Friday, February 12, 2010

A kick in the butt and a pat on the back.

I guess a couple of million bucks is chump change to Councillor Hill. So intent is he on having the MVA at the Mendel site that he is blithely spending money on upgrades to the Mendel building so it can be leased to the MVA. I wonder if council is with him on this expenditure? Then I almost fell off my chair when Susan Lamb states that the MVA would barely fit in the Mendel building. Then Hill throws in the children's museum and states its an ideal place for the MVA because of the proximity of the park and parking is ideal for visitors and children's groups. Doesn't the Mendel also have those same needs? We have already incurred an additional $1 million in taxation for operating costs of the mega swimming pool. We are going to be absorbing the operational costs of River Landing in the not too distant future. We will be taking the hit on increased operational costs for the MVA.

I don't have a problem funding the MVA developments, ie the trails, Beaver Creek, etc. I like the interpretive aspects being outdoors. I do have a problem with swishy admin offices on the riverbank.

A pat on the back to Maura Davies and the Health Board for their willingness to review the decision on placement for the Children Hospital. I would like to see City Hospital turned into a Womens and Childrens Centre and move all obstetrics, gynaecology and neo natal medical services there. Throw in space for a parent dormitory was well.

Ah, I feel so much better. Venting is good. Then again, perhaps its because my pockets are so much lighter thankd to the likes of Mr. Hill!


  1. I agree with you on this one. Why does the MVA need plushy offices riverside? I know they ideally want to create an 'interpretive' centre, but I think we are right now pushed to the max to pay for what we already have. The MVA should get new offices if they need them, but they don't need to be riverfront unless they can raise private money to do so.

  2. Ever since the birth of the MVA I had the suspicion that it would grow into more a bastion for administration than the true intent of enhancing the riverbank with a sense protecting it's natural aspects.

    Why do we need an interpretative centre to tell people about what they can see and learn by walking the trails and experiencing the riverbank.

    Although if it means keeping more washrooms open during the winter while I run the trails I could be bribed to support it and my bladder will be forever thankful.

    As for the Children Hospital. The fact they are going to take more time is only a blessing as this health region hasn't had a good track record on making a decision and sticking to it. How many redos of City Hospital does one city need. My count is they have modified that building and its functions 5 times since it was built will this be number 6?

  3. There is absolutely no justification for the MVA to use up prime exhibition space in the Mendel building with either their administration or "interpretive" centres. None. Nada. Keep the MVA activities to the outdoors, and keep their offices to a reasonably affordable and modest locale.

    If the art gallery moves to the River Landing destination centre, the best use of the Mendel building would be as a permanent home for the Children's Discovery Museum on the Saskatchewan. Coupled with Kinsmen Park, this would be a fantatic place to take kids 12 months out of the year.

    Children's museums are the fastest growing public insitutions in North America. Unlike traditional museums, such as the WDM or Hill's coveted "interpretive centre", Kid's museums are built to be robust, interactive, and fun. Any visit to a children's museum across the continent -- such as Boston, Portland, or Calgary -- will show you how popular and useful these facilities can be.

    This is particularly important in a place like Saskatoon, which really has no place for parents and caregivers to go during the average winter day.

    I haven't seen Hill's comments on the a potential kid's museum in Mendel, but if he does support this type of initiative, and if has some sense of civic decency, of which I still seek evidence, he should give credit of the idea to his opponent in last fall's election.


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.