 |
| John Hertel |
5 Year Strategic Plan For the Hamilton Entertainment and Convention
Facilities Inc. Click here
Strategic Plan Summary with Clarifications & Observations Click here
Thank-you John for sharing these materials with Hamiltonians on the Hamiltonian
As the city continues to examine whether private sector interest can be the solution to HECFI run facilities, a fallback option of making it a city run department is being examined. In a 5 year strategic plan put forward to the interim HECFI board, made up of Mayor Bratina, Clrs. Merulla, Collins, Partridge and Farr, by CEO John Hertel, Hertel articulates the potential benefits of such an approach.
According to an article by Andrew Drescel, the plan takes a different look at the three HECFI run facilities, with a view toward capitalizing on them individually, as well as looking at synergies that can be had by cross promotions, and by bringing HECFI under the city’s direct control through the planning and economic development department , linking it closely with the culture and tourism. For additional details, click here, or purchase today's Spec print copy.
Andrew ends his write up by wondering as to whether HECFI management may be maneuvering with a view to coming up with an option that may save their jobs.
What do you think? Do you believe a city run option should be given consideration as a fallback one? Do you think it should be given consideration alongside the privatize options, or do you think we should stay away from a city run option? Or, are you leery of this being more about job protection than being a good option for Hamilton?
My gut tells me that the city run option should remain the last resort.
ReplyDeleteSorce
They should have submitted a proposal like all the rest. Bringing it in now leap-frogs the others. If staff can run this better than the private sector, why have they been losing money hand over fist for years on end? Taxpayers should not be in the entertainment business.
ReplyDeleteI don't think a city run option is a good one. Here is my reason http://www.thehamiltonian.net/2012/04/working-hard-for-money.html
ReplyDeletePlain and Simple
Councillors decided moons ago that the City is not to be in the entertainment business. Staff, consultants, and lawyers get to work. The big global entertainment guns weigh in, along with some smaller local interests. The Staff/consultant report goes to Council but councillors hesitate and decide (drumroll) they may, after all, want to be in the entertainment business.
ReplyDeleteAnd, now I'm humming that old Sondheim song "Send in the Clowns" once again.
Does this never, ever end?
I want to thank Mr. Hertel for this information. I think that says a lot about transparency. It is a lot of information to absorb but I am printing it off and plan to read it tonight. Thanks to Mr. Hertel.
ReplyDeleteSevern
Mr. Hertel, thanks for sharing. Decesions should be based on trend and facts. Hoepfully with Mr. Hertel's help the remaining board memebers will base the decision on what's best for the city. I agree with Serendipity that some weight should be given to the position that council took some time ago.
ReplyDeleteDonna
I don't think the city should be in the entertainment business. We should leave this to the professionals in the this field.
ReplyDeleteMKL
City-run is a losing proposition. Going local for local's sake isn't much better. When the Copps administration undertook the Civic Square project almost half a century ago, it was a local group, Pigott subsidiary First Wentworth, that set the current downtown debacle in motion. These facilities originated in just those sort of parochial considerations.
ReplyDeleteBetter to let the business case make itself, rather than tweaking numbers to prop up some dubious and highly subjective claims about cultural synergies (which would, if I'm not mistaken, exist even if the facilities were being managed by a third party).
For the most part, the plan seems solid.
ReplyDeleteThe only thing that rankled was the statement that customers are very happy with the venues. I beg to differ!
Last Christmas, I attended a concert at Hamilton Place in the smaller venue. It was my first time going there and was expecting a nice venue, comfortable and pleasant to watch a concert at. Instead what I got was a dirty chair that was less comfortable than my own kitchen chairs, an icy cold cement floor under my feet, row upon tightly packed row of kitchen chairs that went all the way to the cement walls. I ended up smooshed up against the wall. I actually had a better view of the back stage than of the actual stage and I was only 4 rows in at the front! It was drafty, cramped and cold. That to me does not feel like high customer satisfaction. I actually don't want to go back to be honest.
I was also accompanied by an elderly lady who was shoved and pushed around because the rows of chairs were packed in so tightly she could barely manoeuvre to get to her seat. Every person around us had the same complaints, drafty, cold floor, cramped and filthy disgusting kitchen chairs.
So if they could take some of the budget for 'exterior' facelifts and use it to a) clean those disgusting chairs, b) do something about the cement floor and c) fix the drafts... I might consider spending a lot of money on a ticket to see AND enjoy a concert.