AndCallMrHellerInTheMorningVille
From that City of Vancouver 'Mayor's Budget Task Force Report' that I've been blathering on about recently:
Hmmmmm...
I see that 'parks' are on the no-go/do-not sell 'Core Assets' list.
But what if a park like, say, Spanish Banks, is not actually a park?
At least not a 'permanent' one.
More on that in the next post...
_____
Raymond Tomlin is a little ahead of me on this one if you want to head over to his place and cut pretty much directly to the chase...
Subheader?....This!
.
4 comments:
The problem with selling assets is that it is a one-shot deal. Once sold, there is no going back. It's like selling your car to raise money for your vacation...you wouldn't do that, would you? And two of the three options involves selling assets. It's better to get spending under control.
It would be good if they listed the non-core assets so we know what they are referring to.
Finally, it sounds like propaganda when they use terms like prioritize resources, operational excellence, and maximum benefits. I always worry when I hear a bunch of feel-good jargon
And, to add to the other two posts, private management or public/private partnerships almost always, every single time, work out costing the taxpayers more than if this hadn’t been done. And usually worse or less service.
Bad idea. Look to our period of liberal in name only for several examples of such.
A P-3 is nothing more than a sweetheart deal to fleece the taxpayer over a long time frame.
The Canada Line is a good example.
The Canada line is the only heavy-rail metro, built as a light metro, having less capacity than a modern tram or streetcar.
The real cost to the taxpayer for the Canada Line is well over $5 billion, but is spread across a 35 year period.
Of course after 35 years the Canada Line will be entering "old age" for a metro system and will need a minimum $5 billion rehab to renew all systems, just in time to be handed over to TransLink.
Also the Canada Line is woefully under built and to extend the system it needs a $2 billion rehab before one metre of any extension built.
The stations with 40m to 50m long platforms can only accommodate 2-car, 41 metre long, trains.
So, what is the real cost of the Canada Line?
Massive and why you will not hear Falcon, who championed the Canada Line P-3, extolling the virtues of P-3 construction in the next election.
Anon-At-The-Top--
Please see new post about the possibility that assets assumed to be core might not actually be so...Especially if we have no Parks Board to get in the way of changing such a designation.
_____
Graham, couldn't agree more.
Put another way, why does the private part of the P3's like them so much?
______
Thanks for the reminder EE.
However, it is entirely possible that the good Mr. Falcon or, perhaps more accurately, those backing him will come up with some new fangled/FI-approved makeover moniker to slap on said bottomless pit (i.e. the fourth 'P'!).
.
Post a Comment