It became very obvious that the reason that I could not get a clear idea of exactly what it is that council and city staff are proposing we build for facilities is because council and city staff have NO CLEAR IDEA of what exactly it is they will build. The know the types of facilities (entertainment center, recreation complex and art gallery/museum), they have a wish lists of what they want in those facilities (eg. Basketball court, ice surface) and they have a price they propose to pay. But as to what exactly the city will get for spending all that money – they have no idea.

They will tell you that this is because it makes no sense to spend money to come up with any kind of actual plans or hard numbers because it would be wasted if the plan was turned down. They would rather spend those dollars on a high pressure sales campaign than developing actual ideas and plans they could present to the public so they had layouts and numbers of a real nature for the public. They would appear to be so lacking in vision and leadership that vague generalities and snake-oil salesmanship is their way of operating on this and many other pressing issues facing Abbotsford.

In a nutshell they planning/proposing to put out their building types, wish lists and the price they will pay in what is referred to as design/build. They seek offers to build a facility at that price. The company then designs and builds the building. You know what it is you paid for and are getting when they are finished. You better hope their vision of the wish list and what a, say, entertainment complex looks like are reasonable close to what you thought you were getting/wanted/needed.

As I said lacking vision and leadership. If you believe that the City needs facilities you make that part of your platform at election time. You do not avoid this subject to get elected, so that you can then use access to taxpayer money, city staff and facilities to steamroll vague promises and proposals over any opposition by denying their rights of free speech and answers to questions and fool the public into thinking they have a good idea of what the final shape of these facilities will be, when nobody knows or has a good idea what the final structure will be.

You present your vision, your reasoning and your plans in the public forum and more level playing field of a municipal election. You design the facilities, hiring reputable engineers and architects; you come up with business plans, projected income or losses at which point you present this information to the citizens. Then you listen to them. The concerns are addressed or you explain why you are not going to address a particular point. Listening is the key, they have a right to be heard, to present their views and above all they have a right to access city facilities in presenting their views to their fellow citizens.
City Staff and Council are so use to ignoring citizens that even at a session they claimed was for public questions to be answered they repeatedly gave answers that did not answer the question asked by a citizen/taxpayer. Which may help to explain their time limit on questions – it provides an excuse to avoid those pesky follow up questions if the citizen tries to insist the City answer the actual question posed. Especially when the moderator is one of the city staff selling these mirages to the public.

They have no interest in explaining why the management fees paid to Global Spectrum to manage the facility are apparently not considered an expense by the city since in answering questions about operating costs, they failed to include fees paid to Global Spectrum in the entertainment facility costs. But then they also chose to ignore maintenance and upkeep costs for the facility. Perhaps they plan on using they profits they choose to imagine for the complex to pay fees, maintenance and upkeep. Which raises the question: if big profits are such a sure-fire guarantee, why is it that Global Spectrum wants a management fee? Should they, since the company speaks so blithely about big profits be rewarded via a profit sharing plan? If they are promising profits and the city is depending on a profit, should not Global Spectrum have the incentive of being compensated out of any profits, profits net of all operating and maintenance costs? Should Global Spectrum, based on their promises and assurances of profit share with the city’s taxpayers the risk that there will in fact be no profits?

It was fascinating to learn that Councilor Beck, through words out of his own mouth, sees no difference between an Abbotsford citizen and taxpayer who questions the wisdom of proceeding with such vague plans for unneeded facilities while needed facilities go un-built – and an American company wanting to build SE2 and pollute our air-shed. Personally I have no idea what this comparison was meant to mean, you will have to ask Councilor Beck. I suppose this insult should have come as no surprise in light of the distain and disregard the council and city staff has shown for anyone who would dare question their infallibility.

I was amazed to learn that the city has a fairy godmother? Leprechaun? whom magically fills and refills the reserve fund. How else is it that taking money out of the reserve fund is not spending taxpayers money – at least according to city staff and council. After all, when asked if the cost of the land should not be included in the proposed entertainment complex the question was told “No, it came out of the reserve fund” and thus was not an expense. Which begs the questions: Where exactly does this money come from if not from the taxpayers?; If it does come from taxpayers, does that not mean that buying the land was an expense paid out by taxpayers? And just how bad is the city staff’s and council’s grasp on basic financial principals that they see money in and out of the reserve as magical not revenue/expense in nature?

It is clear that what staff and council have is labels such as “entertainment complex” and wish lists but no definitive plans for the proposed facility. So what it comes down to is handing them a blank cheque for $85 million and hoping/praying. I was talking to a non-senior (pity!) staff member who was willing to listen and discuss ideas, questions and Reality about Plan A. S/he was correct what the city’s Plan A boils down to is blind faith. I just cannot support turning all that money over to a group I would not trust to build an outhouse. So I must vote NO.

At the UCFV Plan A meeting it was very clear that Councilor John Smith, with his ties to UCFV, badly wants University status for UCFV and believes (as do many) that the entertainment complex is necessary part of UCFV’s bid for University status. The problem? As a city councilor Mr. Councilor Smith is in a position to have exerted undue influence on the entire process, from the “surveys” and “consultations” to the current slick high-pressure sales campaign.

Slanted survey questions and design; selected groups and persons to “consult”; influence and/or pressure to ensure the entertainment complex was chosen to build; a backroom deal to obtain the land from its owner; reasons found to build next to UCFV and nowhere else; pressure and promises to elicit support and backing.

Did all of this happen, some of this or none of this? We will never know, but we do know Councilor Smith was part of the process from beginning to end.

Ethical behaviour demands that someone with such a powerful Conflict of Interest, a position of influence and multiple opportunities to exert undue influence on the process and outcome declare that they are in a position of great conflict of interest, and then place wide distance between themselves and every aspect of the process use in arriving at the recommended projects.

They most certainly should not be acting as both booster of UCFV’s bid for University status, as one of the architects of Plan A and one of the slick, taxpayer funded, high-pressure salesmen for the very project(s) at the core of this Conflict of Interest.

Councilor Smith’s actions upon being in both a Conflict of Interest and a position to exert undue influence jeopardizes not only UCFV’s application for University status, but taints the entire Plan A process. The only way to cauterize this grievous wound to Abbotsford’s integrity is to start again at the beginning and carry out the entire process in a fully public and transparent way OR with a resounding and overwhelming NO vote on November 25, 2006.

Has Abbotsford become a community so lacking in character that we would choose to build a Coliseum were we will watch gladiators, or their modern equivalent, battle for our amusement while so many capital projects that would fill real, pressing and important community needs go unbuilt.

With all the desperate social needs, issues and problems facing Abbotsford; while so many in Abbotsford burn with poverty, hunger, homelessness, mental illness and hopelessness; why are council and senior city staff fiddling around with an extravagant, nonessential complex for entertainment. Lacking in leadership, ideas, principles and honesty they seem to have chosen to try to distract the citizens with entertainments as have self-serving tyrants from the Christians and lions of ancient Rome to our modern times.

Yes our City needs facilities, but we need a sense of priorities, we need to involve and engage the groups that will use the facilities, we need to listen to the ideas of the citizens – they are a pretty bright bunch with wide experience and then we need to tell and show people what will be built (NOT imaginary pictures and wish lists). We do not have to build in a mad rush or all at once. We should have a building program that is steady, consistent and well thought out. We do not need snake-oil sold to us as a plan, eh?

Soccer mom’s have spoken to me about an all weather soccer field and covered practice fields – take an idea from a farmer and just use some pole barns and voila a reasonably priced covered fields. We have a lot of young soccer players. We have many swim teams but no 50-meter competition pool, not to mention being able to attract events like the BC summer games in future. Do we need a better live theater/music venue? Encouraging local talent and participation seems far better for the community’s spirit. There are many such needs from small to large that would far better serve the community than Plan A.

I suggest we send the council and senior city staff a loud and blunt message of our displeasure with their performance on this matter via a resounding NO vote. And if, like spoiled children, they keep their petty threats to throw a tantrum and build nothing I suggest we come together as a community to set our priorities, decide what we need to build to meet those priorities and set out a consistent and long term building schedule to meet our current and future needs. Should egos and self-interest get in the way I am quite willing to bang heads together and hold feet to the fire to ensure we move forward, compromise and reach some form of consensus. Then we hand it to council and senior city staff and tell them ENOUGH – get your asses in gear or get out of the way.