KA-NON has left a new comment on your post "Visions
Of Sugar Plums Dance In Our Heads":
Yahoo! I think.
Until we
understand the ongoing operating costs of this gift, we won't know what sort of
impact it may have on our taxes.
Here's hoping that it is at worst
tax-neutral.
**************
Let me repeat because I know it's hard to believe. I asked the question. "Is it the intent to maintain private ownership and responsibility for operating the facility?".
The answer was: the intent is to set up a foundation to provide resources for the facility to operate without being a burden on taxpayers.
It doesn't mean all uses will be free. It means governance will be without the profit factor.The model has to be worked on still.
A huge amount of work has already gone into planning the facility with town staff.
It has apparently taken a year.
I heard about it a year ago. I chose to wait for it to be a reality before I got excited about it.
It truly is a gift of monumental proportions.
Truly great news. Hopefully it will occupy the heads of certain councillors so that they give the boot to their pie-in-the-sky plans for a Heritage Deal on Yonge St.
ReplyDeleteYes, it is, 1:37 PM. The two proposals are entirely different concepts at opposite sides of the town. Why can't we have both?
ReplyDelete2:24 PM
ReplyDeleteAs Mr Carvell used to say, "it's the Economy,, Stupid". Oh, and the teeny little fact about cost to taxpayers. We must not be greedy. Already got the one poor example of a not-for-profit. It will be wonderful having a properly working example courtesy of Mr Stronach.
I'm not greedy, 3:58 PM. I just want amenities that appeal to the breadth of the populace. One could say, "It's a Community, Stupid".
ReplyDeletePerhaps 2:24 we can't have both because the fanciful heritage park, insultingly refereed to as the Mac-In-Tyre / Hillary park (giving no recognition to the heritage of the "Horton" house, nor the property in the middle) is not proposed to be self sufficient.
ReplyDeleteI haven't been able to see a professional business plan, or anything suggesting sustainability with regards to the heritage park.
Considering the Aurora Hysterical Society is involved and were unable to a) operate a Heritage Centre, nor b) properly maintain a collection of artefacts I don't believe there is much substance to their involvement in such a grandiose pitch.
Oh and this new opportunity sounds like a revenue neutral proposal not one that will drain money out of the Hydro Fund, which the heritage park real-estate deal seems contingent upon.
Me, I would like to see the High Tor lands opened up for all the town to use. But that isn't likely to happen. We simply do not need more heritage buildings or new parks on the taxpayers' bills. The single word ' No ' is not used often enough.
ReplyDeleteOK
ReplyDeleteIf the Heritage Development is such a viable needed facility, let its backers form a consortium & find investors. That is how Wonderland was built. Give people the OPTION of being involved. So far, all I have seen is a willingness to spend Aurora's money. Not their own. And don't come back with the properties are being offered at a discount. One has been on the market for quite a while.
It would be nice if Aurora could vote in the Austrian elections. We could take his party right to the top. There is no way to express our appreciation. Wow.
ReplyDeleteOh, and about the maintenance of the Aurora Collection, Mr Watts. It certainly hasn't prevented you from accessing its archives through multiple private appointments, now has it?
ReplyDelete"The single word ' No ' is not used often enough."
ReplyDeleteOh, I don't know about that, 6:05 PM, Cllr Buck seems to utter it a lot.
6:20 PM, you're comparing a proposed civic heritage park to a large-scale, corporate-backed theme park/entertainment complex? Really?! Like, seriously?!
ReplyDeleteI person 3 comments in 7 minutes Did someone hit a nerve?
ReplyDeleteNo, 10:14 AM, just responding to comments - revealing motivations, exposing hypocrisy, and countering stupidity, etc.
ReplyDelete