Give us a good reason to “give it a rest”.
bubbasteve…I certainly do not " hate " anyone, nor do I present myself as being indifferent. Just think the subject is brought up in alot of posts and, my opinion was given.
I think covering the exercise equipment is great; especially if someone else pays for it. It promotes physical fitness and good health.
As far as funding for drug counselors, etc.; have you tried lobbying the local churches for resources ie: funding, space, organization, etc. ? How bout starting a Narcotics Anonymous if we do not already have one. This city appears to be quite generous with charity from what I have witnessed. I am sure there is private money out there.
We have narcotics anonymous, alcoholics anonymous, and al-anon.
Excellent!
I didn’t realize you had the priviledge of telling us what we can talk about…I thought that right was reserved for the admins. Careful there bubbasteve, you have mentioned NA, AA and Al-Anon all in one little post, you may have gone overboard ? Might have to “give it a rest” LOL 
Somebody is addicted to posting messages about addiction…
PS: ╰▄━▄╯
Well I wouldn’t have guessed …
Correct me if I am wrong, but I suspect that the hockey players pay for ice time, while the City gives the golf club grants and exemptions to pursue their preferred recreation.
It’s $40 for a round of golf. And then there is the yearly membership. I don’t know the price for that, but I argue its fairly expensive. So if you are talking about somehow players golfing for free than you are mistaken.
If I’ve missed your point, Creaking, sorry. But that was what I read from your post.
My point was pretty clear – why is one sport subsidize-able and another not? If you were really to bare the costs of an ice rink every time you used it, user fees would be much more expensive than than they currently are (i.e. sharing the costs of lighting, heating, janitorial work etc.). The city pays for some of those costs for us to use because it promotes good health. Golf can be the same if you remove the carts from the equation.
Is it justifiable? I don’t really see an issue with it. But if you do, perhaps attend a council meeting and let council know your thoughts on the issue.
Well, that’s quite a barrage of points there, Baker. A sensitive issue for sure.
I don’t know how you could possibly read into my post that golfers play for free. That’s a ridiculous inference, a ‘straw man arguement’ really.
How the golf club, or for that matter hockey teams, structure their internal finances is their business. The issue is City priorities for spending public funds.
Sure, City recreation facilities are subsidized. Most users - hockey players included - pay money into City coffers. The golf club, it seems, just receives public funds. What do they pay for use of City land? In many places golf clubs are entirely self-supporting. Would there be a grave injustice if that was the goal here?
I think that kids are the only citizens who should get free access to recreation facilities, as far as finances permit. And they should get an umbrella for the jungle gym, even if that means trimming back the tax exemption on the golf club’s beverage room, where I imagine healthy drinks are served.
With that kind of muddy statement what would you expect? The way it reads, you are implying somehow that the city is offering club grants and exemptions to snooty golf club users while forcing our poor hockey players to pay up. That is exactly how it reads.
The only thing ridiculous is your reaction to simple answer I gave, as if I offended you. I said if I missed your point I was sorry. But no need for you to worry about a silly little detail.
So in response good typer, I say to you that you show the providence of a drunk man leaving Johnny B’s past midnight with no cab fare. There. I said it. And I am happy I did. 
[quote=“Creaking Door”]
Sure, City recreation facilities are subsidized. Most users - hockey players included - pay money into City coffers. The golf club, it seems, just receives public funds. What do they pay for use of City land? In many places golf clubs are entirely self-supporting. Would there be a grave injustice if that was the goal here?[/quote]
I get it. You don’t like money handed out to the golf course.
[quote=“Creaking Door”]
I think that kids are the only citizens who should get free access to recreation facilities, as far as finances permit. And they should get an umbrella for the jungle gym, even if that means trimming back the tax exemption on the golf club’s beverage room, where I imagine healthy drinks are served.[/quote]
You actually think an umbrella for a jungle gym is an intelligent idea? That idea so insipid it makes it hard to swallow let alone digest. How would an umbrella logistically work when the winds off the Strait are blowing 80 km/h? No need to answer the question. Insert insult below instead.
Just to clarify…this potential funding is from a private company: Aviva Insurance. There are no tax dollars involved.
… and I hope the proposal is successful, but I wouldn’t have a problem even if tax dollars were involved. I think some civic priorities should be re-shuffled to give greater priority to kids. My general impression is that while some individuals and groups are very dedicated, at a political level youth are not as high a priority as in other towns … more of a vandalism/policing issue here.
No, George, I’m not into insults anywhere near as much as you are at times.
It’s not a “jungle gym” and it’s not built for kids either.
Well, hopefully kids continue to make use of it even if it doesn’t have monkey bars.
Its built for everyone…it uses your body weight for resistance not a set of weights designed for adults. You should check it out…you may actually enjoy it and get a workout…especially if the “umbrellas” get put in and then rain won’t be an issue. (not including sideways rain) 
I hope the umbrellas can be angled…rain never falls straight down in rupert 
would it be better if alcoholic or drug addicts used it instead of kids . you know to help them? 
Maybe they should ask for heaters next.
And perhaps a weatherproof jukebox.
We have funding issues in the city. I agree that the golf course tax break is dumb. I have never agued it wasn’t.
If the city is going to do “something for the kids” perhaps it can put some money towards its delapidated and poorly located fire hall. A new fire hall is much needed and our department staff are deserving of an upgrade.
But all of this means nothing here. I think posting on HTMF is fine and healthy, but what would be really cool is if some posters showed up to City Hall and made it known how they would like funds to be spent. It is your right and it would be on the record rather than some post on the web, which few if any of the council members read.