NNSL (Apr 03/98) - Residents of Yellowknife received a brochure regarding the arena complex in the mail this week.

It is the city's attempt to inform the public about the issues surrounding the $9.03 million dollar project.

Yellowknife Property Owners Association president Matthew Grogono said association members are quite pleased to see that the city has responded to their request for information. However, they do have a number of concerns about some of the content, he said.

First, Grogono said the introduction describes the brochure as "objective and unbiased." Yet, instead of an independent third party, the leaflet was written by city administration without officially identifying them as the authors.

City clerk Tim Mercer said the city's seal was left off the brochure because of an oversight. He said the city retained a third-party to format the leaflet but administration supplied the content.

Another of Grogono's concerns is that the information package includes mayor David Lovell's message and Lovell clearly conveys that he is in favor of the venture.

"How can you put someone's opinion in an 'objective and unbiased' document?" Grogono asked.

He is backed by Ald. Cheryl Best, who added that she feels that "it's built to be positive."

Mercer conceded that administration struggled over whether or not to include the mayor's message but Lovell insisted it be printed.

"Obviously, we've got somewhat of a bias in this because the city's in favor of (the complex), no question," Mercer said. "Otherwise it wouldn't even be on the agenda. It was as unbiased as we could make it."

Grogono added that the summarized history of the matter, on the first page, omitted a 1994 survey that found only 28 per cent of city residents desired a new arena.

Another possible source of confusion, is the brochure's reference to the effect of the project on taxes. On the last page, it states that there will be no impact on property taxes from the arena project.

In reality, the tax impact of the project is substantial, only masked by a number of unrelated offsetting factors.

"This isn't free. Somebody's got to pay for it," Mercer acknowledged. "But because our debt is already decreasing so rapidly, it's not going to cost us to finance this more than our current debt.

"We are paying a significant amount of money for this. However, we can handle it without raising taxes. If we didn't build this arena, conceivably, then we could lower taxes," he conceded.

Best said she wished the document included a baseline comparison with a scenario in which the $10 million wasn't spent at all.

"That seems to be obviously missing from the brochure," she said.

There's also a discrepancy to be noted in the brochure. On the front page under the "Fact Summary," it states the net annual operating costs will be $110,000. However, inside the leaflet, there's an yearly projected operation figure of $200,000.

Mercer explained that the lesser figure is derived by subtracting the savings from the closure of the Gerry Murphy Arena.

"We should have put $200,000 on the front but we didn't catch that until it had already gone to press," he said. "That should actually read, 'The net increase operating costs' on the front page."