6879 Posted Oct 7, 2019, 4:51 PM OldDartmouthMark Registered User Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 4,930 Quote: spaustin Originally Posted by



When this was pitched to Council the pitch was that it would be private-sector led. What we've gotten back isn't that. What we're being asked to do is pay to build the stadium, but not own it, contribute to the ongoing capital costs, someone has to guarantee the loan (province or HRM), and if something happens to the team, guess who is going to be left holding the full costs. Tellingly the only thing we're not being asked to do by the proponents is to share in the potential profits. Everything else is our job. So much for private-sector led. All of that is the known costs. Add to that the fact that the transportation plan is full of holes, which means turning getting there into something that will actually work will also be at HRM's expense and, unlike other developments, we won't be able to recoup that since the stadium proponents expect us to waive all the usual development charges too.



HRM doesn't have a bottomless pit of money. Doing this means not doing other things. It's as simple as that. The proposal is simply so far away from something that's supportable that digging into it further is a waste of everyone's time and energy. I have been entirely consistent on this. I was clear when Council last had this before us that a big ask of HRM wasn't something I wouldn't support. You can read my article I wrote back then here.



http://www.samaustin.ca/council-upda...-yellow-heart/



In terms of my record, I categorically reject the suggestion that I have stood in the way of progress. I enthusiastically supported the Wanderer's, I took my lumps for backing a residential project at Prince Albert/Glenwood, have told people we need to have density in Downtown Dartmouth, amended the Centre Plan to upzone several parcels in my district that I felt could sustain more, and voted to rezone land at Lancaster/Woodland. A lot of that I have done at a political cost and did so because I felt it was the right thing to do. The only projects I can recall voting against in my 3 years on Council is the Willow Tree, Wellington, and now the Stadium. If the standard is councillors must vote for everything then guilty as charged, but I don't think that's what our job is.



Carry on. This won't be popular in this forum given that it's a development forum and a stadium thread, but here it goes.When this was pitched to Council the pitch was that it would be private-sector led. What we've gotten back isn't that. What we're being asked to do is pay to build the stadium, but not own it, contribute to the ongoing capital costs, someone has to guarantee the loan (province or HRM), and if something happens to the team, guess who is going to be left holding the full costs. Tellingly the only thing we're not being asked to do by the proponents is to share in the potential profits. Everything else is our job. So much for private-sector led. All of that is the known costs. Add to that the fact that the transportation plan is full of holes, which means turning getting there into something that will actually work will also be at HRM's expense and, unlike other developments, we won't be able to recoup that since the stadium proponents expect us to waive all the usual development charges too.HRM doesn't have a bottomless pit of money. Doing this means not doing other things. It's as simple as that. The proposal is simply so far away from something that's supportable that digging into it further is a waste of everyone's time and energy. I have been entirely consistent on this. I was clear when Council last had this before us that a big ask of HRM wasn't something I wouldn't support. You can read my article I wrote back then here.In terms of my record, I categorically reject the suggestion that I have stood in the way of progress. I enthusiastically supported the Wanderer's, I took my lumps for backing a residential project at Prince Albert/Glenwood, have told people we need to have density in Downtown Dartmouth, amended the Centre Plan to upzone several parcels in my district that I felt could sustain more, and voted to rezone land at Lancaster/Woodland. A lot of that I have done at a political cost and did so because I felt it was the right thing to do. The only projects I can recall voting against in my 3 years on Council is the Willow Tree, Wellington, and now the Stadium. If the standard is councillors must vote for everything then guilty as charged, but I don't think that's what our job is.Carry on.



I do have one question, though. Relating to this part of your post:

Quote: What we're being asked to do is pay to build the stadium, but not own it, contribute to the ongoing capital costs, someone has to guarantee the loan (province or HRM), and if something happens to the team, guess who is going to be left holding the full costs. Tellingly the only thing we're not being asked to do by the proponents is to share in the potential profits.



My case being:

- It seems to be widely believed that we need some kind of outdoor stadium that would service the citizens of a continually-growing city.

- There also seems to be a consensus that it would be a great asset to amateur and school/university level team sports.

- There seems to be some significant motivation from the CFL to populate the area with a team, plus an opportunity to provide a permanent home for the Wanderers.

- With an actual venue for stadium-level concerts we would open up the door to events such as these, rather than the so-so events previously held at the commons, and without the costs associated with converting such grounds into a concert venue and the teardown/repair costs after the fact. More aptly, these events just don't happen here anymore - instead places like Moncton host them (not that there's anything wrong with that, MonctonRad... ) and Haligonians will travel to Moncton to attend (and spend their money there).



I think this would be justified simply on the benefits it would provide the the citizens of our city, and on top of that there is the possibility that much of the costs could be offset by the potential profits that could be generated.



I agree that we shouldn't lunge headlong into a bad deal, but this seems instead to be an opportunity to negotiate a better deal or at least to tackle it from another angle. There will never be a better time to do it, given the current state of land availability, and the fact that a lot of the legwork has already been done and is current.



This is coming from a guy who isn't actually a football or soccer fan, and somebody who doesn't have a 'development at all costs' attitude. But this one seems like almost a no-brainer to advance Halifax, and make it a more attractive place for those who live here, and those who are considering moving here.



Just my 2¢... Sam, I want to thank you for posting about this, knowing that you were going to be facing a barrage of comments that you will have to defend. It shows good character to put yourself out there and state your beliefs and reasoning on the subject, especially knowing they won't be the most popular views expressed.I do have one question, though. Relating to this part of your post:My question is simply this: If HRM is being expected to pay for the stadium but not have ownership or a share in potential profits, then why don't we just negotiate for a better deal? Or, just build the stadium and budget for the development/maintenance costs, and then have some kind of control over the situation?My case being:- It seems to be widely believed that we need some kind of outdoor stadium that would service the citizens of a continually-growing city.- There also seems to be a consensus that it would be a great asset to amateur and school/university level team sports.- There seems to be some significant motivation from the CFL to populate the area with a team, plus an opportunity to provide a permanent home for the Wanderers.- With an actual venue for stadium-level concerts we would open up the door to events such as these, rather than the so-so events previously held at the commons, and without the costs associated with converting such grounds into a concert venue and the teardown/repair costs after the fact. More aptly, these events just don't happen here anymore - instead places like Moncton host them (not that there's anything wrong with that, MonctonRad...) and Haligonians will travel to Moncton to attend (and spend their money there).I think this would be justified simply on the benefits it would provide the the citizens of our city, and on top of that there is the possibility that much of the costs could be offset by the potential profits that could be generated.I agree that we shouldn't lunge headlong into a bad deal, but this seems instead to be an opportunity to negotiate a better deal or at least to tackle it from another angle. There will never be a better time to do it, given the current state of land availability, and the fact that a lot of the legwork has already been done and is current.This is coming from a guy who isn't actually a football or soccer fan, and somebody who doesn't have a 'development at all costs' attitude. But this one seems like almost a no-brainer to advance Halifax, and make it a more attractive place for those who live here, and those who are considering moving here.Just my 2¢...