Most, if not all, attempts to move forward in a community involve some kind of change. Society and government cannot be all things to all people -- in part because some of those "things" are mutually exclusive, and in part because of financial realities.
Consider some givens:
a.) The current Memorial Centre is a dump. It is obsolete as a major entertainment centre given its lack of acoustics, backstage, and other features. It is obsolete environmentally as both a building and as a rink. The cost to rehabilitate it would likely exceed the costs to build a totally new structure in the field behind it, and tear down the existing structure. The costs to operate its obsolete plant are a drain on the municipality. Let's stop pouring good money after bad.
b.) As community rinks, single pads have the advantage of being dispersed throughout a community. However, multi-pads have much lower operating costs and have the ability to share concessions and other amenities. They also have tremendous advantage to parents and participants in hockey tournaments. It is a trade-off -- the municipality cannot offer a solution that pleases everybody -- but given finite financial resources the municipality can offer more capacity if multi-pads rather than single pads are used for community recreation.
c.) As a "memorial", the current Memorial Centre is a disgrace. While I am not personally a veteran, my Grandfather went overseas with the 1st Expeditionary Force in 1914, and spent almost 5 years in the trenches. My father served as a Lancaster pilot in bomber Command during World War 2. The Memorial Centre could be repaired/refurbished, but at a high cost. Why? Much more suitable opportunities exist to honour our veterans. Where is it written that, just because a municipality owns something once, it must own that same item in perpetuity? To never change is to never improve.
d.) We are one municipality -- not a bunch of individual districts. The analysis of parkland/public open space per capita by district presented by those opposed to a new facility serves to only perpetuate an unhealthy "them versus us" mindset that is damaging to the culture of our community.
e.) Given the historical development patterns, Williamsville developed before modern provincial planning legislation that requires 5% parkland in each new development. It is inevitable that there will be differences in open space per capita between districts. However, just as Williamsville ended up with less parkland because of the planning act regulations in place at the time it developed, it also benefits from a more traditional urban land use that allows for efficient public transit and neighbourhood stores -- unlike modern suburbs. Furthermore, it appears that the public open space per capita figures are skewed by the unrealistic inclusion of "Lemoines Point" and "Little Cataraqui Conservation Area" in the figures for Districts 4 and 1 respectively. To allocate major region-wide Conservation-operated spaces to such a chart, if that indeed has been done, merely illustrates by example the saying that "statistics don't lie, but statisticians do".
As a friend who has paid $1,000 for season's tickets to the Frontenacs said to me today (as he was complaining about the "litter" placed on his windshield by K-CAL while he was attending last night's hockey game), he has a problem paying the price he does to watch a hockey game where he cannot see the puck on the ice by the third period (due to fog), and where elderly attendees are at such a risk of falling due to the frost build-up on the walkway around the ice surface. He, like many others I talk to, is looking forward to being able to attend games at a downtown location. He will then be able to patronize a good restaurant before the game or a pub after the game, without having to move his vehicle. As it is, he has to troop through a (usually) muddy parking lot or field after the game. By the time he gets in his vehicle and gets out the gate, he feels he may as well go home as drive somewhere else to complete the evening.
My wife and I do not attend hockey games. We do attend figure skating events and musical or theatrical productions. Several times a year, we find ourselves driving to Toronto, Ottawa, or New York City for such performances. While Kingston is not large enough to attract all of the performances we travel out-of-town to see, should we have the benefit of seeing a figure skating performance at a suitable venue in Kingston we would be taking far fewer of our tourism dollars out-of-town. Currently, if the same performance was playing at the Memorial Centre and in Ottawa, we would drive to Ottawa to see it -- creating jobs for people designing, building, and working in Ottawa restaurants rather than in Kingston restaurants. Similarly, if Holly Cole were performing at the LVEC, we would be more likely to attend that concert than to drive to Toronto to see Dianna Krall.
Any proposal for change will meet some resistance. The question is not whether we should ever change -- but rather how we should change. The Memorial Centre is environmentally and functionally obsolete, and beyond the limit of viable repair/refurbishment. Let's quit sending bad money after good -- get over it, and get on with it.
Peter Walker