LONGMONT — The Longmont Ice Pavilion is becoming a moneymaker for the city.
According to preliminary 2009 numbers (which don’t become final until March), the ice rink took in $146,956 during the year while spending $131,752. That comes to $15,204 of revenue, or roughly an 11.5 percent gain.
“It was just awesome,” said city recreation manager Jeff Friesner.
“This is becoming the place to be in the wintertime,” agreed Mark Mann, who manages the ice rink.
The 2009 figures reflect the last half of the 2008-09 skating season and the first half of the 2009-10 season. The season ends March 14.
The news is a welcome turnaround for a rink that once was on the chopping block. In October 2007, the Longmont City Council cut the rink from the budget due to its operating costs; at the time, the ice pavilion was making back no more than 60 percent of its expenses.
A new council gave the rink a second chance that December. Skaters didn’t take long to make the most of it. The rink broke even in 2008 and drew an estimated 21,000 people to the ice for the 2008-09 season.
“I would comfortably say we’ll easily surpass that figure,” Friesner said of this season’s expected attendance.
BRIGHTON — John Jukkola is happy Heaven Fest won’t be in his back yard this summer.
And he doesn’t want to see the Christian music festival return.
“I’m glad they’re gone, and I hope they don’t come back, but Longmont needs to know what they’re in for,” Jukkola said Tuesday afternoon in his shop on his 60-acre property on Weld County Road 4, about a mile north of the field where Heaven Fest was held the past two years.
One of the anonymously insane commenters at the TC blurted this out:
mfrede, sorry that you don’t get it. We have to rescue progress from the so-called progressives. We need a liberal, not a libertarian, social order with deeper values than material advances. Your idea all pre-existing traditions or values are by definition just so much unprogressive baggage is as philistine as it is laughable. Pseudo progressives pose danger of fanaticism, authoritarianism, abuse of power, exploitation or abuse of the old and the young, corruption, rigged elections and harm to minorities. In our confused discourse, some people who embody these very threats have disguised themselves as liberals. Their deep intolerance and intimidatory techniques in pursuit of license and power must be resisted in the interests of preserving a decent, fair and free society. That is why I am a progressive.
Wrangler, Longmont, 1/15/2010 12:21 AM
This is so twisted up logically it hurts to read.
The person behind this pseudonym should really seek psychiatric help immediately… obvious loss of connection to reality.
I mean, this person is so spooky they should be required to wear a yellow shirt with thick black diagonal stripes at all types to indicate ‘hazard’.
Anyone this mentally disrupted shouldn’t be allowed to drive.
The following is from Petapixel and is the text of a reference on photographers rights. If you’d like to submit a photo to Free Range Longmont, please be sure these rules have been observed:
You can make a photograph of anything and anyone on any public property, except where a specific law prohibits it. i.e. streets, sidewalks, town squares, parks, government buildings open to the public, and public libraries.
You may shoot on private property if it is open to the public, but you are obligated to stop if the owner requests it. i.e. malls, retail stores, restaurants, banks, and office building lobbies.
Private property owners can prevent photography ON their property, but not photography OF their property from a public location.
Anyone can be photographed without consent when they are in a public place unless there is a reasonable expectation of privacy. i.e. private homes, restrooms, dressing rooms, medical facilities, and phone booths.
Despite common misconceptions, the following subjects are almost always permissible:
Security is rarely an acceptable reason for restricting photography. Photographing from a public place cannot infringe on trade secrets, nor is it terrorist activity.
Private parties cannot detain you against your will unless a serious crime was committed in their presence. Those that do so may be subject to criminal and civil charges.
It is a crime for someone to threaten injury, detention, confiscation, or arrest because you are making photographs.
You are not obligated to provide your identity or reason for photographing unless questioned by a law enforcement officer and state law requires it.
Private parties have no right to confiscate your equipment without a court order. Even law enforcement officers must obtain one unless making an arrest. No one can force you to delete photos you have made.
These are general guidelines regarding the right to make photos and should not be interpreted as legal advice. If you need legal help, please contact a lawyer.
Here’s a few more good references on photographer’s rights: