Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Rental Revenue Is A Mirage":
Sorry, Matt, they are really really nasty which I think indicates that they might be feeling the heat. All pretense at co-operation has flown out the window. But none of us believed in any of that hooey in the first place. Threaten a nest of any species and you can expect trouble. It is a trifle ironic that this emerges from a place billed as a 'cultural' centre.
It was likely your excellent letter to the Auroran that drew their attention and there appears to be a habit of attacking facts with venom.
.Sprite
**************
Matt Maddock's letter to the editor was thoughtful, civil and well organised. I think it deserved a at least a civil response. We know there's more than one side of looking at things.
Elected representatives can hear and consider all sides but they don't have the luxury of switching back and forth. Comes a point when a decision has to be made. The only guarantee is, it won't please everybody.
My concern is the amount of money we shovel out of the treasury into the culture centre'scoffers. No matter how much revenue is generated, they still get a huge amount from the town withan increase every year, no responsibility for maintaining the facility and no rent to pay.
There isn't another facility in the town served like that. Every program user, cultural and recreational, pays a fee. Serious effort is made towards equity among users.
The Culture Centre situation cannot be sustained.
We are in the process of passing a budget with a hefty increase in taxes. Money and service in kind the Culture Centre receives amounts to more than 2% points in the tax rate. Add $50,000 for the Arboretum and $50,000 to the Historical Society without a town museum, twenty- thousand here and twenty- five there and we have tax bill that I do not believe can be justified.
Council is being inundated with e-mails. One from a Whitby couple who believe the town should support the program. We assume they mean from taxation.
They are all full of praise for the concept. Nary a one expresses a willingness to pay whatever it costs.
Parents pay more than a hundred dollars a year for a child to play soccer Hockey I think costs twice as much. Then there's the expense to equip a youngster. Figure skating costs a fortune.
People make sacrifices to give their children the opportunity. Not just financial but in time as well.
Why would people who crave culture not expect to do the same?
If a senior, having a hard time holding on to their only asset, after a lifetime of working to provide for a family, who would anyone expect them to be thrilled to be spending more than half their income on shelter , going without other things, and expected to pay for someone else's idea of culture?
Yes, culture nice to have it. And yes you should be prepared to pay whatever it costs.
If it matters that much to you, you make the sacrifice.
I don't want to sound like a nagging mother. But I also think just because you are anonymous,you shouldn't forget your manners. You don't have to be nauseatingly sweet. There's fun in fencing with words. I do it all the time.
Thursday, 16 February 2012
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
7 comments:
Reading through the collection of comments there is one thing that strikes me. How could a few people who had a safe, secure, funded location manage to screw it up so badly? A public relations disaster on the same lines as the last election. I guess no lessons have been learned. How very sad but no great surprise. The town probably would have cut some slack, likely too much, but the cultural centre actually aggravated the situation. Compete and utter stupidity. Can't blame this fiasco on Aurora. As the kids say,,,," You did it our own self."
just so you know Hockey cost almost $500 per child for recreational hockey, the point is we all have to pay , Isn’t this just a matter of giving them a free building and letting them stand on their own two feet , just like theater aurora , we don't see them with their hands in the cookie jar and we certainly don’t see the Town Lawyer dumping all over their agreement with the Town , what's so complicated about this ?
8:54 PM
Your questions have been asked and answered to the point of nausea. Please refer to Council minutes, Warren Mar's report, coverage in Auroran, Alison's programs including this week's, letters from Councillors, Matt Maddocks' letter just this past week. That should get you started on your research.
I encourage anyone making comments if they haven't already done so to actually read the Report No. LGL11-011 on its recommendations concerning the ACC and the original agreement.
This is freely available at http://www.town.aurora.on.ca/app/wa/mediaEntry?mediaEntryId=59273
(see page 5 for Item 9 LGL11-011 Church Street School - Cultural Services Agreement Review - if you click on this link you'll be taken to the 18 page pdf report that includes the original signed agreement of June 9, 2009).
This is the report that Councillors Abel & Pirri are acting upon. They are simply following up on the recommendations of the Town Solicitor. Perhaps it may be negligent on the Town’s part not to follow through with the recommendations in order to protect the Town’s interests.
Please see the report. Perhaps if a solicitor (Town Solicitor, Associate Town Solicitor or contracted external legal counsel) was engaged for the writing and/or review of the original agreement in 2009, they would have found the same omissions that Mr. Mar found in his present review prompting their actions.
The ACC may be operating within the guidelines of the agreement but it is the recommendation that it is the agreement that is flawed.
I would hope that the Council would handle any other agreement and disbursement of funds in the same responsible manner be it ACC, sports or the Arboretum.
I am not against the ACC but they have to be responsibly run like any other organization funded by the Town and if the agreement is flawed it should be changed for the better.
From what I can tell in the agreement, there are no predetermined measurements from the Town to determine the ACC’s success. It is perhaps an old & tired saying but “if you don’t measure it, you can’t manage it”- and this is relevant whether it is a business or a non-profit. How does the Town justify the expenditure? How does the ACC show the money has been well spent (and if so ask for more funding)?
I simply encourage anyone who is interested to read the report.
Thanks to Paul Sesto for his reasoned approach -- Good to encourage people to read the report and the full agreement to which Paul has referred -- in the agreement there are several avenues for the Town to resolve issues, concerns or deficiencies in the agreement . It was the first agreement of its kind and not all problems could have been foreseen by town staff when it was written and signed.
Anyone who has dealt with contracts and agreements will know that there is always a cancellation clause but they are never used in good faith rather only as a last resort when disputes are not able to be reslolved -- not used as a first approach.
Why has the Town , as a signatory to the agreement , not given the Centre a list of issues and attempted to resolve them in good faith?
BTW Paul good point on the measurements, discussions regarding key performance indicators have been on going recently but derailed by the proposed termination by Pirri and Abel.
A few ongoing notes to Tracy Smith's reply:
Yes, I can see in the agreement under the section “Dispute Resolution” items 32 through 37 there are provisions for what Tracy Smith refers to as the “several avenues for the Town to resolve issues, concerns or deficiencies in the agreement”. I don’t know if this would actually include to mean deficiencies in the agreement. As stated in the PCSA, the “Dispute Resolution” item “32. In the event of a dispute between the parties as to any matter arising from the Agreement…”. Isn’t what Councillors Abel & Pirri are stating is that the problem is that the actual agreement is flawed. So how does a mediator arbitrate something that is not contained within the agreement?
Regardless this would seem to mean more costs to both sides in order to pay for mediation which is in fact would be deleting the ACC funds from the Town (i.e. the Town is paying both sides of mediation).
And referring to Mr. Mar’s report (LGL11-011) page 6 “Dispute Resolution – ss. 32 to 37”, he states: “The PCSA (Provision of Cultural Services Agreement), provides in sections 32 through 37 for mediation and arbitration in the event of a dispute between the Centre and the Town. Arbitration and mediation are both costly and time consuming; accordingly, in any new agreement, it is recommended that Council have the final determination in any dispute with the Centre on the basis that the Town is providing grant funding and leasing the property to the Centre for the nominal rent.“
In regards to the measurements, you state that it has been derailed but I would think this is something that should stay “on track” as it is only with measurements that are ultimately approved by the Town that the ACC will garner the Council’s support along with the other considerations of course.
As you state: “Anyone who has dealt with contracts and agreements will know that there is always a cancellation clause but they are never used in good faith rather only as a last resort when disputes are not able to be resolved -- not used as a first approach.” Cancellation clauses are used for many reasons, in this case because it appears that the contract is at fault, it needs to be rectified and this may be the best avenue to do so. I don’t have the full history of events in regards to the ACC, so in regards to “good faith”, somehow that faith seems to be broken and needs fixing. ACC wants the Town money and to deliver cultural services with it and the Town needs to see and measure the value.
2:58 PM
Is this the same Tracy Smith who thought Watts was trying to intimidate him ? Sorry, son. you offer too little too late. There was a time when such talk would have been welcome...didn't happen..there were plenty of opportunities to remedy the situation and no effort was made from the Culture Centre. The emphasis is always on attacking the town, the Council and the taxpayers. We own the building and you have over-extended your welcome. Name one good deed that the Culture Centre has done, off the cuff or naturally, to show they belong.
Post a Comment