State Funding for Ice Arena possible...

MACMAN · Post by **MACMAN** » Fri May 15, 2009 1:21 pm

hold on. IT is my belief that the 4mil allocated to the rink by the U was pulled, that money was in fact pulled and put into the Stroh center. All part of the robbing of the hockey program continuation. It is also my understanding that Jack Vivian is largely responsible for getting the state of Ohio, to allocate this money to a state owned building, from a fund dedicated to maintaining state buildings. There are no strings attached, other than the rink is getting funding, the only string I would like to see, the line that pulls the 4million back out of the stroh center and puts it back in to the building where it belongs.

BGDrew · Post by **BGDrew** » Fri May 15, 2009 1:42 pm

MACMAN wrote:hold on. IT is my belief that the 4mil allocated to the rink by the U was pulled, that money was in fact pulled and put into the Stroh center. All part of the robbing of the hockey program continuation. It is also my understanding that Jack Vivian is largely responsible for getting the state of Ohio, to allocate this money to a state owned building, from a fund dedicated to maintaining state buildings. There are no strings attached, other than the rink is getting funding, the only string I would like to see, the line that pulls the 4million back out of the stroh center and puts it back in to the building where it belongs.

The funding wasn't pulled from the IA to the Stroh. They attempted the first stage of fund raising (wealthy donors, former players, etc.) and stopped when they realized that no individuals were going to donate until they received a guarantee that hockey would be kept. They'd have no problems fund raising at all if they removed the current coach and Greg Christopher made an announcement tomorrow that hockey was going to be a varsity sport for the foreseeable future. This starts with the University stepping up and modernizing the Ice Arena. This is a good start but we have to do a lot of work to make us competitive with the Miami's of the world.

BG84 · Post by **BG84** » Fri May 15, 2009 4:52 pm

At last fall's (?) public meeting in the Ice Arena Lounge about the $8,000,000 arena renovation, folks associated with BG youth hockey expressed a desire for a second ice sheet so the facility could host tournaments. I think that's a great idea. Unfortunately, my impression was that those folks [shields up] wanted the university to provide it. There was no mention of raising funds, no "Let's put on a show!" for a second sheet. I'd love to see BG youth hockey, the city, the county, and whoever raise significant $ to be put toward a second sheet.

Falcon Fanatic · Post by **Falcon Fanatic** » Fri May 15, 2009 6:01 pm

BG84 wrote:At last fall's (?) public meeting in the Ice Arena Lounge about the $8,000,000 arena renovation, folks associated with BG youth hockey expressed a desire for a second ice sheet so the facility could host tournaments. I think that's a great idea. Unfortunately, my impression was that those folks [shields up] wanted the university to provide it. There was no mention of raising funds, no "Let's put on a show!" for a second sheet. I'd love to see BG youth hockey, the city, the county, and whoever raise significant $ to be put toward a second sheet.

At a community focus meeting (for all Ice Arena sports) last week, there was a LOT of discussion on adding a sheet of ice. Vivian was at this meeting. People gave a ton of reasons why adding a sheet would be financially beneficial to the the University AND the community!! It was my feeling that he was looking at this option seriously. I'm hoping we get some "official" news soon, as Vivian's committee was supposed to have the draft of his proposals out around the middle of May...which is now! I know it's been said on this forum before, but after his meeting, I felt more than ever that JACK IS THE MAN who can save Falcon hockey and the Ice Arena!!! His knowledge and experience are just AMAZING!!! I am EXTREMELY HOPEFUL!!!

BGDrew · Post by **BGDrew** » Sat May 16, 2009 12:02 am

Falcon Fanatic wrote:
BG84 wrote:At last fall's (?) public meeting in the Ice Arena Lounge about the $8,000,000 arena renovation, folks associated with BG youth hockey expressed a desire for a second ice sheet so the facility could host tournaments. I think that's a great idea. Unfortunately, my impression was that those folks [shields up] wanted the university to provide it. There was no mention of raising funds, no "Let's put on a show!" for a second sheet. I'd love to see BG youth hockey, the city, the county, and whoever raise significant $ to be put toward a second sheet.
At a community focus meeting (for all Ice Arena sports) last week, there was a LOT of discussion on adding a sheet of ice. Vivian was at this meeting. People gave a ton of reasons why adding a sheet would be financially beneficial to the the University AND the community!! It was my feeling that he was looking at this option seriously. I'm hoping we get some "official" news soon, as Vivian's committee was supposed to have the draft of his proposals out around the middle of May...which is now! I know it's been said on this forum before, but after his meeting, I felt more than ever that JACK IS THE MAN who can save Falcon hockey and the Ice Arena!!! His knowledge and experience are just AMAZING!!! I am EXTREMELY HOPEFUL!!!

With the tennis courts having been moved there should be no reason that you wouldn't be able to attach a second sheet to the east side of the building and still use the locker rooms/lounge that's already there and in amazing condition.

MACMAN · Post by **MACMAN** » Sat May 16, 2009 1:39 am

"Dec. 1, 2007 Convocation Center, Ice Arena Renovation Part of Array of University Capital Projects

BGSU plans $150 million in capital projects.
BOWLING GREEN, Ohio - The construction of a new convocation center at Bowling Green State University and the renovation of the BGSU Ice Arena are part of the University's capital project plan. BGSU will initiate approximately $150 million in capital projects on campus over the next several years that will be funded through private gifts bonded debt and state funds. "

Remember this headline in 2007? Part of the capital project plan was 4-5 million in funds for the rink. A small pittance in compairison to the other allocations, yet enough to make an impact, couple that with the now 1.5 and were making head way, another 5 and were aprocahing a level where the program is endowded. A short time after that number was reduced to 400k, to 0
Just where do you think that money went? An over priced Architect for the art building? The stroh? split more to sebo?
Point is hockey got shanked, again. We had 4 mil allocated...who unallocated it and for what under whos authority? A study was held, a need determined and that need was addressed, to MAINTAIN an EXISTING structure. We deserve to know just what is beding hockey over the table, if we dont ask, and question they will continue, the rink and the program DESERVE to have those funds reallocated, now.

BGDrew wrote:
MACMAN wrote:hold on. IT is my belief that the 4mil allocated to the rink by the U was pulled, that money was in fact pulled and put into the Stroh center. All part of the robbing of the hockey program continuation. It is also my understanding that Jack Vivian is largely responsible for getting the state of Ohio, to allocate this money to a state owned building, from a fund dedicated to maintaining state buildings. There are no strings attached, other than the rink is getting funding, the only string I would like to see, the line that pulls the 4million back out of the stroh center and puts it back in to the building where it belongs.
The funding wasn't pulled from the IA to the Stroh. They attempted the first stage of fund raising (wealthy donors, former players, etc.) and stopped when they realized that no individuals were going to donate until they received a guarantee that hockey would be kept. They'd have no problems fund raising at all if they removed the current coach and Greg Christopher made an announcement tomorrow that hockey was going to be a varsity sport for the foreseeable future. This starts with the University stepping up and modernizing the Ice Arena. This is a good start but we have to do a lot of work to make us competitive with the Miami's of the world.

sbkbghockey · Post by **sbkbghockey** » Sat May 16, 2009 1:49 am

KeyWestParrot wrote:At this point I think BG should take anything they can get from any source.

I agree even if there's small strings (idk yet if there is or isnt) any strings are worth it as long as they are not too outragious. If we already had a secure program and new arena (ie Miami OH) then it'd be more questionable but right now WE NEED SUPPORT/MONEY

redskins4ever · Post by **redskins4ever** » Sat May 16, 2009 3:13 pm

BG84 wrote:At last fall's (?) public meeting in the Ice Arena Lounge about the $8,000,000 arena renovation, folks associated with BG youth hockey expressed a desire for a second ice sheet so the facility could host tournaments. I think that's a great idea. Unfortunately, my impression was that those folks [shields up] wanted the university to provide it. There was no mention of raising funds, no "Let's put on a show!" for a second sheet. I'd love to see BG youth hockey, the city, the county, and whoever raise significant $ to be put toward a second sheet.

Its a nice theory, but this just isn't how things work in the real world.

The city has no use and no desire to invest in a facility that they can't own..

The university has make hundreds of thousands of dollars a year from the youth sports programs in BG that already use the Ice Rink. If the university doesn't see renting ice as being profitable, then they need to A) raise the rent or B) cut costs or C) close the facility.

The city of Bowling Green cannot be blamed for a lack of support of the building and its uses. Hundreds of youth hockey games, thousands of hockey players and skaters come into that building every year. The better question is where did the money go for the building? Where was that revenue diverted? Very often in non for profits, but as well as for profits, monies raised in profitable areas go to fund unprofitable other areas of a group. So who is going to ask the most pressing question? What happened to the revenues from the Ice Arena?

It has been well documented that no money has been put into the building, and if routine maintenance had been performed at a high level instead of with bubble gum and tape, had money been put aside, had their actually been planning and foresight this wouldn't be an issue today, maybe tomorrow, maybe not to far down the road, but not today.

This Arena problem is more a reflection of the current state of leadership at the university than it is on the athletic department or Hockey program at BG.

MACMAN · Post by **MACMAN** » Sat May 16, 2009 8:44 pm

There are others on the board that can attest youth hockey numbers are at an all time low. few team and the truth is at roughly 200 bucks an hour for ice and the few youth team, the rink is not making any cash. Problems facing youth hockey...a bgsu team that is strugling and not drawing local interest. BAseballs longer season, Soccer, soccer soccer year round. Basic travel hockey costs a family about 2k a year to particpate. Annual swim team fees are about the same, travel soccer is about what 1500. Folks have to pick. If Soccer was regulated and limited to its proper season, kids would not only better rounded but hockey could presumably suffer less.
Figure skating...BGSU skating club...numbers at an all time low.

Falcon Fanatic · Post by **Falcon Fanatic** » Sun May 17, 2009 11:31 am

redskins4ever wrote:Its a nice theory, but this just isn't how things work in the real world.

The city has no use and no desire to invest in a facility that they can't own..

The university has make hundreds of thousands of dollars a year from the youth sports programs in BG that already use the Ice Rink. If the university doesn't see renting ice as being profitable, then they need to A) raise the rent or B) cut costs or C) close the facility.

The city of Bowling Green cannot be blamed for a lack of support of the building and its uses. Hundreds of youth hockey games, thousands of hockey players and skaters come into that building every year. The better question is where did the money go for the building? Where was that revenue diverted? Very often in non for profits, but as well as for profits, monies raised in profitable areas go to fund unprofitable other areas of a group. So who is going to ask the most pressing question? What happened to the revenues from the Ice Arena?

It has been well documented that no money has been put into the building, and if routine maintenance had been performed at a high level instead of with bubble gum and tape, had money been put aside, had their actually been planning and foresight this wouldn't be an issue today, maybe tomorrow, maybe not to far down the road, but not today.

This Arena problem is more a reflection of the current state of leadership at the university than it is on the athletic department or Hockey program at BG.

Most of what you said are good points. The only comment that I have regarding a second sheet of ice is that Mayor Quinn (representing the city's interest) is VERY involved in this process. He (and all of them on the official committee) understand the community's contribution to the Ice Arena's use. That is why Randy Gardner is working to get state money to help fix the arena. As I stated earlier much of the talk at the community focus meeting was suggestions and discussions about why it would be profitable to EVERYONE to add a second sheet of ice. One thing that Jack Vivian made VERY clear was that the city COULD NOT SUPPORT a second sheet of ice on it's own (see U of F; which Jack Vivian told them NOT to build), but that adding it to the current arena was a feasible idea, because they would be run together; not in competition with each other. Running them together makes the best use of the ice time on both sheets.

redskins4ever · Post by **redskins4ever** » Sun May 17, 2009 9:58 pm

Being involved and financially supporting are two separate items.

I'd like to know where Mayor Quinn plans on getting the funds to contribute, and b) where it says the city can give money to a non city owned or operated facility.

MACMAN · Post by **MACMAN** » Tue May 19, 2009 8:36 am

if it is in the best interest of the city the city can do it, based on a vote of council, public vote or tax levy even. A tax levy would not pass, a vote by council could. Most likely is that city would contribute a portion that is reflective of community use.

redskins4ever · Post by **redskins4ever** » Tue May 19, 2009 12:02 pm

MACMAN wrote:if it is in the best interest of the city the city can do it, based on a vote of council, public vote or tax levy even. A tax levy would not pass, a vote by council could. Most likely is that city would contribute a portion that is reflective of community use.

Reflects community use? Isn't that already accounted for by rented ice time?

NWLB · Post by **NWLB** » Tue May 19, 2009 4:46 pm

redskins4ever wrote:
MACMAN wrote:if it is in the best interest of the city the city can do it, based on a vote of council, public vote or tax levy even. A tax levy would not pass, a vote by council could. Most likely is that city would contribute a portion that is reflective of community use.
Reflects community use? Isn't that already accounted for by rented ice time?

It becomes a catch-22. The quality of the venue is more than the ice. The facility is so out of date, ill-equipped, the youth hockey programs are losing even local kids to places hours away. The argument has been made in some of the presentations, that the age and decline of the facility tracks the decline of everything going in inside of it.

redskins4ever · Post by **redskins4ever** » Tue May 19, 2009 5:55 pm

I'll counter you two fold...

1) The old BG City League Pee Wee park was a dismal facility that had more teams then they could handle.

2) The new Carter Park facility... ok... its 20 years old now... but they have had a severe decline in teams over the last 10 years despite the quality of facility.

Do you need nice facilities? Sure. Is there a direct correlation between nice facilities and usage by the public? Only partially when you get the initial boost. In reality what we have seen is that kids have been specialized in sports, because if they fail to do so, they'll never make the travel teams which help you become very very good.

Today there are just 5 Junior level teams... 20 years ago there were two divisions and 16 teams.