Costs for Janesville ice arena renovations shoot past reserve

By MARCIA NELESEN ( Contact )   Saturday, Dec. 10, 2011
ADVERTISEMENT
 

— Basic renovations to the city ice arena would cost more than the city has borrowed for the project, according to final design estimates.

The council set aside $2.08 million for renovations that include a new roof and new ice-making equipment.

But new estimates that include a traditional ice-making system total $2.44 million. A staff-recommended geothermal system would cost an additional $100,000, or a total of $2.54 million.

The geothermal equipment would take advantage of the cold water in nearby Lions Beach and be cheaper to operate. Staff estimates annual savings of $21,364 with the geothermal system.

The Janesville Ice Arena at 821 Beloit Ave. was built in the mid-1970s and needs major work.

The ice-making equipment, which is a large component of the remodeling, breaks down regularly, and arena users are crossing their fingers it lasts one more season.

Council members in February authorized the city to spend up to $160,000 for architectural designs to improve the ice arena at a cost of between $1.3 million to $3 million.

The council already has borrowed $2 million for renovations. It also has $180,000 from an Energy Efficiency Community Development Block grant.

The council was scheduled to decide the extent of renovations after bids were returned in February.

But Eric Levitt, city manager, said he is bringing the ice-making equipment discussion to the council Monday for several reasons.

First, the project already totals more than expected, and the council might decide to reduce its size.

Also, the architect recommended ice-making equipment be chosen before the project is put out for bids because the equipment affects the design.

The energy-efficiency grant must be used before year’s end. The equipment should be ordered as soon as possible to be ready for construction in April.

The work would be finished in time for hockey and figure skating season in September.

The Janesville Plan Commission on Monday studied three design alternatives for the building.

The base bid—the one projected to cost about $2.44 million with traditional equipment or $2.54 million with geothermal equipment—includes a new roof and an additional 1,950 square feet for a new mechanical storage room. The current mechanical space would be renovated into locker rooms.

A second option increases total additional space to 3,150 square feet and includes new locker rooms for the Janesville Jets.

A third option brings total new space to 7,800 square feet. It would include a segment built on the northeast side of the building for seating, restrooms, a concession stand and programming space.

On the agenda

The Janesville City Council will meet at 7 p.m. Monday in City Hall, 18 N. Jackson St. An informational listening session with council members is scheduled for 6 p.m.

Items on the agenda include:

-- A public hearing on a $10 wheel tax that is included in the 2012 budget. The council must approve an ordinance to levy the per-vehicle fee. It is doubtful at this point that the council would change its choice because it would have to find $550,000 in the 2012 budget if the fee is not approved. The vote for the 2012 budget was 4-2, with Councilman Sam Liebert referencing the wheel tax for his negative vote.

-- Authorization to spend $1.53 million to buy an 84-acre site located at 4021 S. Highway 51 for a possible new business. The money would come from TIF funds. City Manager Eric Levitt suggests the council authorize him to buy the land contingent upon a development agreement.

-- Continued discussion on a roundabout at the intersection of East Milwaukee Street and Wuthering Hills Drive. The project would be paid for with $395,000 from the state and $220,000 from the city. Some residents believe that changes west of the intersection have improved safety. The intersection does not meet standards for traffic signals, so traffic lights would have to be paid for by the city. Staff believes signals eventually will be needed when development occurs to the east. By that time, grants for traffic control might not be available, according to a city memo. The city would have to reimburse the state $78,000 if a roundabout is not built. Staff determined there is no liability to the city if the city does not make further safety improvements and an accident happens at the site.

reader COMMENTS
Click here to view reader comments
(46)
taxed2much
Dec 13, 2011 at 11:24 a.m.
Suggest removal

FYI,

The Jets are not a minor leauge pro team. A Minor leauge pro team would be the likes of the Icehogs, or the Chicago Wolves or the Admirals (AHL). There are several "minor leauge" pro levels of hockey and the Jets are not one of them. The Jets are kids looking to get a chance to play college hockey since you have to play Juniors (What the Jets are) before you can play college.... unless you are a Crosby, Kane, Toews etc that is the route you take.

many people think "Junior" hockey is "Youth" hockey and they are unrelated outside of the tie between the Jets and the "Jr. Jets" which is a form of youth hockey, however the Jr. Jets are not to be confused with the JYHC. Confused yet? Good. Point is there are several layers of hockey and each one brings in revenue to communities around the State.

Olderandornerier
Dec 12, 2011 at 7:57 a.m.
Suggest removal

Operating costs for geothermal do not usually pay for themselves on small projects. In many cases when they break they are circumvented and not used. This then impacts the refrigeration system as it will be designed with the effect of the geothermal in place. This then tax’s the “standard” systems design capacity. I would also question the installed cost figure if they intend to use Lions beach.

lovemycountry
Dec 12, 2011 at 5:16 a.m.
Suggest removal

This article fails to mention the $200,000 in tax money already spent on ice arena remodeling solely so the Jets could start playing. How generous of city taxpayers to pay for a better quality of life for the Jets and fans of hockey. When will elected government representatives stop trying to push projects for which there is no saved money, in order to feel important ? When will the big spenders realize robbing Peter to pay Paul doesn't work ?

Roscoe
Dec 11, 2011 at 8:53 p.m.
Suggest removal

Autoworker2- What Ice Arena are you driving by? The ice arena is packed everyday of the week. Friday, I couldn't get a parking space for the Jets game, Saturday the same, Sunday the J-hawks game was cut short because fans were already arriving for the Jets game. Are you sure you aren't driving by the vacant GM plant and not seeing cars. Stop crying!

janesvillean
Dec 11, 2011 at 3:50 p.m.
Suggest removal

tmcdonald's posting history indicates he is "the real Tom McDonald".
.
Janesville certainly seems to be a place that puts very low value on public goods. We have the parks, but some people think we have too many. We have the bike trail, but some people think it is too expensive. We have the Tallman House, but some people think it is a burden. Some of the other public goods we have, such as Rockport Pool or the Ice Arena, are pretty utilitarian and not very attractive.
.
The ice arena provides value to our community. It allows people to exercise by skating year-round. It supports Olympic sports such as speed skating and figure skating. We even had a speed skater from Janesville get to the Olympics! It supports the hockey program. It even supports a minor league professional team -- but only for the last couple of years. All these bring value to our community and given the decades of investment in the facility over the years would be a great loss to have disappear.
.
Having one facility does not mean an obligation to have others. This is the facility that Janesville residents lobbied for and that Janesville residents have supported with user fees over the years. Nobody was blindsided by the end of the arena's systems life -- this was an expense that was going to occur sooner or later. If anything it has been delayed while the city explored options using private financing, which would have reduced the city's investment relative to its gain. Those weren't popular, though, and ultimately failed.
.
Here we are, now, with no support for private investment, so we are looking at putting in only public money or closing the facility without fanfare. I don't think there's anyone on the council who relishes the backlash that closing would generate -- from families, the schools, and the pro team that would need to relocate. Sure, its tourism dollars aren't enormous, but it has been something. If you don't like the "subsidy" (uh, they pay rental, you know), you should have helped the private funding effort!
.
Two million dollars may seem like a lot, but it is going to give the arena another two to three decades of use. That's as little as $66,000 per year (on top of other expenses) -- just a dollar for every person in Janesville.
.
Madison is upgrading just one small part of its bike trails with a $3.5 million freeway overpass. And Madison regularly gets high quality of life ratings. You don't get there without investment.

ms_sassy_wi
Dec 11, 2011 at 1:56 p.m.
Suggest removal

yeah. didn't see that coming. what a shock. <sarcasm>

youkillme
Dec 11, 2011 at 1:13 p.m.
Suggest removal

tmcdonald, order of priority? No public facility or taxpayer money should be intentionally used to subsidize private-for-profit business. Using government to advantage one over another destroys the free market and it destroys trust in government. You could not ask for a worse deal. That should be No.1.

saxcat70
Dec 11, 2011 at 1:01 p.m.
Suggest removal

and I'm for all of them. Janesville could be the place people come to, instead of the place they stop at on their way somewhere else.

wiggle
Dec 11, 2011 at 12:58 p.m.
Suggest removal

Ski jumping brings in lots of people too! Lets build a ski jump and watch the money pour into the city!
Water parks bring in lots of money, just ask WI Dells and Majic Waters, lets build a water park.
Gymnastics is big business - how about a state of the art arena for gymnastic events.
The list is VERY long.......

Janes
Dec 11, 2011 at 12:30 p.m.
Suggest removal

I recommend joining a facebook page so you can give a identifiable context to your feelings.
The other day I got a friend request from friends of Janesville on facebook. All the running Council members have posts on this page.
Anonymous complaining on the Gazette page serves no real purpose.

saxcat70
Dec 11, 2011 at 12:28 p.m.
Suggest removal

"a project destined to benefit a miniscule number of Janesville's residents." typical janesville shortsightedness. If instead of going for the least possible option, we look towards the future, the ice arena very well could be a good investment. I have never been to the ice arena. but I know alot of people who have kids in hockey. If we provide an arena that will attract tourneys and increased use, Thousands of people will come to our city, spending out of city dollars, and support our community. If you do not see this as a good thing for our community, please move so your property can be bought by someone willing to bet on Janesville's future, instead of hanging on to the past.

wiggle
Dec 11, 2011 at 12:12 p.m.
Suggest removal

tmcdonald- I see a heck of alot more people/cars at golf courses and pools than I do at the ice arena.
Prioritize like this - if it makes money and holds it's own, it stays. If taxpayers need to flip the bill - bu-bye!
As for parks and trails - if it is not necessary to keep the city running and taxpayers are to flip the bill, it should be voted on by the city residents.

tmcdonald
Dec 11, 2011 at 11:30 a.m.
Suggest removal

Many posters have indicated that the ice arena is not profitable for the city so it should be shut down. Here are some other city owned recreational facilities that do not bring in enough revenue to be self sustaining and have cost the city millions of dollars over the years: library, rockport pool, palmer pool, riverside pool, senior center, recreational trails, tallman house, our entire park system, golf courses, etc. Some people think we should take care of and invest in what we have. Other people think we should shut down our recreational facilities because they are not profitable. What do you think? And if you want to shut down facilities, what is your order of priority?

fschultz
Dec 11, 2011 at 11:05 a.m.
Suggest removal

Thank you, Janesvillean.

SuperDave
Dec 11, 2011 at 10:53 a.m.
Suggest removal

@wiggle: Someone who "gets" it! Hooray! And don't forget jai alai on the wish list! I'm the only person talking about that, so not building a jai alai facility is oppression of a minority!

Sigma40
Dec 11, 2011 at 10:47 a.m.
Suggest removal

Anyone do any research and see if anyone on city council or making these decisions has any kids that play hockey? Perhaps we have a biased person blowing out tax dollars?

zdog
Dec 11, 2011 at 10:01 a.m.
Suggest removal

I remember working hockey events 10 years ago in smaller towns all over northern and western WI. Janesville and Beloit teams were always there, every weekend, often in the same town 3-4 times over the course of a winter. Hundreds of kids from 5 up thru the teens. Families of kids and their parents, all staying in local hotels, going to local restaurants, spending money in those small towns. Thousands of new dollars injected everyday just because of hockey and some stupid ice arena.

wiggle
Dec 11, 2011 at 9:52 a.m.
Suggest removal

Why is this being funded by taxpayers? If the fees to have your kid in hockey is 'alot' than the fees should cover the updates needed. If the fees to play aren't enough, then that means there isn't enough hockey players in the area, therefore the arena is not needed.
My kids are into swimming/diving. Swim/diving meets bring just as many into a town if not more, so lets have the tax payers build an olympic size pool and diving pool so my kids can use it!!! My neighbours kids do equestrian jumping, again that is a also a big draw of people coming to the events. Lets have the tax payers build an arena for them.
If taxpayer money is good revenue for hockey lets use it for pools and horse arenas. As well as any other sport a few kids in the city may want to play.

council_foe
Dec 11, 2011 at 9:50 a.m.
Suggest removal

Gandolf your defence of this subject is not unusual. The majority of people on this earth have no idea what happens behind closed doors, over the phone, or online .Sounds like one of those"it could`nt happen in my town" nice acumens. Good for you I`m very glad you excogitated this claim fully , but I will stick to my feelings on this one. Too much baloney for one small town, and too many years of it . To simply dismiss the idea only breathes new life into the old machine.

SuperDave
Dec 11, 2011 at 9:46 a.m.
Suggest removal

It is not the proper purpose of government to buy, build, operate, or maintain an ice arena. As I have said for years (and this article, once again, attests), this white elephant will continue to be an albatross around the necks of city taxpayers for years to come, until the city government once and for all decides to get out of the ice arena business.
And for those of you who support the city government owning and operating an ice arena at the expense of the people (most of whom have never set foot in the place), I ask you - where is my jai lai facility? Still waiting.

janesvillean
Dec 11, 2011 at 9:36 a.m.
Suggest removal

* This is not a cost overrun. No money has been budgeted or spent. The money set aside was a ballpark guess, not based on a full project spec. It just means they don't have to go looking for $2 million now. This was actually SMART.
.
* This is in no way "misappropriation" or "corruption". For actual examples of that try the East Chicago mayor who used city money to improve *his own home*. He got five years in the fed pokey. You guys here have NO IDEA how lucky you are. No idea whatsoever.
.
Any decision on re-siting the ice arena depended on the private financing options that failed over the last two years. Since none of that gelled, we're stuck with what we have, where it is. Installing a geothermal system sounds like a good investment considering the amount of work and the convenient location.
.
onelife2live, the ice arena DOES CHARGE FEES.
http://www.ci.janesville.wi.us/index.asp...
The pools DO CHARGE FEES.
http://www.ci.janesville.wi.us/index.asp...

wahoo_35
Dec 11, 2011 at 9:25 a.m.
Suggest removal

The city at this point should admit it will just cost too much for what it is knock it down and build the firestation(something that is of use to more of the population). The people who use the ice rink will have to do what I did when my step-son whated to skateboard at a skatepark, we went to a community that had one. We lived through it, so will they.

kitten
Dec 11, 2011 at 8:33 a.m.
Suggest removal

Shouldn't the focus be on educating each other so that we can address the ongoing concerns and speak as a community, not a collection of individuals.

Let's face it. There will be a new topic tomorrow and the tax issue will still be here. We can't change the past. Let it go and start over. We all had to start over in form or another. The solution is not to slame on the brakes everytime change is proposed. We as a community need to take an agressive approach to moving forward. We need to start asking questions like: Has a marketing analysis and/or economic impact study been performed to be understand our return on investment? I see the ice arena as an opportunity to increase goods and services; to potentitally eliminate blight; and to better our image and brand.

Given our recent history, this little gem needs to be showcased. Our community is a very different place versus 20-30 years ago .... versus 2 years ago.

The arena and similar projects need to be in close proximity to other businesses. Not perched on a hill on the edge of a residential district. Ice arenas are hubs of activity. They can promote increased sales of goods. They can attract business. If something like this happens, then steps can start to be made by both the private and public sectors to create jobs. There are a number of large commerical parking lots in close proximity to retail and restaurant ripe for the picking. Janesville has for a long time had very limited examples of this type connectivity - economically and geographically. It is kind of sad.

Back to topic - Geothermal design is a great idea! It comes with a higher first cost, but has a lesser life cycle cost than some alternatives. Some fossil fuels will eventually be exhausted. Our community leaders are asking the questions because they are looking out for future generations.

Gandalf
Dec 11, 2011 at 8:22 a.m.
Suggest removal

council foe, you can legitimately oppose using tax dollars to fix the ice arena improvements, but your charges of corruption within the city councel and their paying 'ZERO attention to the common man or women in this community.' are way over the top. Perhaps you would like to retract your ill-considered comment.

council_foe
Dec 11, 2011 at 8:01 a.m.
Suggest removal

Maybe as citizens of janesville we should join efforts together and sue the city council members for misappropriation of taxpayer funds. There is a clear line of poor judgement, and a history of possible corruption. The days of looking for a reason for them not to spend tax money is over . They pay ZERO attention to the common man or women in this community. So its time for legal action. Janesville would not be the first town to have corupt leaders who feel that "the FEW outweigh the MANY" ! REVOLT! REMOVE ! REPLACE ! or this pattern will continue.

theflick
Dec 11, 2011 at 7:39 a.m.
Suggest removal

Why not spend the money to finish since the city seems to feel we taxpayers have bottomless pockets. The city shouldnt have put two dollars into this thing in the first place, if it cant sustain itself then shut it down. I certainly dont want to put one dime into it and I think alot of other people feel the same?

La_instruisto
Dec 11, 2011 at 7:25 a.m.
Suggest removal

Like no one saw THIS coming? Really?? If you are going to budget for a building project, and the estimated cost is 2.4 million dollars, then budget for 3 million at least. Nothing is ever built at the estimated cost or below.

fromjanesville2waukesha
Dec 11, 2011 at 5:48 a.m.
Suggest removal

I think they should build 500,000 sq. foot Ice Palace. There'd be ice sculptures everywhere and the whole building would be super heated so you could skate in shorts and a t-shirt. Or the city could just make due and wait to buy stuff until they have cash. Whichever though.

Autoworker2
Dec 11, 2011 at 5:18 a.m.
Suggest removal

Does anybody really use the ice arena? I pass by there often and the parking lot always appears empty.

youkillme
Dec 11, 2011 at 1:17 a.m.
Suggest removal

Oh boo mnwild. McCoshen should practice what his lobbyist firm and GOP political pals preach. Small government and free markets. Why gravitate to government for an ice arena and free goodies paid for by taxpayers? Go to a bank and get your capital. The banks are swimming in money and the rates are low. McCoshen's rent couldn't cover the cost for the renovation over the next 30 years.

Manners
Dec 11, 2011 at 1:11 a.m.
Suggest removal

Drama sayers and complainers ready, set, GO!

mnwild
Dec 11, 2011 at 12:19 a.m.
Suggest removal

bah hum bug you anti hockey people!!! If you only knew what Janesville Youth Hockey families paid in fees for their kids. This isn't about the Janesville Jets and/or Bill McCoshen! This is about your ignorance on something in the city that is working! Do you know how many people the Janesville Jets and Janesville Youth Hockey employ? No you don't and that is just the start of your ignorance.

youkillme
Dec 11, 2011 at 12:12 a.m.
Suggest removal

Not being pro union or wanting to join a union is absolutely fair, but if that means you will actively work to destroy the work, efforts and organization of others - well, that's not fair. It's an act of war.

onelife2live
Dec 10, 2011 at 11:13 p.m.
Suggest removal

Capitalism and the Free market is what I want. It's like a pendulum, it swings back and forth. I'm just saying not everyone is pro union or wants to join a union. Is that not fair? Again, sorry for being off topic.

Wisconsin needs jobs right now. Union or not. Peace

youkillme
Dec 10, 2011 at 11:02 p.m.
Suggest removal

onelife2live, there is no equivalency between union "bosses" and CEOs or Big Business and unions. They are not both doing the same thing. The head of the union definitely makes more than the hourly employee. Is that fair? Sure it's fair. CEO's should make more money than the average employee too - but 400 times more? Many seem to think, including many Republicans, that taxpayers should not pay better wages and benefits (to public employees) than they get themselves. Is that what you want? A single wage/benefit class for the 99 percent? That's half of what communism is about. Does anyone really believe that laborers in Mexico or China are being paid on performance based work equitable to other countries in the global economy? Is that what you want here?

luvujvl
Dec 10, 2011 at 10:32 p.m.
Suggest removal

Wow. What a shock. Hey, here's a novel idea - stop spending money on stuff we don't NEED and figure out how to define NEED vs. WANT. The School District seems to have a similar problem....perhaps there's something in the water?

onelife2live
Dec 10, 2011 at 10:29 p.m.
Suggest removal

Most of us are broke or near broke, struggling to keep our heads above water....and inflation hasn't even kicked in yet.

Cities are broke, states are broke and our country is broke. Trickle down economics at it's best. There will be tough cuts and decisions to be made. The ice arena and JPAC and Rotary Gardens and Traxler Park and The Aqua Jays are all great for the city. However, they must be self supportive. Those that choose to enjoy them should and must bear the brunt of the economic cost. imo

If I take my kids to Rockport pool every day during the summer I would expect to pay each and every time. And even more if it meant that much to my children and I. imo

Most estimates fall short..or at least that was acceptable practice in the 90'sand early 2000's. Give a bid, make it a binding contract, and if the estimate falls short, the contractor eats the loss. That's good business. How long has the city been awarding contracts? Have they not figured out a way to keep costs in check and make estimates a little more binding than hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars short? Lord help me if I figured my budget like that. Financial responsibility is needed across the board. In the household and in the local government.

I went to Salvation Army today for a gift buying chance for kids to buy gifts for a quarter for their parents. I was amazed at how many people were there. The line was out the door. I have a job. Not great paying, but enough to get by. My daughters and I did not stay more than a few minutes because I had a job and I was definitely not as bad off as many of those there. I am grateful. I am a vet. I am a proud father and I am in support of our state in regards to getting people bake to work. All of this union talk is not good. I know if you are in a union you are led to believe you need a union but that is bull. As a vet (definitely non union) and a 7 year Gm employee, I have seen the good and bad of both. Big business and unions are both doing the same thing. Trying to make as much money as they can. The head of the union definitely makes more than the hourly employee. Is that fair? By your own words (union supporters against CEO salaries) no.

Bottom line to me is this, sorry for the rant and being way off topic but lets put people back to work and give them the choice to join a union or not. I.E. Right to work State. I can work for you but I do not have to join your union. America, wake up. It is a Global economy. Performance based work. I do not care how many years you have been here, as much as I care about the work performance of today, yesterday and tomorrow. It's cut throat out there. Time to roll up your sleeves and go to war with the other global economies....and unless unions change and quit protecting bad employees we are all in trouble here. Change your mind set. Peace

jv93
Dec 10, 2011 at 10:26 p.m.
Suggest removal

Let's build a skate park too!

Sigma40
Dec 10, 2011 at 9:49 p.m.
Suggest removal

Awesome management! = FAIL.

truthteller
Dec 10, 2011 at 9:41 p.m.
Suggest removal

this is the chance the city has to stop this whole project. We don't need an ice arena. I would rather see the money used for the schools than for out of state kids to use- let their communities pay for them!

youkillme
Dec 10, 2011 at 9:25 p.m.
Suggest removal

A $2.5 million taxpayer paid ice arena renovation to keep the GOP's McCoshen's Jets in business on the taxpayer dime. $1.5 million to buy farmland and pave it over for private business use while up to a hundred industrial and business properties are vacant. A $10 wheel tax to raise $500,000 because they needed the TIF surplus money to buy the private farmland. Don't forget where TIF surplus money comes from. It is money that was withheld from the general fund taxpayer pool that everyone outside a TIF district pays property tax into, thus increasing our taxes. Add another $600,000 on a round-a-bout. Yet, earnednotgiven was able to push this on local elected UNION members not doing their jobs? Look at the bright side. The best thing to do is ignore the negative talk I presented and kick back, pop open a brew and a bag of cheez-its and watch Badger Sports all weekend and the Pack on Sunday. Forget the council meeting, we're growing Janesville – Monday Night Football has St. Louis at Seattle. Enjoy.

kitten
Dec 10, 2011 at 9:11 p.m.
Suggest removal

Is a geothermal system the correct system of choice for an ice arena? Yes.

Is it the right answer for a city-owned building? Yes.

Is a pond loop system being considered or is Lion's beach being utilized as a cold water source? Based on this article, this is not clear.

Is geothermal the right answer for this building? I'm not sure about that. What is the payback on the geothermal system? 20 years plus? If yes, then are we willing to invest and maintain that building for another 20 years? This option seems a little unclear and perhaps short sighted.

I would vote for a new ice arena with geothermal, spend the additional money and invest in our future. If we feel that the ice arena is not the direction that we want to go, that works for me too. I'm sure the money could be used elsewhere.

In general, geothermal systems are sustainable. Depending on the system of choice, there may be some ecological challenges as well as post bid challenges.

To learn more about geothermal systems, go to:
http://www.hmcc.com/accelsite/media/6249...

Trak International did a great job of putting together a simple presentation. I hope you like it.

By the way, I have no affiliation with Trak or the designers.

When in doubt seek out a second opinion.

earnednotgiven
Dec 10, 2011 at 8:58 p.m.
Suggest removal

This is what I am talking about! NO ONE ON THE CITY COUNCIL OR ERIC LEVITT ARE THINKING ABOUT ANYONE BUT THEMSELVES!! This is ridiculous and this one you CAN'T BLAME ON GOVERNOR WALKER!! This is your local union elected members not doing their jobs. The taxes weren't suppose to take effect until next year! Wait another lie from the City!!

billnewbie
Dec 10, 2011 at 8:09 p.m.
Suggest removal

Janesville's property owners started getting their property tax bills this weekend. This is just he kind of news they'll want to see, cost overruns (or was that just a poor/deliberate underestimate?) on a project destined to benefit a miniscule number of Janesville's residents. And they'll sure be glad the council and the city manager pushed through "bonuses" just last week for all our overworked and underpaid city employees. I hope the warm afterglow of this news carries us through when we all start getting our newly increased water bills and our new wheel tax after we've paid those inflated tax bills we just got. I hope the Jets appreciate the sweet deal they've gotten, at taxpayers' expense. And I hope the taxpayers appreciate the benefits of city living our money buys. Maybe next, the council will buy us a subway, or even a monorail.

BostonBill
Dec 10, 2011 at 7:20 p.m.
Suggest removal

Uh Oh! Big cost overruns for the ice arena. As Mr. EYSTER says, “Here we go”.

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