I think the lack of “press coverage” the tournament gets is upsetting. After 50 years it deserves more than just local recognition. I’d like to see Global or CTV do a peice on the tournament…not just a 15 second blurb, but come here with HD cameras and do an actual report on the tournament.
I could be wrong but didn’t someone do a documentary on the tournament a few years ago, I kind of sort of remember something, but could be wrong.
Anyone remember something like this?
yes there was it was on APTN and it was a good one to
I think I saw it too.
So why doesn’t APTN take it on? I’m guessing they probably don’t have the equipment for live broadcasts, but they could work a deal with someone who does.
yeah, broadcast it live, and then the ANT can earn money off ad revenues!!
They already do have live coverage of games on CFNR… that started a few years ago I believe. Radio is still the easiest way to get to the outlying villages, and the cheapest too I think.
Oh by far radio would be the most cost effective method of covering the games, television and its adherence to schedule just couldn’t do the games justice as far as providing a full picture of the event.
CFNR as you mentioned has a remarkable reach and resonance in all the communities that are interested in the ANBT.
Documentaries however would be a great way for television to tell the story of what the tournament means to the various villages that participate and how the tournament provides an impact in Prince Rupert.
Maybe one day TSN (no not the Sidhu network, the other one) will branch out away from its Torontocentric ways and figure out that there are other sports out there, or maybe Sportsnet.
I can’t recall if the CBC ever featured the tournament on the Fifth Estate, or after the National, but you would think that this would be a natural for what their mandate is supposed to be.
Maybe even the NFB, who knows one day Rupert could get to Oscars!
Felt it pertinent to the discussion, summary of the decision from tonight’s council meeting:
The City of Prince Rupert will be providing a $5,000 cash grant to the 51st annual All Native Basketball Tournament, but only if the tournament winds up in the red following seven days of action.
There’s an incentive to do a good job…
So with a little creative accounting they have bilked us out of $5000.00.What does this say about councils lack of understanding of accounting principals?Sure glad they are NOT in control of my finances …
Leaving aside the fact that council seems to have missed the point the the all native basketball tourney is being heavily subsidized already according to their own staff there is a question of principle here that is disturbing.
**Should we we using taxpayer dollars to provide grants or any subsidies to an organization that restricts participation in an event based on race? **
With all respect to any cultural organization that wishes to use public facilities, it seems to me that at the very least participation should be open to all races. IMHO, discrimination of any type is just plain wrong and to support it with some $122,000 to $127,000 of public monies is even more egregious.
Based on Dan Rodin’s numbers, we can project our costs for the facility rental is $141,772. (6.25 x the rental of 20,000 plus the additional costs of $16,772 that are incurred). Thus the city is in effect now subsidizing the ANBT to the tune of between $121,772 to $126,772. When I reflect on the funding cuts to other organizations such as the library that welcomes all races… this sticks in my craw.
[quote="The Northern View "]
According to a report from chief financial officer Dan Rodin, the Civic Centre is already highly subsidized by the tax payers – with the City spending $6.25 on operations for every $1 of revenue the facility brings in – and that additional costs totaling $16,772 related to the tournament are not charged back to the organizers.
“In a nutshell the tournament does get a subsidy, as does any other group that uses the facility…We are in tough shape and the tournament is subsidized already,â€[/quote]
Don’t think I like the city ‘donating’ my tax dollars to any organization.
**Should we we using taxpayer dollars to provide grants or any subsidies to an organization that restricts participation in an event based on race? **
A municipality can (and do) support an organization such as the A.N.T. in many ways.A grant is a “no” vote. As far as subsides go, municipalities have been known to “help out” organizations of all shapes and colors.This seems to be a norm in most municipalities.
Before you take this discussion off into la-la land you really should provide the folks out there… whether they support the council’s decision and rationale or not … with accurate information … with all due respect, your math is really quite haywire …
In his Feb 8 report to council Rodin did not say that the city’s projected cost is $141,772 … he also did not project a subsidy of $121,772 to $126,772 … you came up with those numbers through a flawed analysis.
You appear to assume (a) that the rental is $20,000 for each of the 6.25 days of the event (b) that the supposed daily rental reflects the city’s normal operating costs, and then (c) you tack on an incremental cost of $16,772. Hence you project a cost of … (6.25 X $20,000) + 16,772 = $141,772.
You then assume that the ANBT will pay $15,000 - $20,000 in rent … one day’s rent for a 6 day event … applying your faulty premises … possibly with $5,000 cash back, depending on gate receipts as per the council’s decision … You thus arrive at a net “subsidy” to the ANBT of $121,772 to $126,772.
Your mistake is assuming that the rental is $20,000 per day and that that amount reflects the city’s costs… your calculation falls apart from there.
What Rodin said is that the rental is established by bylaw … based on those rates, in 2009 the ANBT paid $20,694.15 … for the full duration of the event … 6 days, rounding a bit …
The actual cost of running the civic centre in 2009 … again according to Rodin … is $1,381,838 … about 86% of which comes from the taxpayers. The civic centre thus costs an average of $3,786 a day … about $22,700 for a 6 day event … the ANBT paid $20,694.15 … those were probably among the few days of the year when rental income almost covered the civic centre’s average costs.
The problem is that … in Rodin’s words … “Because the event is so large …” there were incremental costs in 2009 of $16,722 which the city … under its own bylaw (a point he skips over) … cannot charge the ANBT … The sub-text of his advice seems to be that because there were incremental costs that the city could not recover … the council should be circumspect about giving ANBT a grant of up to $5,000 to partly offset the rent.
I think the bigger question than the well-worn, broken record, frankly rather tired race-based issue you present and reiterate is … do you want an annual event that puts $3-4 million into the local economy during a slow time of year? … or would you prefer that it go somewhere else like so much other business that used to employ people in this town? … I don’t always agree with councillor Gordon-Payne but I think she pretty much nailed down the real bottom line on this issue (see Northern View coverage and op-ed in A Town Called Podunk, focusing on councillor Bedard’s inconsistencies, which baffle some of us almost as much as why she sits on the Rupert council in the first place … living as she does in Port Ed … I digress).
As for your race-based argument … where do you draw the line? I’m not sure what organizations have survived the downturns and out-migration … but in the past and in other places groups that reflect cultural diversity have been and still are … at least by some of us … viewed as a plus, not a negative …
So if Norwegians, Indos, Chinese, Portuguese, Philippinos, Vietnamese, Metis or anyone else want to rent a facility … what do you say? … “No, unless we’re all full participants that would be wrong … we don’t want your money” … ?? Somehow I doubt it … because then this place … which is already pretty grim and discouraging in a lot of ways … would be even worse off than it already is … and in more ways than economically.
Very well put Mr. Travenn, thanks by the way for doing the math, my abacus was getting worn down with all the calculations required to divine the cost analysis provided by the city’s number crunches.
If I were a member of the ever declining business community contemplating the upcoming tax grab as per the city’s business property tax regimen, I think I would be asking a few questions of council.
First off why they seem so determined to offer up a money generating tourism event to other communities who very well might enjoy that financial boost in the deadest economic month of the year.
Beyond that perhaps ask the council to provide a comparison study in the cost of other tourism initiatives in the city.
For instance how about the cost of the cruise ship facilities and the assorted land purchases of past councils down on the Cow Bay parking lot area, considering the amount of money the city “invested” in those lands (and has yet to see any kind of return on other than a less than successful parking fee grab), we wonder if the tourists arriving off the boats provide the same amount of flow through cash to local merchants?
Other than the local tour groups that offer sight seeing and whale expeditions, the return seems rather small.
While the cruise ship visitors buy the odd post card, or other trinket from local merchants, for the most part outside of stocking up on pop, chips Canadian smokes and beer, I don’t think they’re leaving much change in the till of the small business community.
I wonder if the ANBT Visitors and participants are not injecting more money into the restaurant, hospitality, grocery and retail sectors when they descend on the city in mid February.
Might be a study that Tourism Prince Rupert or Economic Development could undertake for us, unless of course the tournament doesn’t qualify as a tourism or economic development venture.
As for the rent rebate and other such subsidies, perhaps taking a share of those monies from the two above departments budgets might help to soothe the angst of those against the projected cost, it’s not like we’re seeing a lot of industrial development coming our way of late. They could take it out of the travel junket envelope, give up a trade show or road trip for the sake of a little economic stimulus in February.
After all, it wouldn’t be a hard case to make that the ANBT probably qualifies under both categories.
Something that other communities looking for some form of economic stimulus for their commercial and retail sectors might figure out for future tournament years.
In general, I don’t moderate threads that I take part in, but this kind of statement is how you end up with an entire thread being dumped into the wasteland.
The All-Native tournament has never refused a team based on the racial makeup of its members. I’ve seen players of other races and ethnicities playing, and nobody thought twice about it.
Years past, players would need to prove their lineage. Not sure if they still require this in today’s game.
In all native hockey they have provisions for certain number of non native players per team. Usually three or less depending on roster size.
The All-Native tournament has never refused a team based on the racial makeup of its members. I’ve seen players of other races and ethnicities playing, and nobody thought twice about it.
I’ve coached in this tournament…and you are wrong. Only a person who is a member of a native band is allowed to participate.
ANT Rules say all players must “be of North American Indigenous Ancestry: ie: 1/8 First Nations Ancestry” and “be able to demonstrate membership in a band or First Nation”.
Just to clarify current rules (taken from last year’s program).