Ice arena talk heats up

By MARCIA NELESEN ( Contact )   Friday, Oct. 23, 2009
ADVERTISEMENT
 

— A south side industrial park is the best place to build a new ice rink, Janesville City Manager Eric Levitt has suggested.

The city council at its Monday meeting will consider partnering with a private group to build a rink.

Levitt wrote in a memo that the council could consider giving up to $2 million to the Janesville Youth Hockey Club for a new rink if the group can get commitments for an additional $1.5 million by Dec. 1.

The meeting begins at 7 p.m. in City Hall, 18 N. Jackson St. A public hearing is not scheduled, but residents can sign in and speak at the beginning of the meeting.

Levitt recommends a site in a south side industrial park as the best option, along with two other possibilities. Twelve sites had been identified, but many would require additional costs. Disadvantages include small lots and the need to buy private property, unsuitable topography or environmental concerns, for instance.

The three sites recommended by the city are:

No. 1: The preferred location in a south side industrial park on Venture Drive west of Beloit Avenue. The city-owned property is in TIF No. 22 and located north of the John Deere warehouse.

The city prefers that the arena move because the city is looking for a site for a new central fire station. The current ice arena location at 821 Beloit Ave. would fit that bill, and the city owns the land. At a recent meeting, council member George Brunner said buying land for a new fire station could cost as much as $1 million.

In addition, the city might be able to rent the new facility to the Beloit Youth Hockey Association in the off-season because of its proximity to Beloit.

Those living and working on the city's south side have frequently complained at public meetings that the city focuses its energy on the east side rather than encouraging commercial development elsewhere.

No. 2: A location in an east side industrial park south of the Youth Sports Complex. The site is owned by the city and is about 11 acres.

No. 3: The existing location. The building could be expanded over what is now the parking lot to house a second sheet of ice. New parking could be added on the south side of the building.

The ice rink is 35 years old. The city estimates it must spend about $1.5 million on such major items as a new roof and cooling system. The rink shut down for two months this summer because of problems with the ice cooling system.

The Janesville Youth Hockey Club earlier this year proposed that it would be smarter to build a new rink rather than throw money at the old. The group suggested the site at the Youth Sports Complex because the city already owns that land.

Others in the city, such as a west side business group, urged the city to look elsewhere rather than concentrating everything on the east side.

In the club's proposal, a new ice rink would cost about $5 million and have two sheets of ice.

The city would be asked to commit an initial $2 million and an additional $500,000 when the second sheet is added.

The council has included $1.15 million in its yearly borrowing note issue to either repair the existing arena or help pay for a new facility. The council will consider the borrowing at Monday's meeting. About $648,000 has previously been borrowed for a new aquatics facility and could be used for the ice arena, as well, according to city memos.

Other ice arena locations mentioned in the memo include:

-- The open space south of Jackson Elementary School and west of Beloit Avenue owned by the city. The proposed site is north of the berm. The berm was built to provide a buffer between the industrial park and the residential neighborhood.

-- Rockport Park.

-- An area south of the Rock River and east of South Jackson Street adjoining Dawson Field. Other privately–held properties would have to be purchased to increase the size of the lot.

-- A site on Palmer Drive adjoining Interstate 90/39. The undeveloped area of Palmer Park is a pet exercise area.

reader COMMENTS
Click here to view reader comments
(81)
SuperDave
Oct 28, 2009 at 10:38 a.m.
Suggest removal

Funny how the article discusses WHERE to put an ice arena, not WHETHER TO. It is NOT the proper purpose of government to buy, build, own, operate or maintain an ice arena. Might as well rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic after hitting the iceberg. And to be crystal clear for those of you on city council reading this, the "iceberg" was the closing of the GM plant.

ne1but24n18
Oct 28, 2009 at 12:11 a.m.
Suggest removal

lovemycountry- Are you nuts. Hockey is not just a rich white mans sport. My kids play and I am far from being rich. I wish I was but I am NOT. Also you can out fit a kid for hockey for a lot less than $400. You dont need the best stuff on the market. Clubs also let you use there equipment.

SarahB1
Oct 27, 2009 at 12:08 a.m.
Suggest removal

Thanks, donkeykong. My bad.

BadgerFanMom
Oct 26, 2009 at 5:11 p.m.
Suggest removal

ugghh

babsjvl
Oct 26, 2009 at 3:57 p.m.
Suggest removal

Pete and her NEED TO GET A LIFE together or apart they are both nasty on here maybe the gazette should look into them and read the way they treat other people

justintimberlakerules
Oct 26, 2009 at 3:51 p.m.
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
CallitasIseeit
Oct 26, 2009 at 3:46 p.m.
Suggest removal

CONGRATULATIONS HANNAH!-You have passed Gazettefan in posts and now lead the Gazette on line commenter's in all categories including:

Most posts, misspelled words, incorrect grammar, offending deceased people and chasing balloons down highway 26.

Keep up the good work!

justintimberlakerules
Oct 26, 2009 at 3:27 p.m.
Suggest removal

Hannah - Let me get this straight. You're not married to Pete?

justintimberlakerules
Oct 26, 2009 at 3:07 p.m.
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
SarahB1
Oct 26, 2009 at 2:44 p.m.
Suggest removal

Hannah, it is a sad situation. The Council is getting us hook, line and sinker. This was probably mapped out during those secret meetings held more than a year ago regarding the semi-pro hockey team. Take off the blinders, Council members. Your community needs more effort put into future jobs. That's been on the ice too long.

justintimberlakerules
Oct 26, 2009 at 11:50 a.m.
Suggest removal

Shotgun - Huh????

ShotgunWillie
Oct 26, 2009 at 11:28 a.m.
Suggest removal

Heard Eric Levitt on the radio report dance around on this subject taking about City profits, sharing, build a fire station where old one is, and private investor. Never once was their takes off not building it.

ShotgunWillie
Oct 26, 2009 at 10:54 a.m.
Suggest removal

Do the meeting start at 6:30 now ?

ShotgunWillie
Oct 26, 2009 at 10:41 a.m.
Suggest removal

So how are they paying for this?

ShotgunWillie
Oct 25, 2009 at 11:14 p.m.
Suggest removal

Sandman
I agree, and read on here before there is some connection between City Manager Eric Levitte, the Rock County Youth Hockey, and him pushing this plan through.
** I thought Public officials needed to remain neutral or remove themselves from the project.
This Eric is planning the project.

ShotgunWillie
Oct 25, 2009 at 10:56 p.m.
Suggest removal

Sounds like this Eric Levitt guy has it in for the tax payers. Does he have a conflict of interest in this project?

justintimberlakerules
Oct 24, 2009 at 11 p.m.
Suggest removal

This has Doyle written all over it.

council_foe
Oct 24, 2009 at 3:47 p.m.
Suggest removal

He is hangin with his buddies on the council. Its a conflict of interest .You scratch my back and I will scratch yours . See no evil hear no evil, speak no evil .

Sandman
Oct 24, 2009 at 3 p.m.
Suggest removal

It seems this council is not interested in anything but their own dreams, which will likely turn out to be our tax nightmares!

1. WRITE.
2. CALL.
3. SHOW UP AT THE MEETING MONDAY NIGHT.
3. ASK FOR A REFERENDUM ON THIS ISSUE
4. VOTE THEM OUT OF OFFICE IF THAT'S WHAT IT TAKES TO GET RESIDENT TAXPAYER REPRESENTATION.

This issue has predictably spun out of control -- from $200k to $1m to $5m and climbing -- and apparently will continue to do so if this bunch is allowed free reign in this city. I expect that building a new facility was most likely the plan in the first place, not fixing up an old, under-utilized building that has poor parking to begin with and has been on the closing discussion list for years.

And don't fall for the old "fire station relocation" ploy! Why did this suggestion JUST come up now? Grasping at straws? Watch ... they'll push the ice rink down our throats, then tell us the site does not have sufficient room or roadway access or is a bad location on which to build a fire station -- then they'll buy some other land on which to build a new station! Any takers on that bet?

STOP THIS UNTIMELY PROJECT! We have yet to experience the full brunt of this recession on local services and city taxpayers -- DO NOT SPEND MONEY WE DON"T HAVE ON THE PIPE DREAMS AND SPECIAL INTERESTS OF A FEW!

If this junior hockey is so viable, give it three to five years at it's present location and see how it grows and at what level it stabilizes. It's only been a few weeks -- it's still new -- and way too early to tell how long the interest will last. Building a new facility now is like proposing and buying a house together after the third or fourth date (and remember that each of these dates has been greased by a more than sufficient quantity of beer, of course!). It's far too early to predict future attendance numbers, program stability and success.

Ilovehockey
Oct 24, 2009 at 2:52 p.m.
Suggest removal

Really, I'm rich now! Good to know. Just because I choose to have my children play hockey does not mean I'm anywhere near rich. What the naysayers are not getting here is that it can't wait a couple of years to see how it is going. It needs to be fixed now! So, because the city has contractual obligations to maintain that ice rink, they are in it for at least the 1.5 million. That is because the previous administrations did not take proper care of this facility. So now it is all dumped on us. And I'm really getting tired of the "I don't use it so I don't want to pay for it" attitude. There are so many things that I pay for in my taxes that I don't use, but I understand their value to this community. That's what you don't seem to get. The value to the community. The adding of the fire station to the current central location is a bonus for the city!

harley21
Oct 24, 2009 at 2:27 p.m.
Suggest removal

Can't blame teachers for this!

SpeedKills13
Oct 24, 2009 at 2 p.m.
Suggest removal

lovemycountry....are you really tryin to make this about race? everything is not in terms of black and white these days no matter how hard you try. this is the witch hunt of the 2000s. give it up.

council_foe
Oct 24, 2009 at 1:42 p.m.
Suggest removal

http://www.tomahjournal.com/articles/200...
Dont forget to read this article .Its an eye opener .

partarican1
Oct 24, 2009 at 1:35 p.m.
Suggest removal

How is this ice rink going to provide enough jobs for our community? What is the percentage of residents who will use this facility? Why not ask them to pay for it, because I don't want it, and I don't want to pay for it, either.

council_foe
Oct 24, 2009 at 1:06 p.m.
Suggest removal

Is that what they are calling themselves now ?

woody
Oct 24, 2009 at 12:37 p.m.
Suggest removal

council foe...Are you talking about the Forward Janesville country club?

meerkat
Oct 24, 2009 at 11:06 a.m.
Suggest removal

I cannot believe, that in a time of crisis, and this is a crisis with the current unemploymnet rate in this city, that this project is even in the works. What is wrong with this city and the council? Who is going to benefit from this? A very small group of people thats who. While a vast number of people will suffer from this(more taxes). People, we haven't even seen the after effects from the loss of GM, Lear, Sanford and the many of the other small buisinesses that are not on the map. I could care less about hockey, or a local hockey team, but that is not the point. If we are to survive as a community, we should wait at least till the dust settles before making any commitments of tax payer money. Heck there is talk of local residents having to pay for trash pick up (which is probaly coming) let alone financing a new ice arena. Use the old one for now and lets wait a couple of years. Let's see if Janesville can survive the after effects of high unemployment.

lovemycountry
Oct 24, 2009 at 9:48 a.m.
Suggest removal

At $400 for a kid to get outfitted for hockey, it's surprising those who are concerned about community welfare are supporting this. This is a white rich man's sport. Check out the Jets photos and try to find a non-white. http://janesvillejets.pointstreaksites.c...

wtp
Oct 24, 2009 at 9:26 a.m.
Suggest removal

When the boys baseball came to the council meeting requesting 1.5 million to expand there park at the sports complex, no one was at the council meeting complaining. It all took place less then 15 minutes and you folks just spent 1.5 million. However now they want to build a skating rink and the complainers are in high gear. What gives? Is baseball so much better for our kids then hockey? I do see where your priorities are, baseball and basketball. You folks spent 72 million for basketball and no one complained like this.

cardtrader
Oct 24, 2009 at 8:58 a.m.
Suggest removal

I say use the old menards plenty of parking and right by the highway Great location and plenty of exposure

creatureinthefreezer
Oct 24, 2009 at 6:35 a.m.
Suggest removal

Not a surprise to see this special interest pet project being rushed. Why is no one investigating this insider deal that will rob Peter the taxpayer to pay Paul the friends of the council. The logical plan would be to see how profitable the current location can become with the new sports team and in a few years if all is well then put this up for a vote. Otherwise let the private investors put their money into the new rink. If they cannot see the return of investment then that's your answer.

SuperDave
Oct 23, 2009 at 10:16 p.m.
Suggest removal

Here we go again. It is not the proper purpose of government to buy, build, own, operate or maintain an ICE ARENA! The current state of the economy (horrible) *should* make this crystal clear, but, apparently not. So go ahead, build it, run it, do whatever you want. And as I have continued to say, YEAR after YEAR, this will continue to be a problem for the citizens of this city who will continue to be forced to pick up the pieces - pay the millages, fund the bonds, make up for the loss of private business, etc. etc. etc.
The only reasonable solution is to privatize. And if no one in the private sector wants to own and run an ice arena, well then --- DUHHHHH --- that proves that it's not worth the investment.

SarahB1
Oct 23, 2009 at 9:27 p.m.
Suggest removal

If the Council does end up approving this new arena, please (at least) DO NOT build it inside Palmer Park. That place is nearly sacred to a lot of residents.

booch11
Oct 23, 2009 at 9:18 p.m.
Suggest removal

i suppose we may need to fight the battle to keep the dog park again. one of the site being considered for the arena:
-- A site on Palmer Drive adjoining Interstate 90/39. The undeveloped area of Palmer Park is a pet exercise area.

council_foe
Oct 23, 2009 at 9:18 p.m.
Suggest removal

Let the recalls begin !

tom1cass2
Oct 23, 2009 at 9:10 p.m.
Suggest removal

Well for one I am all for this. I know alot of people that use the rink. It will be good for Janesville. Go ahead beat me up for my opinion but I am all for it.

SarahB1
Oct 23, 2009 at 8:54 p.m.
Suggest removal

council_foe: I don't want to beat you up; I want to join you in the fight against this ill-timed waste of taxpayer money.

Unidentified
Oct 23, 2009 at 7:22 p.m.
Suggest removal

Where the heck is this nonsense coming from. One minute we're going to spend 200,000 to fix the old arena. Next it jumps to 1.5 million to fix or 2 million to build new. We were opting to fix at that time. Now we're looking at 5 million to build new? What is it like .000001% of the Janesville population that gives a hoot about an ice arena or ice hockey? I've met a lot of people in this town over the years and I can't name ten that care about anything other than football or baseball. The Milwaukee Admirals can't even fill the seats and that's in a major city. This seems like a massive money pit that only a small minority will care about, but the majority will pay for. I used to think the children's museum was a bad idea (due to lack of money), but at least more people would get use out of that. Oh, wait they wouldn't serve beer. What a joke. I'm waiting for the next round of talks to see what that figure is. Soon we'll have a retractable roof stadium that seats 65,000.

council_foe
Oct 23, 2009 at 6:52 p.m.
Suggest removal

Once again the good old boys politics . The matter of using tax payer money is the main issue , and the public needs to be asked what it wants , and put it on record ,instead of this constant disregard for what the citizens want their tax money to be used for . Is a city wide recall needed to drive home this point ? Someone has an agenda who feels that they need to push this issue repeatedly to fullfill a commitment . Seems like someone has their hands to deep in the public cookie jar , and their buddies are the only ones who get any cookies . Now your free to beat me up .

crazcass
Oct 23, 2009 at 6:28 p.m.
Suggest removal

I feel that the south side would make a better location for several reasons.
1. It keeps traffic away from to downtown area.
2. It would make the south side more appealing to business looking to bring that side of town (food and entertainment) Hotels would be more interested if more and more attractions were added. It would be like a chain of events. The more “class A” businesses in one area, the more people, meaning more revenue and a better chance of businesses surviving and more jobs.
3. With the loss of GM, a lot of businesses over have lost a customer base. (Pick N’ Save, McDonalds, Burger King, Family Video) People who would travel to watch the games or for the events that the hockey team/club would host would bring people to those businesses instead of to the ones on the north side of town.
4. There’s more room on the south side. The south side has a lot of prime acres that are open for people to build on. It is close to the interstate.

janesvillean
Oct 23, 2009 at 5:14 p.m.
Suggest removal

I do like the idea of using the current arena location for the new main fire station. Finding a central enough place with enough space for a facility was going to be a real challenge.

MSouthers
Oct 23, 2009 at 4:56 p.m.
Suggest removal

I'm not a fan of ice (either in a rink or on the roads), but this plan is growing on me. I'd like to see more private investment and consider the value of the land as a portion of the City's commitment to the project package.

Before you post a comment, consider this:

Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy Agreement
  • Keep it clean. Comments that are obscene, vulgar or sexually oriented will be removed. Creative spelling of such terms or implied use of such language is banned, also.
  • Don't threaten to hurt or kill anyone.
  • Be nice. No racism, sexism or any other sort of -ism that degrades another person.
  • Harassing comments. If you are the subject of a harassing comment or personal attack by another user, do not respond in-kind.  Hit the "Suggest Removal" button on offensive comments.
  • Share what you know. Give us your eyewitness accounts, background, observations and history.
  • Do not libel anyone. Libel is writing something false about someone that damages that person's reputation.
  • Ask questions. What more do you want to know about the story?
  • Stay focused. Keep on the story's topic.
  • Help us get it right. If you spot a factual error or misspelling, email newsroom@gazettextra.com or call 1-800-362-6712.
  • Remember, this is our site. We set the rules, and we reserve the right to remove any comments that we deem inappropriate.

Post Comment

Commenting requires registration.

Username:
Password: (Forgotten your password?)

Comment:

ADVERTISEMENT