of Government Grants

2006-08-20T16:15:00.000-07:00

In the August 16, 2006 issue of the St Marys Journal Argus

St Marys Town Council wrote:

Recreation buildings are owned by the Town of St. Marys. It is our responsibility, not the Province’s, to maintain them in a respectable state.

In recent years, the province has increased our grants to help with the costs of roads, bridges, water systems, land ambulance and public health services. Increased grants in those critical areas mean we have more capacity to bring our recreation facilities up to modern standards.

The Province has also responded to the Town’s need for a cost-effective way to fund this project. The OSIFA program provides financing that is low-cost with a fixed interest rate for long-term. While this is not a grant, it is provincial help that allows us to improve the quality of our public services. These services contribute to a high quality of life and a strong, prosperous economy.

Andrew Atlin / John Munro on behalf of a ratepayer group wrote in reply:

No municipal government would consider a project of this size without exploring whether grants were available. The other levels of government expect to participate in major infrastructure projects. The SuperBuild and COMRIF programs were specifically designed to help Towns like ours. You dismissed this possibility even when one of your colleagues suggested it.

Fundraising and the St Marys Pyramid Centre

2006-08-19T18:45:00.000-07:00

In the August 16, 2006 issue of the St Marys Journal Argus

St Marys Town Council wrote:

Volunteers have developed a comprehensive community-driven fundraising campaign that includes local service clubs, organizations, user groups, corporations and individuals. The fundraising committee is working together for the community to create recreational opportunities and strengthen the overall appeal of St. Marys to new and existing residents. By raising money now to support the centre, we are reducing the amount of your tax dollars required.

Andrew Atlin and John Munro on behalf of a ratepayer group wrote in reply:

A fundraising team needs a chance. They need a target and a receptive community. Council’s approach makes their task much more difficult. Aylmer and Goderich have had no discernable improvement in their economic position following the building of their projects. Both the Galloway and Monteith reports did not link any growth improvement to the project.

Timing of the Pyramid Centre Project

2006-08-18T07:18:00.000-07:00

In the August 16, 2006 issue of the St Marys Journal Argus

St Marys Town Council wrote:

The various components of the Pyramid Recreation Centre are proceeding all at once in order to achieve significant savings and economies of scale. For example, by twinning the existing arena there will be an estimated 50% savings per ice pad on payroll and utility costs, when compared to a single pad facility. Twin pad arena may also augment revenue streams with special evenets and tournaments. The construction odf a pool in the same location as the two rinks will offset the operating costs associated with the aquatic components. Landscaping and parking lot improvements will also be finalized in the project. It is important to note that the baseball diamonds and soccer fields will remain in their present location.

Andrew Atlin / John Munro on behalf of a ratepayers group replied:

Council may have received a wonderful price. The problem remains that a great price on a Porsche only works if you can make the payments. The Town can’t afford the payments.

The Pyramid Centre's Impact on Other Projects

2006-08-17T07:06:00.000-07:00

In the August 16, 2006 issue of the St Marys Journal Argus

St Marys Town Council wrote:

The Pyramid Recreation Centre project will not impact on Council's ability to move forward with other projects to our community.

Currently, we are negotiating with Perth South to acquire land necessary to help attract industry. Purchased land will be funded from reserves and then sold at market rates in parcels that best meet the needs of the individual industry. Land is a solid investment ans a valuable asset within the Town's financial portfolio. Council does not plan to raise taxes to achieve a boundary change and acquire industrial land.

Later this year, we will conclude the upgrades to our wells that were required out of the 2003 Walkerton legislation. Our well supply will be fully compliant with modern standards. The total cost of the project is $3.3M. Two-thirds of this cost
was paid by the Provincial and Federal governments through the OSTAR program. The Town's share of the project is $1.1M and will be fully paid out of water rates.

Andrew Atlin / John Munro's ratepayer group wrote in reply:

Frankly, Council has no idea whether they can afford to do any other infrastructure projects. They don’t know whether the recreation project will cost more than they estimated and they don’t know what the final interest rate will be on the loan.

If the interest rate on the complex and operating centre loans goes to 6.5% the Town is out of borrowing capacity. The level of Town debt per household after the project is finished will be double that of any other community in southern
Ontario we have looked at.

Note: St Marys debt was compared to Chatham, London, Guelph, Aylmer, Stratford, St Thomas and Brantford. The figures can be seen at www.freewebs.com/stmaryspyramid/ad.htm

Inside Stratford / Perth Editorial

2006-08-07T08:43:00.000-07:00

Richard Roth in this week's Inside Stratford / Perth writes in his editorial:

The only thing I want to note is that my central position is that a town council in a municipality the size of St Marys simply cannot ignore a petition bearing (now) well over 1,100 names. Don (Gibson) makes very good points about public meetings of the past, but none of this explains why, if the public was so well informed, so many people are now clamouring for more information.

My understanding is that the Deloitte study is open to question. Perhaps handing out something like this out at a public meeting is a little too much, too late. Can a layperson understand it? At least one of the protest group members is an accountant, I believe, and perhaps this is why the Deloitte report is not being treated by the group as if it arrived carved on two stone tablets. I don't know.

I certainly respect those who want a rec complex, but I still feel the protestors have raised some good points, and I believe a petition representing almost as many voters as cast their ballots for the mayor is something that needs to be addressed. This tally is equivalent to the government of Canada being presented with millions of names. If this doesn't represent a groundswell of concern, I don't know what does.

In Wild Wild St Marys

2006-08-02T07:47:00.000-07:00

Andrea Macko in her editorial in the St Marys Journal Argus writes:

The Pyramid Centre. Will it or won't it be built? Construction has began, but if Andrew Atlin and company has their way, it just may not be. Like it or not, we seemed to be past it once and for all, and now we're back in a quagmire.

The showdown is comparable to one of those old Technicolor Westerns, except that Main Street has been replaced by the arena's parking lot and it's difficult to tell who's wearing the black Stetson and who's wearing the white one. You can almost hear the rattlesnakes and see the tumbleweed blowing by as each side sizes each other up and tries to guess at motives and who will draw first.

Town councillors are bound by an informal gag order, like kidnapped womenfolk in their calico dresses stashed away at the saloon, while the townspeople search high and low for answers from Town staff, who have provided measured responses through ads and, some would say, silence. Atlin is the rogue, with sparkling spurs and seemingly endless rounds of ammo just waiting to be fired.

But the ending may not be Hollywood-perfect. Feelings have been hurt, opinions ignored and lovers of 'The Town Worth Living In' scorned. Room for a sequel? We'll see come election time in November.

Inside Stratford / Perth Editorial

2006-07-29T06:34:00.000-07:00

In an editorial in this week's Inside Stratford / Perth on the St Marys Ontario Pyramid Centre, editor Richard Roth writes:

"(Andrew Atlin's) group does not oppose the recreation complex for the sake of opposition. It has assembled troubling numbers to show the town is precariously close to going over its provincially approved debt load with this recreation complex. In fact, according to Atlin and others, the municipality can't help but go over the top if it honours the other commitments it has made."

Roth continues:

"The issue is, has the town done its due diligence? Has it looked forward enough? More to the point, why doesn't it pause, take a breath, and explain this situation to its citizenry based on the figures that have come forward? Or is it unable to explain?

"As Atlin noted, there are more than 1,000 names on a petition asking council to put the brakes on this complex until some pointed questions are answered. It is not an unreasonable request. In fact, it is a particularly compelling request considering it is backed by almost as many names as votes that were cast in favour of the mayor during the last election. A petition representing that many voters is one that must be taken seriously if 'representative' democracy is to have any meaning at all.

"Council needs to have a full and open meeting on this issue, allow citizen input, carry out a sensible debate and then - and only than - can it be morally justified in proceeding with the recreation complex.

Opposition to Pyramid Centre Grows

2006-07-25T07:53:00.000-07:00

Debra van Brenk reports in today's London Free Press:

'A citizens' group planning to speak to town council tonight says it has amassed 1,000 names -- in this town of about 6,000 -- opposed to the new arena and indoor pool.

And if council doesn't heed its concerns and slow down, the group may seek a court injunction, said group leader Andrew Atlin.

Van Brenk continues by quoting Andrew Atlin:

"Clearly the tax burden is going to be onerous,"

"(It) could bring us considerably to our knees" and leave the community unable to afford road, bridge and waterline repairs.

"Nobody's saying the dream isn't a good dream," he said.

"The reality is where do we go from here in allowing the community to do those other things?"

Open Letter From Andrew Atlin

2006-07-21T15:34:00.000-07:00

Published in the St Marys Journal Argus July 19

Please accept this letter as an open letter to all the residents of the Town of St Marys. We have one last opportunity to challenge the financial merits of the recreation-borrowing bylaw. Council feels that it is in compliance with Ontario Municipal Board borrowing limits and feels that they can go forward in good conscience. However a group of residents is concerned that this compliance is simply a temporary condition.

The facts are as follows:

Maximum allowable borrowings per the 2006 debt limit from the province: $24.8 million (assuming 7 per cent borrowing rates);

Current borrowings per the Town: $3.5 million (includes salt shed debenture in 2005);

Amount available to borrow: $21.3 million.

How much have we committed to borrow now:
Recreation centre: $14.0 million.
Municipal operation centre: $2.5 million.
Water plant upgrade: $1.1 million.

Total new commitments: $17.6 million.

So the net position is that right now we have about $3.7 million of borrowing left below our maximum as of today.

But what about the other identified needs on Council's list of capital projects:

1. Industrial land. The Council has begun to make inquiries to purchase industrial development land off of James Street South. Current estimates are that $5 million should be set aside to accumulate an acceptable amount of acreage. Most business people agree this need is crucial to allow the Town to grow its tax base and develop more jobs.

2. Phase II of the water plant upgrade. Originally, Council felt that about $3 million of improvements were needed to meet provincial requirements. Therefore, we can expect about $2 million more to be spent on this project. Water is clearly one Town resource we cannot trifle with:

3. Others? The Town will be out of borrowing capacity when these projects are factored in.

At the same time, debt servicing will go from about $500,000 per year currently to about $2 million per year when the new commitments are factored in. The Town currently has about $10 million of tax and user fee revenues. That means we will need to realize another $1.5 million of revenue every year - a 15 per cent shortfall - for the next twenty years to maintain the status quo. We know many individuals have pledged support to the project and this commitment will reduce the pressure for the first few years but what happens for the next 15. The succeeding councils will have to choose between reduced services or substantial tax increases and we won't have any room to borrow for essential capital improvements.

What can we do?

I'm part of a group of residents who have engaged a municipal law specialist out of our own pocket. We've already spent money to challenge the Council's process before the town reaches the point of no return. We ask you to forward your letters of concern to our member of provincial parliament, John Wilkinson and to John Maddox, regional director of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs in London. Both of these individuals are the check on a municipality when its financial management is suspect.

We suggest you copy Council with your letter to ensure they understand you're concerned with their actions. To date, they have ignored this argument but St Marys is their town too and I believe they may have a change of opinion if they hear from enough of us.

However, they may still proceed. We have one last option open to us. We can apply to an Ontario Court to get an injunction to stop digging by July 24, 2006. The problem with this option is that it may cost more than $20,000. Each of the current members of the residents group has committed $200 to the court challenge. We would welcome any contributions up to $200 each to build sufficient funds to file the injunction if necessary. We will return the funds in full if they are not needed.

What do we want to see?

Most of us are indifferent as to whether the project is built. We want an honest debate during the upcoming election campaign to hear whether the project is built and how it is financed. We don't presume to know the overall sentiment concerning the merits of the project but we feel that the majority of residents are against unnecessary tax increases and hasty decision making processes.

We will respect the wishes of majority of our residents. If the community elects a slate of candidates who want to go forward immediately after being elected so be it.

We have prepared a petition for residents to sign which runs as an ad in the paper twice to gather an indication for the support for delaying construction on the project. We would like people to respond within one week if they support the petition.

We will forward the petitions to Council and John Wilkinson's office.

If you want more information concerning our argument or want to support the cause please contact me, Andrew Atlin, andrewatlinca @ rogers.com, 519-284-2654 or John Munro, jmunro @ webfinancialsolutions.com, 519-284-4224

Yours truly

Andrew Atlin
St Marys, Ontario

Greg Sorbara in St Marys Ontario

2006-07-19T21:40:00.000-07:00

Today, Ontario Minister of Finance Greg Sorbara attended a sod-turning ceremony for St Marys Pyramid Centre. The province is making no contribution to the project and Sorbara later told Donal O'Connor of the Stratford Beacon Herald that Ontario is unlikely to make a contribution once construction gets underway. Through its Ontario Strategic Infrastructure Financing Authority, the Ontario Government is responsible for making it easy for councils such St Marys to accumulate large amounts of debt.

The original Living Life Mission Project called for the province to contribute a third or about $5-million. No provincial program existed then or exists now for funding this kind of project. Just 9 months ago, St Marys Council Voted $124,000 for Architect Garwood-Jones and Hanham in the October 25, 2005 council meeting because Councillor Gerry Teahen said the architect's design was needed in order to get provincial funding, "we can't submit something to the Ministry without the drawings. Until we get that back we can't move any further ahead on this."

St Marys Ontario taxpayers will bear the brunt of the cost for the Pyramid Recreation Centre.

St Marys Pyramid Project Delay Petition

2006-07-19T07:57:00.000-07:00

To: St MarysTown Council and Ontario Municipal Affairs

I ask the Council of St. Marys to delay construction on the Pyramid Project until an independent body confirms the Town can afford the expenditure and the community can have a public discussion and vote whether they want the project to proceed.

To sign this petition go to www.petitiononline.com/07182006

Council Awards Tender

2006-06-27T11:59:00.000-07:00

By a vote of 5 to 1 council awarded a tender to Norlon Builders London Ltd to build the Pyramid Center. Councillors Cunningham, Edney, Luna, Teahen and Symons voted for the motion, Councillor Osbourne opposed, Mayor Winter was on vacation in Arizona.

The notion of St Marys Council deciding the best contractor to build the pool and the ice rink was not discussed. Separate Contracts for Pool and Ice Rink outlines that project architect Bob Prince wanted to present council with bids for each of
the major elements of the Pyramid Recreation Centre.

Tenders

2006-06-22T22:09:00.000-07:00

The tenders for the construction of the Pyramid Recreation Centre were announced today. The contractors and their bids were:
Norlon Builders (London) $11,672,607
Southside Group (London) 12,238,000
Melloul-Blamey Construction (Waterloo) 12,290,000
Reid & Deleye Contractors (Courtland) 12,417,762
K & L Construction (London) 12,502,177
M J Dixon Construction (Mississauga) 12,768,310
H.I.R.A. Ltd General Contractors (St Thomas) 13,577,101

Cunningham Says LLP Opponents Narrow-Minded

2006-06-18T11:07:00.000-07:00

In this week's St Marys Independent Jack Coddington writes he thinks 80% of St Marys, Ontario would vote against funding an indoor pool. Councillor Dave Cunningham opened the door to speculation on the extent of opposition to the Living Life Project at a March 28 council meeting.

In the April 5 issue of the Journal Argus Jennifer Leslie reported Councillor Cunningham as saying that in his contact with the public, he observed a 50/50 split for and against the Living Life Project. Cunningham went on to say 'People are somewhat narrow-minded and can't see the benefit of the pool'

Presumably Cunningham would include among the 'narrow-minded who can't see the benefit of the pool' the consultants St Marys Council hired to study the need and feasibility of a aquatics centre.

Monteith Brown Planning Consultants, The JF Group and MacLennon Jaunkalns Miller Architects found in their June 2005 report for St Marys Council that 'there is insufficient market demand to recommend that the Town build an indoor pool'.

The findings of the consultants can be read at ca.geocities.com/stopcouncil/mbpool.htm

$6,400 Per Household

2006-06-09T11:29:00.000-07:00

There's a December 2004 letter from Herb & Dolores Richmond at pyramid.awardspace.com. Nothing special about the letter but
it does emphasize that ordinary St Marys Ontario citizens knew years ago that Councillor Gerry Teahen was on the wrong track with the St Marys Ontario Living Life Project.

The letter begins by saying 'We have to deal with our council. They are so one-sided that if they get their way we will never be out of debt with regards to the Living Life Project.' and ends with 'Please do not come to our home expecting a donation for the Living Life Project'

Since this letter was written Gerry Teahen has solved the problem of 'coming to homes for donations' by just adding the $16 million cost of the Living Life Project to the town's taxes for the next 20 years.

The cost to the St Marys Ontario ratepayers for the Living Life Project in round figures is quite easy to calculate. You divide LLP cost of $16,000,000 by 2500, the number of St Marys households.

Too Little Too Late From Bill Osbourne

2006-06-05T06:30:00.000-07:00

J Queenan and Jeff Taylor have applauded St Marys Ontario Councillor Bill Osbourne for voting against the Pyramid Rec Centre (Living Life Project) but it should be noted that until recently Osbourne was one of its hardcore supporters. He did not just go along with St Marys Council he wrote opinion articles for St Marys newspapers advocating the LLP.

As early as June 9, 2004 he wrote a 'special to the Journal Argus' opinion piece. The article was about 1000 words and had the headline 'Why the CBHOF and Living Life Mission?'

He talked about the Living Life Mission Project being special event driven, that it would attract industry, bring in doctors and ended the long piece by quoting LLP Chair Rob Staffen.

While its good that Osbourne came to his senses it would have been better if it had happened a lot sooner.

New Name for the Living Life Project

2006-05-27T06:36:00.000-07:00

May 17 St Marys Ontario Council decided that the new name for the Living Life Mission Project would be the Pyramid Recreation Centre.

It was not exactly a bold move as the proponents of the Living Life Project have been trying to get people to call it that for the last 18 months. They even came up with this logo.

Reading Gordon van Rassel's letter in this weeks Journal Argus a more appropriate name might be the Pyramid Financing Scheme Centre.

Perth South Outsmarts St Marys

2006-05-21T16:13:00.000-07:00

Yesterday's Stratford Beacon Herald has a feature article on rezoning of land just south of St Marys Arena.

When St Marys Council gave the go ahead for the Arena Expansion they made the land south of it, which happens to be in Perth South, a lot more valuable. Last October, Perth South Council anticipated St Marys actions and did the rational thing and rezoned the land to promote development. Now, St Marys is crying foul and appealing to the Ontario Municipal Board.

What St Marys should have done is either 1) annex the 120 acres being rezoned before committing to the Arena Expansion project or 2) get Perth South to contribute to the project. As it stands now, not only will St Marys taxpayers be subsidizing Perth South residents who use the new facility but also St Marys will be losing tax revenue to Perth South that new development will generate.

The preliminary Ontario Municipal Board hearing to see if St Marys even has a case is June 2.

Separate Contracts for Pool and Ice Rink

2006-05-17T09:08:00.000-07:00

Andrea Macko in the St Marys Journal Argus reports that an ad ran in the Daily Commercial News, a construction trade paper inviting pre-qualification bids from general and sub-contractors to build the recreation centre.

The ad calls for specific jobs such as mechanical, electrical, refrigeration, swimming pool system, ice rink slabs and landscaping. By way of explanation project manager Bob Prince said.

"You want people who have done ice rinks before ... with a definite expertise in the field"

He went on to say the town will make the final decision on who wins the contracts out of pools of eight for each job.

Dawson City Bankrupt

2006-05-17T07:43:00.000-07:00

A comment on Herb and Dolores Richmond's letter to the editor points out a CBC North article on Dawson City's bankruptcy.

The article says:

"Andre Carrel, Dawson's former financial administrator, says Dawson's problems go back to the late 1990s when the city took on too many expensive projects, including a new swimming pool, cable television system and refurbished recreation centre."

Sound familiar?

Ron Bidulka's Incompetent Analysis

2006-05-14T11:46:00.000-07:00

When St Marys Ontario Council hired Ron Bidulka of Deloitte and Touche they finally found a consultant who would give them costs they liked. Of course, the figures make no sense.

Take Ron Bidulka's Net Cost Analysis. Here's the table he presented

Estimated 'All-In' Facility Cost	$16.0 million

Less:	Retrofit of Cadzow	New Outdoor Pool	New Indoor Pool
Capital expenditures required at existing facilities	$3.35 million	$5.1 million	$7.1 million
Capital fundraising	$5.0 million	$5.0 million	$5.0 million

Net Project Cost	$7.65 million	$5.9 million	$3.9 million

That's right Ron Bidulka is saying its more expensive to retrofit Cadzow Park pool for $3.35 million than to build a $7.1 million indoor pool. Why would he subtract the figures from $16-million? That's just incompetent analysis.

First Official Arena Tax Increase

2006-05-10T07:40:00.000-07:00

The Stratford Beacon Herald reports that last night St Marys Council voted for a 2006 tax increase of 4.9 percent. The increase will primarily go increased salaries, benefits and of course the first of the tax increases officially designated for the St Marys Arena Expansion. One example of an unofficial Arena Expansion tax in previous budgets is the Facility Maintenance Fund, 62% will go to the arena.

Mayor Tony Winter made no apology for three years of increased rates repeating the claim that town services needed to be improved. Winter did not provide examples of where services actually have improved which is hardly surprising since the extra money was spent on pay raises, staff offices and the arena expansion process.

Most of the town improvements that people will see will come from the provincial government. Ontario has given $534,000 for upgrading St Marys roads and bridges. Surrounding municipalities also received similar grants and in fact for Perth County the provincial money allowed them to decrease their tax rate.

Current Facilities Not Being Maintained

2006-05-07T13:53:00.000-07:00

This week's Journal Argus has a letter from Debora A. Morrison about St Marys Community Centre. She wrote,

"... it does not look good when we are asking guests coming to St Marys to park in a parking lot not only full of crater sized pot holes but covered in broken glass. Once you get through the parking lot you must trudge through 'sand dunes' and garbage on the sidewalks to get to the entrance."

This council has said previous councils did not maintain facilities. The Community Centre opened just 2 years ago so previous administrations cannot be blamed this time.

With council committing $16 million to the Arena Expansion, the question council needs to ask itself is "If you can't look after one facility why build another?"

Say No To Living Life Project Fundraisers

2006-05-06T07:52:00.000-07:00

In this week's St Marys Journal Argus, Herb and Dolores Richmond argue that if enough people say no to Living Life Project fundraisers then somebody at town hall will have to listen.

Unfortunately, St Marys council has already decided to proceed with this project in spite of the lack of donations. A Fundraising Motion Moved By Gerry Teahen was passed back in October 24, 2004 and the community has sat on their hands.

Mayor Tony Winter's Reaction to Criticism

2006-04-20T01:45:00.000-07:00

Below is a letter that was in the St Marys Independent from Jeff Taylor. The letter was also intended for the Journal the following Wednesday. However, on the Monday Mayor Tony Winter called Mr Taylor and threatened legal action if he did not write a full retraction. Mr Taylor got a lawyer who called the Mayor and told him the Town had no ground to stand on. Mayor Winter didn't pursue the matter and Mr Taylor didn't send the letter to the Journal.

So, it looks like the cabal that runs the town was able to coerce six of seven Councillors into voting in favour of the financial train wreck that the Living Life Project will become. The vote followed a process marked by a flagrant disregard for public input. The prevailing sentiment seemed to be that the average citizen could not be trusted to understand the details. They would therefore, be unable to help make an informed decision. How ironic.

There is much talk of a Tax Revolt, and perhaps it would take an action like this to get the message across. If Council thinks it’s acceptable to ram through a project of this magnitude without public support, they shouldn’t mind doing it without the public’s money, either.

Hands up those who want Bill Osborne to run for Mayor!

Jeff Taylor

Councillor Bill Osbourne's Vote

2006-04-19T06:22:00.000-07:00

The April 5, 2006 St Marys Journal Argus reported St Marys Councillor Bill Osbourne's 3 reasons for voting against the St Marys Ontario Arena Expansion as

The original Living Life Project recommendation had the arena expansion only moving ahead if there was provincial or federal funding for one-third of the costs. "I'm well aware that funding is not available."

To come up with the annual financial support for the project the money has to come from other projects in the town. "I don't feel comfortable with that situation, there's too much stress on the system."

The great urgency. "Many want the whole complex and they want it now and many want the second ice pad and they want it now." Even the feasilibity study indicates that "the time line is unrealistic."

The following week in a letter to the editor J Queenan applauded Bill Osbourne "for having the integrity to hold true to his principles." (see J Queenan letter)

$2.5 Million in Fundraising Required

2006-04-17T06:11:00.000-07:00

The April 6 Beacon Herald editorial on the St Marys Arena Expansion said that St Marys residents 'will no doubt be asked to contribute to local fundraising efforts'.

There is no doubt - the amount cited in Deloitte and Touche's Financing Strategy is $2.5 million.

What is in doubt is who is going to do this fundraising and how they will raise the money. In the 2 years this project has actively been discussed no service club or other organization has come forward to volunteer for this role. The fundraising commitment by year is

Year	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011
Amount	$265,000	$265,000	$265,000	$265,000	$265,000

Year	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016
Amount	$215,000	$215,000	$125,000	$125,000	$125,000

62% Facility Maintenance Going to Arena Expansion

2006-04-15T19:06:00.000-07:00

In a postscript to his April 12 letter to the editor Murray Mitchell says 'It seems in the last year all our town buildings have become no good or unuseable. Also, the way they were run or used has been changed. Come on, let's use some common sense.'

This council raised taxes to create the Facility Maintenance Fund to fix the town buildings that were either no good or unuseable. Those 47 buildings cannot be in too bad a shape because council is allocating 62% of the fund ($185,000 per year) for the next 20 years to the yet to be built St Marys Arena Expansion. (see Supporting Project Operations)

St Marys Ontario $16-million Arena Expansion

2006-04-15T04:26:00.000-07:00

From the April 6, 2006 Stratford Beacon Herald editorial on the St Marys Ontario Arena Expansion

A $16-million arena expansion and swimming pool project for a town of about 5,000 residents seems quite ambitious, especially when there is no provincial or federal funding in the plan. Yet, that is what St. Marys town council approved last week. The town will shortly be calling tenders and expects construction to begin this summer.

Mayor Tony Winter says he’s no risk taker, that he’s confident the project is workable and that community proponents will come up with the $5-million contribution to which they are committed. For the sake of Stonetown taxpayers, let’s hope he’s right because, even with that commitment, the town has to come up with the remainder of the money plus financing costs. Apart from those capital costs impacting property tax bills, local residents are expected to support the project and ongoing operational costs through program memberships for hockey, skating and swimming. And they will no doubt be asked to contribute to local fundraising efforts on top of that.

$385,000 Annual Operating Loss

2006-04-13T04:19:00.000-07:00

Why would St Marys Ontario staff estimates of the annual losses for the St Marys Arena expansion be so out of line with the estimates of the professional consultants?

In June 2005 Monteith Brown on page 50 of their report 'Recreation Complex Expansion Feasibility Study' said the proposed St Marys Arena complex would lose between $398,832 and $383,149 annually from operations.

8 months later on March 9, 2006 Deloitte & Touche at their public presentation basically agreed with Monteith Brown and estimated the annual loss at $385,000 (see St Marys Ontario Arena - $385,000 Operating Obligation).

In between at the August 23, 2005 council meeting Jim Bryson's estimate was less than half at $166,000. Because he's the facilities manager its the one figure in his presentation I thought would be right.

Gerry Teahen Denies Spearheading Project

2006-03-28T00:00:00.000-08:00

At the council meeting Gerry Teahen denied spearheading the St Marys Ontario Arena expansion project and pushing it through.

Events say otherwise, see

Mar 2004 Gerry Teahen leads in promotion of LLP
May 2004 Teahen, Luna, Edney Join Living Life Project
July 2004 Gerry Teahen named Living Life Project Co-Chair
October 2004 Fundraising Motion Moved By Gerry Teahen
December 2004 Gerry Teahen and Mike Thompson
December 2004 Gerry Teahen Anticipates $4.7 million Provincial Grant

Letter To The Editor

2006-03-22T00:00:00.000-08:00

The St Marys Journal/ Argus expanded today's edition to make room for these letters:

It would appear that democracy is dead in St Marys - Ian Ball
"Figures don't Lie" "Liars Figure" - Robert Bendall
This project is big money and a big risk and if it is not done right could sink the Town for the next 25 years - Gary Boyce
Not a single member of this council ran with this project as part of their platform in the last municipal election - Mark Dickey
We are too small a community to go ahead with the whole project - Lita Miandro
Let's vote on this project. It's the only answer. - John Munro
The information received from Deloitte was nowhere near as complete as that contained in the Monteith Brown report - Jan Mustard
The format of the meeting on the St Marys Arena Expansion was the usual charade - John O'Drowsky
Robbing Peter to pay Paul - J Queenan
We cannot start this project without this council knowing that this is feasible for the average resident - Herb & Dolores Richmond
Let's be responsible. Let's build the pad, not the pool - Louis & Nancy Vermond

Additional Room With an Unspecified Purpose

2006-03-15T20:02:00.000-08:00

The St Marys Journal Argus has printed the plans for the proposed St Marys Arena Expansion. It includes an additional room with an unspecified purpose.

You would think the architect Bob Prince of Garwood-Jones and Hanham would know the purpose of every room. The architectural firm was paid $114,000 in November 2005 and another $10,000 in January 2006.

If you can't look after one facility why build another?

2006-01-10T00:00:00.001-08:00

Council discussed their December 13 decision to dissolve the St Marys Arena Board.

With the dissolution of the board Perth South, who put up 40% of the cost, no longer have any say in the running of the facility. Councillor Gerry Teahen said 'There's no question that it is our intent to take it over.'

Councillor Bruce Symons said in the last month the facility is not be taken care of and he gave the examples of the markings on the ice surface not being in good shape and of a recent injury at public skating. With regard to arena expansion Symons said he had heard the comment 'If you can't look after one facility why do you want to build another?'

Cost rises to $13.4 million

2006-01-10T00:00:00.000-08:00

With only Councillor Bill Osbourne opposing the motion, St Marys council voted to give the architect an additional $10,000.

Garwood-Jones and Hanham Architects were scheduled to present plans to council this month. Instead, they said the building will now cost $13.386 million up from $12.160 million estimated August 23, 2005. As their fee is based on the cost of the building, the architect told council their fee will rise to $134,000.

On November 5, 2005 when St Marys Council Votes $124,000 for Architect the justification given by council was that the architect's design was needed in order to get provincial funding.

In opposing today's motion Bill Osbourne said,

"Why do we have to continue? We have enough information now and we can go out and see if the money is there."

St Marys Council Votes $124,000 for Architect

2005-11-05T09:45:00.000-08:00

Jennifer Leslie in the Journal Argus reports St Marys Council voted to hire Garwood-Jones and Hanham Architects for $124,000 to design the St Marys Arena Expansion.

Councillor Bill Osborne opposed saying, "I realize the need for such a study but is seems somewhat premature. We haven't a clue if we can get the money."

Osborne reminded council that "the study by the architect doesn't address maintenance and who's going to verify operating costs. That's where the original project ran into problems."

Councillor Bruce Symons also opposed the move backing up Osborne up with, "I don't feel we're at the point we can fit $124,000 into our budget."

Councillor Gerry Teahen supported hiring the architect. Teahen said the architect's design was needed in order to get provincial funding, "we can't submit something to the Ministry without the drawings. Until we get that back we can't move any further ahead on this."

Councillor Dave Cunningham voting for the motion said, "This will finally help us determine if we can afford this project."

June 28 St Marys Council generally agreed that the $15 to $16 million cost calculated in the Monteith Brown study made the Living Life Project Too Costly

How Do We Stop This Foolishness?

2005-10-12T20:11:00.000-07:00

The following letter is from Bill Mustard printed in the St Marys Journal Argus.

We have had two consultants tell the council that the Living Life Project is too expensive for a town like St Marys, that most of the people do not want the LLP, and that St Marys cannot even afford to maintain the LLP.

Yet the LLP lives on. What is council thinking? Whose side are they on? How do we stop this foolishness?

2 short paragraphs say it all.

Living Life Project Too Costly

2005-07-06T00:00:00.000-07:00

Jennifer Leslie in the St Marys Journal Argus reports that St Marys Council will not pursue the Living Life Project as originally proposed. Instead there will be a strategic plan for all recreation in St Marys which staff will work on over the summer months and have a concrete proposal for council in the fall.

At the June 28 council meeting attended by about 20 people Mayor Tony Winter said the message he is getting is, "yes, the project is a little rich, scale it down."

Councillor Gerry Teahen said "I think we can do a project but not at the level proposed."

Councillor Bruce Symons said of the Living Life Project "It's too costly as proposed"

Councillor Dave Cunningham said "There needs to be a stronger focus on recreation," and to include all areas and age groups.

Councillor Marg Luna said "I don't like the numbers, they scare me to death." and went on to suggest, "looking at alternatives to LLP and going forward with something."

Study Says Living Life Project Not Feasible

2005-06-06T05:13:00.000-07:00

Today the Journal Argus reports that Monteith and Brown Planning Consultants could not recommend that St Marys proceed with any one of the main aspects of the Living Life Project (the proposed expansion of the St Marys Ontario Arena)

At a public meeting June 1 Todd Brown and Steve Langlois, from Monteith Brown, summarized the results of the study, key points of which were highlighted in a power point presentation, before inviting questions from the audience. They could not recommend proceeding with any of the three main aspects of the project -- the second ice pad, swimming pool or fitness centre.

The consultants research showed that St Marys needs 1.5 ice pads, but would have difficulty filling ice times if there are two ice pads. (see Monteith Brown Additional Arena Analysis)

The study suggests that an indoor pool would lose $141,928 in its first year and $153,627 by year five, and that's not factoring in staffing costs associated with the management of the entire complex, nor capital maintenance.

"There is insufficient market to recommend an indoor pool at this time," Todd Brown said. (see Monteith Brown Findings on an Indoor Pool)

As to a fitness facility, there is little "unmet demand" and a second fitness centre would clearly be a detriment to the existing Wellness Centre.

"It is not recommended that a fitness centre to be built," the planner said. (see Monteith Brown Findings on a Fitness Centre)

A summary of the consultant's capital cost study revealed that estimated cost to build the facility is between $14.927 and $16.554 million (not including financing).

The consultants suggested that if the municipality went ahead with the project, building a second ice pad, indoor pool and fitness facility, they would lose close to $400,000 a year, not including any management fees which would be additional.

No Comparable Facilities In Comparable Communities

2005-06-01T00:00:00.000-07:00

Monteith Brown looked at multi-purpose recreation centres in Centre Wellington, Goderich, Hanover, Orangeville, Orillia, Wilmot, and Wingham. They found none could be used as examples to justify proceeding with the St Marys Arena Expansion.

see Monteith Brown's Review of Similar Facilities

In September 22, 2004 issue of the St Marys Journal Argus Sports Reporter and Living Life Project member Pat Payton wrote a 2 page article extolling the virtues of the Goderich facility.

St Marys Council Delay Releasing Report

2005-05-10T23:15:00.000-07:00

Consultants Monteith Brown presented their completed feasibility study regarding the Living Life Project (St Marys Ontario Arena Expansion) to St Marys Town Council.

Council has decided the consultants will present the report to the general public in 3 weeks at a special public meeting on Wednesday, June 1 at the Community Centre at 7 pm

Gerry Teahen and Mike Thompson

2004-12-03T10:33:00.000-08:00

Sharon Malvern reports in the Stratford Beacon/Herald the official fundraising campaign for the Living Life Project (St Marys Arena Expansion) will kick off in February 2005 with the aim of raising one-third or $4.7 million of the $14-million project from community sources. Coun. Gerry Teahen projected another third would come from the municipality and a third from federal/provincial grants.

Mike Thompson, campaign co-chair, said "Council has accepted the business plan and indicated a desire to move forward. But they will do a municipal review before giving final approval."

Coun. Gerry Teahen said that, during the next few weeks, the St Marys council will meet with the Living Life Project committee to draw up terms of reference. The council will also conduct a feasibility study.

Gerry Teahen Anticipates $4.7 million Provincial Grant

2004-12-02T00:00:00.000-08:00

Pat Payton reports Living Life Project co-chair Gerry Teahen's comments on the provincial COMRIF grant program.

"We’re very encouraged by the conversations we’ve had with the various levels of government," Teahen said "We will be formulating a grant application, which has to be in by mid-March, 2005."

Co-chair Mike Thompson added "There’s a new grant program (COMRIF) announced that the project qualifies for. This project is fundable the way the (L.L.P.) business plan suggested it was."

One-third of the cost of the $14 million project is slated to come from federal and provincial grants.

Fundraising Motion Moved By Gerry Teahen

2004-10-26T00:00:00.001-07:00

Motion No. 299–2004 Date: October 26, 2004

Moved by: Gerry Teahen; Seconded: Bruce Symons

That the Town Council for the Separated Town of St Marys request the Fundraising Subcommittee of the Living Life Project headed jointly by Reid Dundas and Mike Thompson proceed with the fund raising for the Living Life Project immediately on behalf of the Town of St Marys.

Motion To Form Subcomittee and Hire Consultant

2004-10-26T00:00:00.000-07:00

Motion No. 298–2004 Date: October 26, 2004

Moved by: Marg Luna; Seconded: Gerry Teahen

That the Town Council for the Separated Town of St. Marys form a subcommittee of Council and the Living Life Project Steering Committee to develop a term of reference to engage a third party to do a feasibility study of the Business Plan in its entirety.

Motion That Government Grants Should Be At Least $5 million

2004-09-28T00:00:00.000-07:00

Motion 266-2004 September 28, 2004

Be it hereby resolved that the Town Council for the Separated Town of St. Marys give approval of the proposal to expand recreation facilities at the St. Marys and Area Arena and Community Centre Complex based on the attached financial model and assumptions therein (received Tuesday, September 28, 2004 as prepared by the Living Life Steering Committee ) with all of the following conditions to be met:

1. The total capital project cost including furnishings and equipment shall not exceed $15,000,000.00
2. The total provincial and federal grants for capital shall be not less than $5,000,000.00.
3. Local fundraising for capital shall be not less than $5,000,000.00
4. Local tax support for capital shall not exceed $5,000,000.00

ALSO THAT
The facility expansion shall include a second ice pad, a pool complex, a fitness centre, community services office space and improved
canteen facilities
AND FURTHER
That the expansion might also include an auditorium and might include daycare facilities.

Instead of this motion St Marys Council passed motion: 267–2004
That the Council for the Separated Town of St. Marys postpone a decision on the motion on the floor until a Public Meeting on October 19, 2004.

Gerry Teahen named Living Life Project Co-Chair

2004-07-27T00:00:00.000-07:00

At today's council meeting Gerry Teahen was named Living Life Project co-chair. Teahen was already on the steering committee along with councillors Marg Luna and Bruce Symons.

Also at the meeting, original Chair Rob Staffen said "We need this to appear as a council-driven project."

Teahen, Luna, Edney Join Living Life Project

2004-05-31T00:00:00.000-07:00

Earlier this month St Marys councillors Margaret Luna and Gerry Teahen joined the Living Life Project Steering Committee.

St Marys Councillor Rob Edney joined Living Life Project’s Program/Design Sub-Committee.

Gerry Teahen leads in promotion of LLP

2004-03-17T00:00:00.000-08:00

At a special meeting March 10 at town hall, St Marys Ontario council unanimously passed the motion ‘That the Separated Town of St Marys support The Living Life Mission Project and Business Plan in principle and meet with the committee to formulate a plan of action to go forward’

The article in the Journal Argus by Laura Payton describing the meeting was given the sub-heading Coun. Gerry Teahen leads in promotion of moving project ahead, Couns. Osborne, Symons urge caution. In the article Payton wrote: 'When Coun. Gerry Teahen finally spoke, it was to urge council to get onside. ... "I think it’s a heck of a project, it’s good for the town, good for business and industry. let’s kick into gear, sit down together and work on this," Teahen said.'

Living Life Project Presented In-Camera

2004-01-14T23:45:00.000-08:00

Rob Staffen, Rob Bell, Scott Taylor, Brian De Groote and Wayne Barber presented the ‘Living Life Mission’ project and business plan to St Marys and Perth South Councils in a three-hour, 40-minute in-camera session at St Marys Town Hall. Also attending were Living Life committee members Reid Dundas, Stephanie Ische, Bruce Kittmer, Rick Vanderschot and Pat Payton.

The St Marys Ontario Arena expansion will include a second ice pad, a three-pool aquatic park, a rock climbing wall, two new lighted outdoor soccer fields, an indoor walking and jogging track, multi-dimensional meeting rooms and new offices.

Estimated cost of the project was $10.89 million. It was proposed that funds come from fundraising (36%) - $4 million; Federal and provincial funding (32%) - $3.45 million; Corporation of the Town of St. Marys (24%) - $2.65 million; and the Township of Perth South (7%) - $790,000.