• 
• CLASS
• JOBS
• AUTO
• HOMES

Candidates split on hockey support

JANESVILLE — Three Janesville City Council incumbents and one challenger on Wednesday endorsed the idea of bringing a junior A hockey team to Janesville.

The remaining four candidates said they would not support spending the $200,000 needed to improve the ice arena to bring the team here.

The League of Women Voters sponsored a candidates' forum during which eight of nine candidates appeared. Dan Steinhoff did not attend.

The hockey team coming to Janesville is controversial because the city is being asked to build a locker room and office for the team. The team would rent the space from the city. The $200,000 also would expand the concession stand and improve the heating system.

Beer sales would "a significant part of the revenue stream" for the team, a spokesman for Wisconsin Hockey Partners said earlier.

The council is scheduled to vote Monday on an agreement with Wisconsin Hockey Partners. The partners have said they will decide by March 15 whether to bring the team here.

The city estimates the city could bring in $14,000 to $20,000 a year having the team here.

Nine candidates are seeking four open seats on the council in the April 7 election. Three of the candidates are incumbents. Amy Loasching is not seeking re-election.

Below are the candidates' answers to questions about bringing the hockey team to Janesville and allowing the sale of beer at the ice arena. While the issues likely will be settled by the time a new council is seated, their answers show the candidates' philosophies on what city money should be spent on and when.

Bill Truman, incumbent: The hockey team would benefit all Janesville residents because it would bring visitors who would spend money in the community. It also would bring another entertainment option. He is concerned about the sale of alcohol but believes that with some maneuvering it can be kept away from the kids.

Russ Steeber, incumbent: We need to create a city that has amenities for everyone. People who don't use the ice rink might use the city's bike trails, for instance. The city has to take a step forward. The money is a lot to spend but it is being invested in a city building and one that needs repair and upkeep. The city must work through some of the alcohol issues and make it available only under the right circumstances.

Spencer Potter, challenger: We have an opportunity to invest in the rink, and that would bring in a hockey club. Now is precisely the time to invest in the ice arena and other existing city amenities. It undermines public trust when people pay taxes but find amenities financially neglected. If the venture fails, the city would end up with an upgraded hockey rink that has to be updated, anyway. He is concerned about the alcohol but doesn't think the venue is any different than taking kids to other places where beer is sold, such as a Brewers or Snappers game.

George Brunner, incumbent: The hockey team should be considered as economic development because it would draw people to the community who spend time and money here. Before he supports spending $200,000, he would make sure the improvements serve all users of the ice arena and that the beer is kept separate from youth.

Frank Perrotto, challenger: It's a nice amenity at the wrong time. The hockey team would have little if any economic impact on the city or the downtown. All of Janesville would end up paying for an attraction that at the most 5 percent would ever attend. The ice arena will need well more than $1 million in renovations in the future. Why not look at the whole ice arena before spending the $200,000? And selling beer where kids are playing hockey sends the wrong message.

Daniel Straasburg, challenger: He has mixed feelings about bringing the team here. On one hand, it is a good idea to get more youth involved. But the ice arena would not bring people downtown. Instead, they would spend money on Milton Avenue. The $200,000 would be better spent on a marketing firm to solicit companies to set up shop here.

K. Andreah Briarmoon, challenger: The ice rink improvements, the proposed tunnel under Milwaukee Street, the new bus garage and proposed aquatic center all are nice. But what happened to referendums? The council should ask voters what they want. City employees aren't entrepreneurs or business owners. We need to get back to the basics, such as street maintenance and garbage pickup. Also, why didn't the council discuss spending the $200,000 during budget deliberations when it could have been considered in the big picture?

Billy Ray McCoy, challenger: He would vote against spending the $200,000. The ice rink is an old building with a leaky roof and an old ice chilling system. It's going to eventually need repair, and the hockey team should put $700,000 into a holding account to cover those expenses. He also would vote against serving beer.