I guess it’s ok then - St. Francis Church doubles in cost
Just read this on metroland . No comment from councillors or questions . Approved.
Rob Ford, the Town’s director of finance, says the $2.55-million tab was a high-level estimate done in the space of two weeks to meet the stimulus funding deadlines and it was done without the necessary due diligence to figure out exactly how much the project would cost in order to meet the stimulus funding deadlines.
“We really had no choice if we wanted to tap into the funding,”
Ok , it’s another level of governments fault. Now I feel better.
Haven’t municipalites learned to come up with an estimate and then double it to arrive at a better estimation of cost? Ask for moon and perhaps the sky would have covered it. Shouldn’t a municipality always be ready to have figures for funding applications if the need arises? It’s called thinking ahead, grade 12 students don’t just start thinking about applying for scholarships in May of their final year.
I have a feeling we would not be dealing with these bad high level estimates if that other Rob Ford was in Ajax!
The Church was purchased before the economic downturn and stimulus program was thrown together by the Feds. We announced in Jan 2009 that renovations were going ahead and that it was desired to have the Church opened in 2010, Between Jan 2009 and the actual application of the paperwork , why wasn’t the Town getting a better idea of the true cost to inform the Citizens ?
Mr Ford, you are a nice person and I respect you but this answer is just not good enough for the Citizens of this Town and for the Councillors to sit on their on their hands , also not a good thing.
But what could they say? . Costing is a skill severly lacking in Government, all levels. High Level is not good enough, the devil is in the details and it seems so are the massive $$$$$ .
June 24th, 2010 at 1:24 pm
I emailed all of the potential councillors, except for the new challenger for mayor because I don’t have the time to call or use snail mail.
I asked them what they would have said had they been at the table for the current situation and what they will say if faced with a request for more money if the Church is not completed in 2010 and they have to decide to vote yes or no. Like they have any choice in the matter anyways.
Let’s see what kind of responses I get.
June 24th, 2010 at 1:44 pm
Costs have not doubled, they have tripled!
St. Francis restoration costs started at $1.2M in 2008, increased to $2.6M in 2009, now $3.4M in 2010 and it is not done yet! The seating is only 160 people! Oh what a arts and cultural theatre we could of had (with parking) for $3.4M… an orchestra pit even. I believe in the preservation of our past but surely there were other ways and means with community involvement.
http://www.newsdurhamregion.com/article/94109
$700Gs this year, $513Gs next year
Feb 21, 2008 - 10:37 AM
By Keith Gilligan
http://www.newsdurhamregion.com/article/128673
Almost $2.6 million to be invested in turning church into performing arts and culture venue
Jun 16, 2009 - 02:26 PM
By Reka Szekely
Karem: Thanks for the extra links, I was searching for more but did not see that one.
June 24th, 2010 at 4:44 pm
E-mailed you my reply. Hope to see it here soon…
Rob
Karem: I pasted your email into a comment but it shows as myself as admin but all your info is there. Thanks for the very
detailed response, Thanks to Marsha Dooley, Kim Dowds, Rob McArthur for responding to the issue. I have to paste in Kim’s response next.
June 24th, 2010 at 5:01 pm
I have a very thorough response from Robert McArthur but I have to go out in a few moments, I will paste it up tonight.
I wanted it on record that he has responded.
June 24th, 2010 at 9:00 pm
Like I said in my response to your last post about this topic, sometimes it’s lousy being right.
http://www.voicesofajax.com/?p=214 . Even then I said that costs would approach $3 Million.
Even before the initial cost overruns on the bell tower I had predicted in front of council and in a written correspondence to council that this would happen and that the project should never be undertaken
http://www.voicesofajax.com/?p=132
The thing is, I’ve come to expect this from Ajax Council. As bizarre as it seems it’s not the cost overruns the trouble me most on this.
What I find most troubling is that we have a director of Finance stating, categorically, in the press in reverence to the estimate that
“…it was done without the necessary due diligence to figure out exactly how much the project would cost in order to meet the stimulus funding deadlines.
“We really had no choice if we wanted to tap into the funding,” he said, adding that many municipalities find themselves in a similar circumstance with escalating costs.
Otherwise, Ajax would have borne all the costs.”
Note the use of the word NECESSARY as in required. Was council informed that the estimate was, at best a rough guess? I was at the council meeting when this was discussed in the budget. There was no such statement.
Were council even advised that sufficient due diligence was not done?
This is a several million dollar mistake if council did not have all the facts in relation to the estimate then we can only conclude that staff mislead council and Mr. Ford and the appropriate staff members should resign or be fired.
If council was aware and direction was given to Mr. Ford to keep it quiet then both Mr. Ford and whatever council member directed them should be gone.
Mr. Ford an Council have an obligation to be forthcoming on such matters and, like it or not, the public was not made aware of certain facts in this matter and someone needs to be held accountable for obfuscating those facts and stifling open and honest debate about this.
As for saying “we had no choice”. Sure we did. We could have chosen to not do the project.
Karem: This is not the first time that Council has not been provided all the information. It happened with the Ombudsman issue as well.
June 24th, 2010 at 11:04 pm
Karem:
Thank you so much for your question. I will be addressing this issue in a number of ways.
If on Council at that time, my objections would have been when this project was first brought up. The fact that the budget estimates where a rush job so that deadlines could be met to access funding would have been the first warning sign of a problem. Is it right to approve something when you don’t have a good picture of the total costs? No. It’s like writing a blank cheque for a project, which the Town has done before. If staff were not confident of the numbers, they should have provided the worst case scenario of the project cost, so Council and tax payers would be aware, and make an informed decision. Staff and Council have to be made accountable for expenditures, and answer to their actions when they are wrong. Basically, staff should have told Council that this may happen.
The next issues is when the actual numbers did come in. Double the price is unacceptable. However, this problem really started as mentioned before. As the Manager of Computer Systems for the Town at one time, if I had quoted a project at $50,000 and it ended up at $100,000, I would be in trouble, as would Council. That is what has to happen here. Steps have to be taken so that this does not happen again, and reprimands should be done.
To address would I approve the increased amount, or any amount for that matter, on this project is a bit more difficult. This is a social benefit. A performing arts and culture centre is very important and needed in Ajax, but should all tax payers foot the bill? We have approximately 91,000 residents in Ajax. We also have approximately about 32,000 residential tax payers. Questions on this project should be answered such as the estimated return on investment, or revenue, if there is any, as well as the estimated number of residents that would use the facility. The facility could cost each resident as much as $19.00. I use the number of residents as even if they are not a tax payer, the rent they pay goes towards taxes. This amount would be reduced by other funding sources such as reserves, development charges, and such. It is paramount that residents and tax payers know what part of any project is being paid in any way by their taxes. Just for the record, the cost to each tax payer could be as high as $54.00. So, are these numbers acceptable for the original amount and the double increase? If it is a fact that a good majority of Ajax residents will enjoy and use this facility, then I would say yes. If the facility would also provide a stream of income for the Town to help offset taxes, then I am even more for it. The increase issue should never have happened in the first place, but it has and I would still approve to move forward with the project. I don‘t believe, I would have remained quite when this information was presented. This project was badly handled by all involved. I don’t think it was all Rob Ford’s fault, as I am sure there were other departments and staff members that worked on this. Rob was just the messenger. It is Council’s fault for accepting the original estimate with out knowing all the details, or at least getting information that would have stated this amount of increase could have happened. It is staffs fault for not doing the job completely.
My final opinion is that this issue brings up another issue I have. Just like the $12.5 million being spent on the bike paths project did. All residents and tax payers are paying for resources that they may not use. Don’t get me wrong, the centre and bike path project are important social projects for the residents of Ajax. One could view them as a social cost for living in Ajax. However, years back when the Town built the new arenas, Sportsplex, and other outdoor resources, they instituted user fees to help cover the costs of the new resources. The reason they did this is they felt that those that don’t use the facilities should not bare the full costs. Youth sports organizations not only had to pay permits, they had to pay user fees to help offset the costs since they were users of the resources. Personally I think youth, senior, and challenged individuals organizations should not pay anything, or at the very least get a significant break on their costs. However, the concept of those that use pay, is an acceptable concept in many municipalities. Is this going to be the case for the new centre and bike path projects? Will those that use or attend the new paths and the new centre pay a user fee? If it is 100% yes, fine. If it is not, then we should not be charging user fees to organizations that use hockey rinks, baseball diamonds, soccer pitches, etc.
Thank you for the opportunity to state my opinion on this. If any one has an comments or questions, please do not hesitate to call me.
Robert MacArthur
Candidate for Ward One Council
2010 Town of Ajax Municipal Election, Durham Region
www.votemacarthur.ca
robert@votemacarthur.ca
905.424.0155
June 24th, 2010 at 11:12 pm
This is the response I received in Email from Kim Dowds.
Hi Karem!
The increasing price tag for St. Francis is a concern for me. This project could have and should have been managed better from the onset.
You asked “Had you been at that table , what would you have said to the current figure”:
My answer is firstly that I would have had a number of questions long before the initial budget was approved.
Obviously there were many unknowns and undiscovered issues with the property that have increased the cost. My experience is that construction costs need to have some $$ set aside for any unknown issues that may come up (especially in renovation and retrofit projects), but also we need to ensure that a thorough inspection is done during budgeting. I understand that there were some structural issues with the building that had been made known to staff and council and have now become part of the reason for the ballooning price tag.
You also asked “if the Church is not opened and ready in 2010 before the election, what will you say when you could be presented with a motion requesting more $$ .”:
My answer is that I cannot give you a simple answer like “I would approve the $$” or “I would vote against the request”. By that point significant tax payer dollars will have been invested from multiple levels of government in the property. My vote will have to be based on the amount requested, the value to the taxpayer of the additional funding, how vital the funds are to the completion of the project and whether funding could be sought from other sources (other levels of government, corporate support, service organization support).
Best,
Kim Dowds
Kim Dowds Accessful Strategy Group **On October 25th Vote Kim Dowds for Regional Councillor, Town of Ajax, Wards 3 & 4**
Karem: I am having a ctv/dion deja vu - ) However you did understand my question
basically I was asking what you would have done and will do if you were a councillor today and/or in the future.
June 24th, 2010 at 11:22 pm
This is from an email received from Leslie Davies.
I do not know enough about this subject to comment,but the lack of response by the council is typical.
Leslie Davies
— he is refering to the news article , I did not email council to ask for a response. I only emailed the candidates that are not current councillors.
June 25th, 2010 at 6:48 pm
This just in from Marilyn Crawford via email.
Good afternoon Karem - Thanks for giving us a chance to respond
I’m unsure of the circumstance of not staying inside the budget on this renovation, but I have had plenty of opportunity sitting around a Board table and know that there are many reasons why a construction can go off budget, however, as duly elected officials it is our responsibilty to ask questions. While I was not present at the council meeting, having been involved with these type of things at the school board, it is possible that discussion had taken place privately in an “in camera” meeting. I feel that even if this had been the case, some sort of explanation should have been given in a public forum.
The public that we represent needs to be informed.
Some of the questions I would have asked:
Why did the price double from what was initially approved?
Where is the money coming from to pay for this increase?
What other projects could be at risk, if we increase this renovation budget?
At the present time, I would not be in favour of approving more money for this renovation.
I hope this answers your specific questions.
Marilyn Crawford
______________________-
That concludes Marilyn’s response. I will include the current in-camera meeting rules for Municipal Councils or Boards.
Closing A Meeting To The Public
The municipal council or local board decides whether a meeting will be closed to the public.
A municipality or local board can close a meeting to the public when dealing with the following:
•The security of the property of the municipality or local board.
•Personal matters about an identifiable individual, including municipal or local board employees.
•A proposed or pending acquisition or disposition of land by the municipality or local board.
•Labour relations or employee negotiations.
•Litigation or potential litigation, including matters before administrative tribunals (e.g. Ontario Municipal Board), affecting the municipality or local board.
•Advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege.
•A matter in respect of which the council, board, committee or other body may hold a closed meeting under another Act.
In this case, a discussion regarding the renovation work on the church does not qualify, the purchase of the church did qualify for some in-camera as it was an aquisition. No employees are discussed, No litigation is in the works unless we are suing a contractor, lawyers are not involved in the church at this point.
June 25th, 2010 at 9:54 pm
What concerns me is that at times such as the Town’s budget that members of council refuse to discuss the budget with the taxpayers … at budget time nobody in Ajax seems to care what the budget contains because the taxpayers refuse to attend these budget meetings & speak their mind as to what they think about the budget. This council is so elitist in the way they are doing business with our tax dollars that it doesn’t seem to bother the people of Ajax to do something about it. It’s time for change in Ajax & hopefully the candidates running against the incumbants will make a difference & get lots & lots of taxpayers out on Oct 25 in order to bring in a brand new council … one that will communicate with & be available for the people of Ajax … especially to those taxpayers who are interested. The people of Ajax continue to be totally oblivious as to what this council is doing with our tax dollars. The members of this present think they are doing a wonderful job & that they cannot … will not be beaten in the coming elections. Will beating them be mission impossible. All’s quiet in Ajax. Will it stay that way thru Oct 25/10 & beyond?
Karem: I wondered where you were. I hope we get more people out to vote. I agree with you that no one cares about the budget but apathy is hard to fight.
June 27th, 2010 at 12:05 am
This shouldn’t come as any surprise. This project started out as a restoration and has basically become a rebuild from the ground up. Now that we’ve pumped this much money into the place, I guess there’s no turning back. For the sake of comparison, I wonder how much it cost to restore Casa Loma?. I visited Boldt Castle last summer in Alexandria Bay, NY. It was the second time I had been there. It sat abandoned for decades before they finally decided to restore it. The restoration has taken many years and they still haven’t completed the top level. However, it’s my understanding that a lot of the money used to restore this place was done through donations. Why couldn’t we have done this with the church?.
There was a very good reason why the church folks moved out of that building. They likely knew the restoration wasn’t affordable and they could build a new place for a fraction of the cost.
I’m all for saving history and it’s something I feel strongly about. That being said, I’m also realistic and know that some places aren’t worth saving from a financial point of view. Even if they could have simply done a basic restoration and made the place safe, I’m sure it would have saved some money and kept everyone happy.
July 2nd, 2010 at 11:18 am
I have a response from Khari Gaynor :
Hello Karem,
My position is strongly in favour of getting the St. Francis church project complete. This is an investment in the community, our culture, and our heritage. As our population continues to increase, and our ability to provide services to our residents is strained even more, additional public spaces such as this Performing Arts Centre become a must.
Moving forward situations like this call to ensure due diligence and increased accountability during the planning and implementation phases of these projects. Projects are bound to be mismanaged or poorly managed when accountability is not clear. The role of a councillor is to represent the voice of the residents. Unfortunately, this time it appeared as if the residents did not have that voice.
Khari Gaynor
Candidate-Regional Councillor, Ward 1 & 2
416-317-2732
______________________
July 2nd, 2010 at 5:40 pm
Hi Khari,
I have history with St. Francis DeSales church and saw the estimate for restoration that was handed out to parishioners before the church was vacated. Obviously due diligence was not done by the Town and council. Someone should have questioned the costing discrepancies that the church had vrs the town.
You write:
As our population continues to increase, and our ability to provide services to our residents is strained even more, additional public spaces such as this Performing Arts Centre become a must.
Please note that seating for 160 people (with NO parking) is NOT a Performing Arts Centre. This has less seating than the Oshawa Little Theater. It would make a great small wedding hall. So much money and so little homework before the purchase. I’d be homeless if I bought a house the same way.
Now, it is our money pit and WE WILL GROW TO LOVE IT, we just have to pay up because we can’t turn back now!
Marsha Dooley
Ward 3 - Councillor Nominee
July 2nd, 2010 at 5:52 pm
Note:
Oshawa Little Theater seats 354.
St. Francis will have 160 seats.
Marsha Dooley
Ward 3 - Councillor Nominee
July 5th, 2010 at 11:40 pm
I’m not sure if there’s a need for another performing arts centre in Ajax. Who exactly will benefit from this when everything is said and done?. It’s unlikely we’ll ever get a major broadway musical like Jersey Boys in this town but suppose we did. What’s wrong with using the Ajax Community Centre for such a production?. There’s already lots of seating, lighting, a sound system, and lots of parking. Even the Hilton has a nice room for hosting large functions. When the town decided they wanted to restore this old church, I don’t remember them saying how they intended to use it.
I’m also not impressed by this glass room they plan to build out front. If the goal was to restore the church to it’s former glory and preserve the look of Church Street, then I feel they should have kept the building looking original. This new addition reminds me of the crystal at the ROM.
One more comment for the candidates….
Election time is not far away. We need to hear more from you!!!. I’m thrilled that there’s so many people wanting to run for council but unless you start to advertise and get your voice heard by residents of this town, we’re going to be stuck with the same old gang that we’ve had for decades!
Karem: Big shows would not be out here anyways. I saw that Crystal at the ROM, different is all I can say.