Tsk, Tsk, Tsk. Regina, why would you be surprised by Abbotsford City Hall happily squandering a few thousand dollars on a pointless trip to enjoy the ECHL all-star festivities? Having demonstrated their willingness and ability to cost taxpayers millions, a few thousand more is just chump change – with taxpayers as the chumps paying the bills.

Your time might better be spent putting together a primer on how to use that new-fangled, ultramodern communications device the telephone. It seems that nobody at Abbotsford City Hall knows how to use a telephone. Otherwise they could have called the ECHL offices and gotten all the information about local ownership and the one month timeframe at the cost of a few dollars on the long distance phone bill.

Admittedly, while an efficient method of finding out the needed information, a phone call isn’t nearly as much fun as a boondoggle … I mean fact-finding trip on the taxpayer’s tab. Which brings up the question of exactly how many trips were made and at what cost for other fact-finding taxpayer funded vacations on or for Plan A?

No doubt the ECHL management was suitably impressed by representatives of Abbotsford City Hall arriving unprepared, having failed to have done their homework on the ECHL management, ownership and franchise requirements/structure. They were undoubtedly as impressed with Abbotsford City Hall as I and a growing number of other taxpayers are.

During the referendum we at stopplana.com asked repeatedly at public meetings, on the websites and in the written word why senior levels of government would contribute funds to a project after the City’s taxpayers were on the hook for the full amount. Why when senior staff and council blithely blew off this question did the News fail to pursue this point on behalf of City taxpayers/readers?

It is pretty easy to say “it appears, then, that Abbotsford City Hall should have approached the province for financial support prior to the $85 million Plan A referendum” after the premier says no. It is easy to not pursue questions that Abbotsford City Hall does not want asked, much less to answer. It is pretty hard to stand up for the taxpayers by demanding answers to those “unwanted” questions. It is harder to explain not pursuing answers to such obvious financing questions with their high cost to taxpayers/readers.

While on the subject of obvious questions: Why would anyone contribute funds to building the arena when the city is committed to building the arena and assuming all the costs and massive debt? In fact, with the City’s desperate need for a tenant of some kind for this white elephant, anyone with common sense would recognize an opportunity to squeeze lots of goodies, freebies, bonuses and low, low fees out of Abbotsford City Hall. A little financing help with the franchise fee? Covering start-up/relocations costs? A guarantee of minimum attendance and revenue levels?

Rather than stating the obvious in hindsight or hoping for divine intervention it would better serve taxpayers if the News were to promise to practice diligence in holding Abbotsford City Hall to standards of good financial practices and fiscal responsibility in future. At the very least and in particular with reference to any “success” they have in securing a tenant. Taxpayers cannot afford any more of what Abbotsford City Hall calls “success”.

Penticton $9.7 million provincial grant secured BEFORE project presented to public; Langley $15 million provincial grant secured BEFORE project presented to public, project modified to maximize grant; Abbotsford $0.00 provincial grant secured BEFORE project presented to public.

In the Friday Abbotsford Times much gnashing of teeth and cries of “we was robbed” by Abbotsford City Hall. Common sense dictates, for those possessing common sense (which evidence suggests is nonexistent at Abbotsford City Hall) that your maximum leverage on a senior level of government for grants is before you fund the project when they (province; federal) can be blamed for the project not proceeding. This was the case in the recent extortion of $2 million each from both the federal and provincial governments for Stanley Park restoration making Vancouver’s contribution $ZERO$.

When asked during the referendum campaign why they had not and if they should not have gotten grants BEFORE coming to the taxpayers for approval, as any rational, fiscally responsible City (i.e. Langley, Penticton) would do, Abbotsford City Hall blew off those posing the questions as “naysayers” and “negative people”.

It turns out that it is Abbotsford City Hall which was/is negative, or is that negligent, to the tune of $millions$ of taxpayer dollars. This may have taxpayers justifiably wanting to say Nay to Abbotsford City Hall and its cavalier and careless attitude to taxpayer’s money.

{shake head} – I am left contemplating how much good could have been accomplished in addressing affordable housing, poverty reduction and homelessness with the $$$ millions Abbotsford City Hall’s carelessness is costing the City. Abbotsford City Hall could have satisfied their hasty drive to saddle taxpayers with $85 million in debt and had a major impact on these growing social problems by diverting borrowings in an amount matching any government grants into investments in meeting the social needs of our community.

But then the one thing the behaviour of Abbotsford City Hall has made very clear during this entire process is that it is not about dealing with the needs for facilities or social issues of the citizens of Abbotsford, but about satisfying the wants of Abbotsford City Hall.

It is also very, very clear Abbotsford taxpayers simply cannot afford to continue to fund Abbotsford City Hall’s record of failure and co$tly mistakes.