Tim Hortons Field | 40m | ? | Complete [Archive] - Page 14

dennis1

Jul 26, 2010, 4:16 AM

No doubt. I don't really watch the CFL much anymore, but I was pretty hardcore back in the 70's and 80's. I'd love to see Hamilton stick around and have great support for the Cats, as well as Ottawa getting their team back - and I think it's time we have at least 1 more team added to the league from the east coast.

I think there's more interest in the NFL than the CFL in Ontario unfortunately. I hope Toronto gets an NFL team - I think it would be great. People claim it would kill the Argos (or even the CFL), but I'm not sure about that.

In any case, competition is healthy. We in Hamilton want an NHL team and hate that the Leafs are trying to kill competition. We also complain about the lack of competition for wireless and internet providers. Yet the same people who hate monopolies and like competition dont want Toronto to get an NFL team for fear it will hurt the Argos/CFL. I don't get the double-standard.
Me too. How can you slam Toronto for wanting an NFL team and then watch the all american NHL? That sport has all but abandoned this country. I believe Hamilton will get the team, but it will be ugly and a hard fight.

dennis1

Jul 26, 2010, 4:23 AM

Young is being greedy for pushing for a site that will allow him to turn around years of annual losses he has swallowed while owning the team instead of rolling over and accepting a white elephant site that will continue racking up the losses - you gotta be kidding me!

Not everyone has a car. Besides the west harbour + off peak GO service?

Look at this
http://maps.google.ca/maps?f=d&source=s_d&saddr=366+Fifty+Road,+Hamilton,+Ontario&daddr=650+Service+Road,+Hamilton,+Ontario+to:500+Centennial+Parkway+North,+Hamilton,+Ontario+to:350+James+Street+North,+Hamilton,+Ontario&geocode=FfhfkwIdj89A-ylVe780e6QsiDGaoq0S1OT4SA%3BFb-ckwIdtek_-ymHaOfRSqIsiDGNV6HhQVVg8g%3BFfXPkwIdaPs--ymx_FoMuZgsiDEOVUfP8ywulA%3B&hl=en&mra=ls&vps=4&sll=43.228705,-79.698735&sspn=0.060787,0.153637&ie=UTF8

If there is a stop at Centennial, you have to take a 20-30 min bus ride to a stadium in the middle of nowhere. And this is without traffic.

c@taract_soulj@h

Jul 26, 2010, 6:10 AM

http://www.ourcityourfuture.ca/

I'm sorry, but this Pan-Am thing is an embarrassment to the city and it's citizens. I understand the goodwill of a petition and I do hope the West Harbour gets it. But Young has a petition as well...what is this, Ancient Rome where we ask the people for all our final decisions??

In no way, will this city ever host another major sporting event ever again that requires something new to be built...maybe a bowling tournament at that new splitsville place on Stone Church but that might be asking for too much cause there'll be a debate over Coke or Pepsi. In reality however regardless of the outcome, more than one person is going to walk away pissed off at whatever is decided. I don't even read the Spectator anymore for updates, I just look at the strain on peoples faces and PoW!! got my answer right there. We're making the Athens olympics fiasco on whether they were ready or not, look like kindergarten.

It's been a long day for me so excuse me, but I know I'm not the only one who feels this way about the Pan-Out debate. Here's a little road map...

PanAm games awarded=West Harbour=5 other sites=Confed Park=Burlington=Ticats to Toronto=TiCats for sale=Katz development/NHL=East Mountain site=East Mountain or West Harbour decision on Aug 10=??????

It's like drawing a circle with a drafting pencil, but having it break 8 times before you reach back to where you started...again, food for thought :koko:

SteelTown

Jul 26, 2010, 11:09 AM

$60m for Mountain site?
Future Fund board divided on role in stadium selection

July 26, 2010
Emma Reilly
The Hamilton Spectator
http://www.thespec.com/News/Local/article/814211

The Hamilton Future Fund board of directors is meeting tomorrow to discuss whether the city should still pledge $60 million to a stadium on the east Mountain.

And according to e-mails obtained by The Spectator, the Future Fund board itself is divided on its role in the process of choosing a stadium location.

The city is relying on the fund, a legacy account created from the sale of Hamilton Hydro, for its $60 million share of the cost of the new Pan Am stadium.

However, questions have been raised about whether the legacy account, which has a mandate to focus on downtown projects, can still be used if council decides to locate the stadium on the east Mountain rather than at the west harbour. That decision will be made August 10 at a Committee of the Whole meeting and ratified August 12 at council.

In the chain of e-mails sent last week, councillors and several community members on the Future Fund board discuss tomorrow's meeting and whether the $60 million contribution is still appropriate for the east Mountain.

The board is made up of 13 community members from various sectors, Mayor Fred Eisenberger, and Councillors Brad Clark, Brian McHattie and Chad Collins. The e-mails were sent to the board and copied to all councillors, senior city staff, and the city clerk.

One of the most vocal participants in the e-mails was Clark, whose Stoney Creek ward includes the east Mountain site. He argues the board already completed its role in the process, and since council did not ask for the board's opinion, it would be out of line for it to participate in the debate at this point.

"To hold a meeting of the board of governors to comment on the process or the merits of either site would be at best inappropriate and in the worst case deemed out of order," Clark wrote.

"I would strongly suggest that the Future Fund board of governors resist the temptation to intervene."

Clark also wrote that council already ignored the board in deciding whether the $60 million withdrawal for the stadium should be a grant or a loan, and as a result, the board has no real power.

"I remember the board passing a motion stating that the $60 million would be a loan to the City. However, at council a motion was passed clarifying that the $60 million would be a grant," he wrote. "So, it would appear that the Future Fund board of directors has no real authority."

That prompted several responses from councillors.

"It is good thing that the majority of councillors are very interested on what citizen volunteers, who take time to sit on boards and committees have to say," wrote Councillor Terry Whitehead.

Councillor Scott Duvall said he would be "happy to hear the Future Fund board's thoughts," adding he finds "any suggestion of them having no authority to be insulting."

The community members of the board had varied responses to Clark's e-mails. Lawyer Kieran Dickson argued the board is "obligated to consider the impact of the new plan."

"It is implicit that Future Fund dollars may be used for the Pam Am stadium construction costs regardless of where it is ultimately built," he wrote. "Specifically, we must determine whether the new scheme is consistent with the mission of the fund -- and we must publicly release our recommendation to Council."

Paul Vaccarello, the CEO of the Tripemco Burlington Insurance Group, took a shot at Clark's suggestion that the board should no longer be a part of the stadium process.

"I volunteered for this board thinking that ... not only as a board member but also as a citizen of this municipality, my input on the board concerning Future Fund monies would be at the very least heard," he wrote. "I guess I was wrong."

Two board members -- Greg Hoath, business manager at the International Union of Operating Engineers, and Chris McLaughlin, the CEO Niagara Escarpment Foundation -- suggested the issue shouldn't be discussed over e-mail.

The board meeting is scheduled for 2:30 p.m. tomorrow in the council chambers at City Hall.

markbarbera

Jul 26, 2010, 11:38 AM

Not everyone has a car. Besides the west harbour + off peak GO service?

Look at this
http://maps.google.ca/maps?f=d&source=s_d&saddr=366+Fifty+Road,+Hamilton,+Ontario&daddr=650+Service+Road,+Hamilton,+Ontario+to:500+Centennial+Parkway+North,+Hamilton,+Ontario+to:350+James+Street+North,+Hamilton,+Ontario&geocode=FfhfkwIdj89A-ylVe780e6QsiDGaoq0S1OT4SA%3BFb-ckwIdtek_-ymHaOfRSqIsiDGNV6HhQVVg8g%3BFfXPkwIdaPs--ymx_FoMuZgsiDEOVUfP8ywulA%3B&hl=en&mra=ls&vps=4&sll=43.228705,-79.698735&sspn=0.060787,0.153637&ie=UTF8

If there is a stop at Centennial, you have to take a 20-30 min bus ride to a stadium in the middle of nowhere. And this is without traffic.

East Mountain is a ten-minute drive from the proposed Centennial train station, so I don't know why you would say it's 20-30 min ride. The proposal does call for shuttle service from Centennial GO to the stadium site.

Besides GO bus service linking Centennial GO to the EM site, there are four existing HSR routes that run to the EM site, which would be augmented by the existing Ti-Cat game day shuttle service currently in use. In addition, the site is directly linked to existing cycling routes (Stone Church bike lanes and the rail trail). The location may be car-centric, but it's certainly not accessible exclusively by car.

Don't get me wrong, I would very much prefer an inner city location for the stadium. Unfortunately the city excluded all sights from consideration except for the flawed site at Barton and Tiffany, leaving us with having to make a choice between a site the Ticats refuse to move into (and therefore a site doomed to lose Pan Am funding) and a site in a distinctly suburban setting. Either way we lose. Thanks again, Eisenberger!

In a way I am hoping the city contiues to support West Harbour on August 10. While we would lose out in participating in the Pan Am games and getting a new stadium, the Ticats can continue to make due with Ivor Wynne and hope for another opportunity for a proper stadium should the city bid to host a future Commonwealth Games. Of course, after this debacle it would hard to get any sports federation to take this city's bid seriously.

SteelTown

Jul 26, 2010, 1:09 PM

I say let the city find a sports franchise for a community ownership (soccer team perhaps) and say "TA DA! We have a tenant for the West Harbour".

dennis1

Jul 26, 2010, 5:15 PM

Will Hamilton support soccer?

SteelTown

Jul 26, 2010, 5:26 PM

Yea get the Italians and Portuguese along James St North to support.

Berklon

Jul 26, 2010, 5:58 PM

Acajack

Jul 26, 2010, 6:34 PM

Stoney Creek is pretty multi-ethnic as well.

Let's not forget the amount of soccer fans from Toronto who would have the convience of the GO train dropping them off very close to the stadium at the WH to watch a game. If we're talking MLS - they'll draw a lot of Toronto FC fans when they play Hamilton, but they can still draw a decent amount who will watch Hamilton play any team.

I'm not a soccer fan at all, but an MLS team would be great for this city.

With all due respect, I think Hamiltonians would do best to focus on a new home for the club they already have (the Ti-Cats) rather than chase some pie-in-the-sky dream like MLS that has little chance of materializing.

Although Hamilton and environs might well be able to support an MLS club, this hypothesis conflicts with the realities of being in a U.S.-dominated league (or trying to get into one). It's the same problem with the NHL: there are quite a few more than (the current) six NHL cities in Canada that could support pro-level hockey, but the "North American" reality of the NHL means most of them won't likely be given a chance to.

Same goes for MLS. Just looking at a map of where their clubs are and there are many, many cities in the U.S. much bigger and more strategic (prestige-wise) than Hamilton where MLS doesn't even have teams yet. As far as Canada goes, they think they've got everything covered off (or at least everything that counts) with clubs in Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver. Toronto FC covers off the entire GTA (and perhaps all of Ontario even) in MLS' eyes I am sure.

If there were a truly Canadian pro soccer league, then Hamilton (and Halifax and Winnipeg and other places) would have a better chance, since these are major cities in the Canadian context. A Canadian league would need cities like these.

But the American-dominated leagues don't owe Canadian cities anything. That's something Canadians keep forgetting.

Gurnett71

Jul 26, 2010, 8:31 PM

If we're talking MLS - they'll draw a lot of Toronto FC fans when they play Hamilton, but they can still draw a decent amount who will watch Hamilton play any team.

I'm not a soccer fan at all, but an MLS team would be great for this city.

Bob Young is talking about a NASL franchise.

http://www.raisethehammer.org/blog/1796/bob_young's_letter_to_mayor_and_council

"As you know, I am involved in the business of professional soccer through the NASL and the Carolina Railhawks Soccer team. It is our view there is a great deal of synergy for combined football and soccer organizations. As such, we have secured franchise right for Hamilton with the North American Soccer League."

SteelTown

Jul 26, 2010, 10:33 PM

Di Ianni, mayoral candidate, said if it took a East Mountain stadium site to keep the Ti Cats than he would support the East Mountain site.

dennis1

Jul 26, 2010, 10:35 PM

With all due respect, I think Hamiltonians would do best to focus on a new home for the club they already have (the Ti-Cats) rather than chase some pie-in-the-sky dream like MLS that has little chance of materializing.

Although Hamilton and environs might well be able to support an MLS club, this hypothesis conflicts with the realities of being in a U.S.-dominated league (or trying to get into one). It's the same problem with the NHL: there are quite a few more than (the current) six NHL cities in Canada that could support pro-level hockey, but the "North American" reality of the NHL means most of them won't likely be given a chance to.

Same goes for MLS. Just looking at a map of where their clubs are and there are many, many cities in the U.S. much bigger and more strategic (prestige-wise) than Hamilton where MLS doesn't even have teams yet. As far as Canada goes, they think they've got everything covered off (or at least everything that counts) with clubs in Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver. Toronto FC covers off the entire GTA (and perhaps all of Ontario even) in MLS' eyes I am sure.

If there were a truly Canadian pro soccer league, then Hamilton (and Halifax and Winnipeg and other places) would have a better chance, since these are major cities in the Canadian context. A Canadian league would need cities like these.

But the American-dominated leagues don't owe Canadian cities anything. That's something Canadians keep forgetting.

They could be called "Ontario." Another thing is that the MLS pays the players and not the teams, with a strict salary cap. We don't really know yet if the MLS is ready to compete big time. They are still missing Atlanta, Miami. They should go there first. If they work, Hamilton should go hard for the MLS and NHL. We need to put ourselves on the map. The TiCats will never do that.

dennis1

Jul 26, 2010, 10:57 PM

What would a Hamilton team be called?

Nothing with steel please.

Dalreg

Jul 26, 2010, 11:02 PM

They could be called "Ontario." Another thing is that the MLS pays the players and not the teams, with a strict salary cap. We don't really know yet if the MLS is ready to compete big time. They are still missing Atlanta, Miami. They should go there first. If they work, Hamilton should go hard for the MLS and NHL. We need to put ourselves on the map. The TiCats will never do that.

Calling it Ontario, Hamilton, Titikaka, doesn't matter a second MLS team in Ontario won't happen in the next 25 to 50 years, so Hamilton should stop dreaming. A second tier team, NASL or whatever is the best and only hope.

Once again Hamilton should worry about the teams it does have first.

I'm sure Moncton will take the Ti-cats.

dennis1

Jul 26, 2010, 11:26 PM

Moncton does not have a stadium

The TiCats won't leave. They simply become the no 3 in the area.

highwater

Jul 27, 2010, 12:52 AM

In a way I am hoping the city contiues to support West Harbour on August 10. While we would lose out in participating in the Pan Am games and getting a new stadium...

Says who? This is not a foregone conclusion. We should call his bluff. He doesn't have enough money on the table to get his way.

markbarbera

Jul 27, 2010, 1:35 AM

Says who?

Ian Troop, CEO of Pan Am HostCo

The proposed construction of a Hamilton stadium for the 2015 Pan American Games rests on the Tiger-Cats and the city reaching consensus on a location that works for both of them, according to Games CEO Ian Troop.

Short of that, Troop, who was in Hamilton yesterday to attend the city’s economic summit, warned there is no guarantee the stadium will be built in Hamilton.

“You look at the history of games, the bid books change and things go different places,” Troop said. “I think in this situation, destiny is in Hamilton’s hands and that’s why they are moving towards facilitation to get some closure.”

The city approved a plan back in February to build the stadium near its West Harbour, but two weeks ago the Tiger-Cats publicly insisted that location makes it impossible for the team to break even. The football club would prefer to see the stadium near one highway access points away from downtown, where it says it has a better chance of attracting private partners.

Last week, at the football club’s request, the city agreed to bring in an outside facilitator to resolve the dispute, an arrangement which should be in place by the end of this week.

While the city has suggested the project is more about community building than a new home for a professional football team, Troop said the Tiger-Cats need to be part of the final picture.

“You have to keep in mind that they only have [10] home dates so you need to have more than just the Ticats but I think to serve the needs of the community, [but] they need to be part of it and we’ve said that from the beginning,” Troop said.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/football/ticats-new-stadium-in-peril/article1572314/

dennis1

Jul 27, 2010, 1:42 AM

Ian Troop, CEO of Pan Am HostCo

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/football/ticats-new-stadium-in-peril/article1572314/

A lot of people would say your previous statement would hand toronto a stadium proposal that could become NFL caliber. North York Stadium. 85,000 seats
I would like it, but others would not. Besides, at this point the west harbour will get built anyway. We could simply land the USL or even MLS for it, I'm sure they would like a major waterfront stadium.

highwater

Jul 27, 2010, 1:44 AM

Ian Troop, CEO of Pan Am HostCo

...in a one off comment that hasn't been backed up. Anyway, our 'legacy tenant' doesn't have the required $50m to bring the stadium up to a usable size no matter where it's located so it's all rather moot. Without the $50m, Young doesn't get his stadium, period, so I really don't see where he gets off making a fuss about the site.

markbarbera

Jul 27, 2010, 1:48 AM

BCTed

Jul 27, 2010, 2:20 AM

Too much pie-in-the-sky and unrealistic stuff in here... White Star, Katz, MLS... none of these groups will have anything to do with the construction of a new stadium. The city should pick a site and make certain that this thing is not built on the cheap, as it will be Hamilton's primary stadium for decades to come.

highwater

Jul 27, 2010, 2:41 AM

No Ticats, no new stadium. End of.

Don't you mean no money, no new stadium? Where's the $50m supposed to come from? The Ticats don't even have enough for their beloved parking lot let alone a 25,000 seat stadium. So right now, we have a choice between a 15,000 seat stadium at the West Harbour, or a 15,000 seat stadium on the East Mountain with half a parking lot, 'cause that's all the Ticats are offering at the moment. When Ian Troop made that threat, he probably didn't realize that our 'legacy tenant' is a deadbeat.

dennis1

Jul 27, 2010, 3:02 AM

Look what happened to the Washington Redskins when they moved to Largo Mark. It's hard for people from NoVA to get out there. Let's not do the same here.

BCTed

Jul 27, 2010, 8:13 AM

Look what happened to the Washington Redskins when they moved to Largo Mark. It's hard for people from NoVA to get out there. Let's not do the same here.

What happened? The Redskins play about ten miles away from Capitol Hill, they have led the NFL in attendance most years since moving to FedEx Field while having some of the highest ticket prices in the league and not having a very strong team, people come from all over Virginia to watch games, and the franchise's value is among the highest in the world for any sports team (Forbes ranks the Redkins third behind Manchester United and the Dallas Cowboys).

SteelTown

Jul 27, 2010, 11:12 AM

Mountain stadium faces hurdle
Future Fund directors expected to voice opposition to spending $60 million at new site

July 27, 2010
Ken Peters
The Hamilton Spectator
http://www.thespec.com/News/Local/article/814757

Critics of an east Mountain site for Hamilton's Pan Am stadium are expected to have their cause bolstered by a prominent city advisory committee when it meets today.

Several members of the Hamilton Future Fund board of directors are expected to voice opposition to the city spending $60 million in public funds for a stadium to be built on the Mountain.

The 17-member board is on record supporting the moneys -- created from the 2002 sale of Hamilton Hydro -- for a west harbour stadium site that would spur downtown development.

Hamilton council has the final say on the two possible locations. It is expected to have a final vote Aug. 12 on whether the Pan Am stadium should be built on the east Mountain or near the west harbour.

Tiger-Cat owner Bob Young has offered $15 million toward the stadium and $3 million a year in operating costs if council backs the Mountain site.

Board member Kieran Dickson said when the advisory committee approved the Future Fund cash in April 2002, it was linked to downtown development.

If the city is moving toward an east Mountain location, then the Hamilton Future Fund board of directors must reconsider the issue, he said.

"There is no question council can do what it wants to do and nothing that the future fund board does by way of advice is binding," said Dickson. "But council has assembled a future fund board of directors, this is a group of committed Hamiltonians and the city has asked these people to provide their advice. If the city ignores that advice, I think they do so at their political peril."

Board chairman Tom Weisz said because of the widespread public debate on the stadium issue, he expects it will get a public airing today.

But Weisz noted that the board's position remains clear; it supports the west harbour site and hasn't been asked by city council -- which also supports that site -- to reconsider the issue.

The east Mountain site is "an issue and people are talking about it but there has been no change in council's position, which is the west harbour," he said.

Weisz said the fund currently sits at about $125 million.

While he expects the east Mountain site to be debated, Weisz noted the board of directors still doesn't have all the necessary information about the site and secondly, it hasn't been asked to change its position.

So why talk about the east Mountain site?

"We can talk about it and I think we should, because it certainly got enough conversation and media coverage, but we haven't been asked to do anything," Weisz said. He added that he remains a proponent of the west harbour site for the stadium.

SteelTown

Jul 27, 2010, 11:17 AM

Whether east or west, all of us want the best
THE STADIUM DEBATE

July 27, 2010
Bob Young
The Hamilton Spectator

It is great to see so many Hamiltonians caring so deeply about their city. Speaking for the Tiger-Cats, we are thrilled to see the enthusiasm from across our community for building a successful new Pan Am stadium in Hamilton.

Because whether you prefer the east Mountain or west harbour -- it is important to note that everyone wants to see a successful new stadium.

We are all in agreement that Hamilton should seize this Pan Am stadium opportunity; we are just debating about where to put it.

Most "stadium debates" are about whether or not a community should invest in a stadium. That is not the case here. Our community is virtually unanimous in its desire to build a stadium.

....................

http://www.thespec.com/Opinions/article/814742

SteelTown

Jul 27, 2010, 11:20 AM

Hamilton's Pan Am website

http://panamhamilton2015.ca/

Includes a poll for West Harbour or East Mountain stadium site.

Acajack

Jul 27, 2010, 1:29 PM

They could be called "Ontario." Another thing is that the MLS pays the players and not the teams, with a strict salary cap. We don't really know yet if the MLS is ready to compete big time. They are still missing Atlanta, Miami. They should go there first. If they work, Hamilton should go hard for the MLS and NHL. We need to put ourselves on the map. The TiCats will never do that.

With all due respect, the idea that MLS would go to Hamilton at some point is totally far-fetched. Sounds like you're just grasping at straws in order to obtain visibility for the city instead of capitalizing on a legitimate interest for a particular sport.

Anyway, even in the unlikely scenario that MLS wanted more Canadian teams some day, they would most certainly look at Edmonton, Calgary and Ottawa before Hamilton.

Hamilton probably has a better chance of seeing an NHL team than it does an MLS club, to be quite frank.

Acajack

Jul 27, 2010, 1:31 PM

Guys you can live in denial all you want but Ian Troop has said on several occasions the Pan Am stadium needs to be a legacy facility for the Ticats if it to be in Hamilton. No Ticats, no new stadium. End of.

Just out of curiosity people, if a new stadium in Hamilton isn't destined for long-term by the Ti-Cats after the Pan Am Games, just who exactly is going to be using it?

dennis1

Jul 27, 2010, 3:24 PM

With all due respect, the idea that MLS would go to Hamilton at some point is totally far-fetched. Sounds like you're just grasping at straws in order to obtain visibility for the city instead of capitalizing on a legitimate interest for a particular sport.

Anyway, even in the unlikely scenario that MLS wanted more Canadian teams some day, they would most certainly look at Edmonton, Calgary and Ottawa before Hamilton.

Hamilton probably has a better chance of seeing an NHL team than it does an MLS club, to be quite frank.

I admit it's for visibility and making Hamilton a destination. Ottawa almost had the MLS in 2008. Like I said before, I want to see that the MLS try again in Miami and be viable in Atlanta before more expansion. I mentioned this before. But after those two, we could give it our all.

Acajack

Jul 27, 2010, 3:51 PM

I admit it's for visibility and making Hamilton a destination. Ottawa almost had the MLS in 2008. Like I said before, I want to see that the MLS try again in Miami and be viable in Atlanta before more expansion. I mentioned this before. But after those two, we could give it our all.

While I can appreciate the desire to augment a city's visibility, I don't think that this is a priority for MLS and Don Garber, or the NHL and Gary Bettman...

dennis1

Jul 27, 2010, 4:26 PM

We'll let's how Ottawa, Vancouver, Montreal go first, then we can come back to this.

Jon Dalton

Jul 27, 2010, 5:34 PM

Obviously there's no purpose for an east mountain stadium in the future fund's mandate. So, East Mountain = $15M from Tiger Cats. West Harbour = $45M from Future Fund. Make sense?

dennis1

Jul 27, 2010, 6:41 PM

And there's no written guarantee he would even pay.

markbarbera

Jul 27, 2010, 6:51 PM

Obviously there's no purpose for an east mountain stadium in the future fund's mandate.

Do you know the mandate of the Future Fund? Where in its mandate are the conditions that would exclude an East Mountain location from funding?

Jon Dalton

Jul 27, 2010, 7:39 PM

Do YOU know the madate of the Future Fund? I know the mandate of the future fund.

To grow Hamilton's economic base - no stadium will do that. However, brownfield remediation will. The east mountain site if not used for the stadium will be developed privately and the city will grow its tax base. The west harbour brownfield will not be remediated with private funds.

To enhance Hamilton's social fabric - an east mountain stadium will not encourage anyone to socialize. People will go from one end of the city to another in their cars with no opportunities to interact. It will not be a monument of pride for the community, and it will be purely utilitarian. It offers nothing unique to distinguish Hamilton. The west harbour will be part of a growing multi-use destination showcasing Hamilton's lakefront geography, something that sets Hamilton apart.

To enhance community life - What is community life? Interaction among people in the community. Any autocentric development discourages this. People will arrive from all ends of the city, fight eachother in traffic, fight for the closest parking spots, and make a dash for their cars at the end of the event. Aside from the event itself, it will be a contest to get in and out as fast as possible. A site that encourages walking, also encourages interaction. This is evident at Ivor Wynne where walking and transit are common. The west harbour will encourage not only walking and transit in and out of the site, but make use of existing community assets downtown. People can walk to surrounding amenities and have opportunities to meet eachother whether they're making a night of it or just waiting out the traffic. No such opportunity exists on the mountain. In fact, the business success of a suburban stadium depends on capturing all revenue, i.e. not allowing surrounding amenties to take a share. 7000 parking spaces helps keep any spinoff development safely away.

Jon Dalton

Jul 27, 2010, 7:44 PM

But the real question is how the hell do you justify spending millions of dollars to develop a cornfield while land in the heart of the city remains contaminated?

markbarbera

Jul 27, 2010, 8:13 PM

You are assuming the land at the heart of the city will remain contaminated should a stadium not be built there, which is not a correct assumption. In fact, the thing holding back development in this area is not the contamination itself, but CN's OMB challenge of Setting Sail. There are developers whose plans for residential redevelopment are on hold while the OMB case is resolved.

IMO residential redevelopment as prescribed by Setting Sail is a far much better use of the lands than for it to be wasted on a stadium.

BTW, the "cornfield" is designated greenfield development within Hamilton's urban area and will be built up regardless of a decision on a stadium. Would you rather more big box here?

And, with regards to the Future Fund mandate, its applicability to a stadium is questionable regardless of its ultimate location, and I have already stated on several occasions that I disagree with its use on a stadium. It will contribute to Hamilton's economic base equally at either location, it has no impact on social fabric or community life regardless of location.

Jon Dalton

Jul 27, 2010, 8:36 PM

There are developers whose plans for residential redevelopment are on hold while the OMB case is resolved.

For the Rheem site? Really?

IMO residential redevelopment as prescribed by Setting Sail is a far much better use of the lands than for it to be wasted on a stadium.

With what money? The money you want to spend paving the mountain?

BTW, the "cornfield" is designated greenfield development within Hamilton's urban area and will be built up regardless of a decision on a stadium. Would you rather more big box here?

That's why I pointed out that it will be developed anyways. Yes I'd rather have more big box there, as much as I hate that crap, because that would leave the future fund to be spent downtown, whether on a stadium or, even better, something else.

And, with regards to the Future Fund mandate, its applicability to a stadium is questionable regardless of its ultimate location, and I have already stated on several occasions that I disagree with its use on a stadium. It will contribute to Hamilton's economic base equally at either location, it has no impact on social fabric or community life regardless of location.

Agreed, it's applicability to a stadium is questionable. If it's a stadium that results in a brownfield cleanup that wouldn't otherwise happen, I call that a compromise. Ideally, the future fund would be used for much more strategic endeavours.

dennis1

Jul 27, 2010, 8:46 PM

mark Young wants money for the stadium still, so I don't want tax dollars to encourage sprawl.

markbarbera

Jul 27, 2010, 9:14 PM

Dennis, the urban boundaries remain the same regardless of the site selection, so neither site woul dhave an impact on sprawl.

Jon, the only reason Rheem remains undeveloped is because the owner of the land has held on in anticipation of a flip to the city. From what I understand, the flip has already happened. Should the stadium end up elsewhere, this is city-owned land now.

The Future Fund should be used to remediate and repurpose the land as originally intended in Setting Sail. We are talking what $10 million, right? Remediate it then pass the land on to Mac/Mohawk for their joint downtown fine arts campus. Locate the creative catalyst centre there. That is how West Harbour should be developed, not wasted on a stadium.

SteelTown

Jul 27, 2010, 9:40 PM

Future fund board says no to East Mountain stadium

July 27, 2010
Emma Reilly
http://www.thespec.com/News/BreakingNews/article/815162

The future fund board of governors says the special fund it oversees should not be used to help build an East Mountain stadium.

In a vote moments ago, the volunteer board reaffirmed its earlier position to allow money from the fund to go toward a west Harbour stadium because building there fits the goals of the fund.

But it went further this time, saying the money should not be used for the East Mountain, should council change its mind and approve that location for a stadium.

The board only makes recommendations to council, which can overrule its decisions.

dennis1

Jul 27, 2010, 10:25 PM

So the East Mountain is (almost) dead. Good.

The TiCats can play at west harbour because that will be the only choice

Jon Dalton

Jul 27, 2010, 11:22 PM

This is another moral victory if nothing else. Council can vote however they choose Aug. 10. They can ignore the advice of urban experts the world over, and the voice of many prominent institutions in their own city, and they can ignore the board of governors for the Future Fund. Our council always gives lip service to revitalization and funding to sprawl, this would be no exception.

dennis1

Jul 27, 2010, 11:37 PM

Sad but true Jon. But at least we are getting all day train service soon. We have that to look forward to.

This is really a big choice if nothing else. We can begin a rennisance of the downtown area and and eventual NHL franchise. And another franchise in the future, what ever that is. Or we can go with the east mountain, let downtown continue to rot, not get the NHL franchise. And admit we have become an exurb or satellite city of Toronto.

SteelTown

Jul 28, 2010, 12:26 AM

dennis1

Jul 28, 2010, 12:28 AM

RTH? What is that?

SteelTown

Jul 28, 2010, 12:30 AM

RTH - Raise The Hammer website

http://www.raisethehammer.org/blog/1836/province_backs_city_on_stadium_location

markbarbera

Jul 28, 2010, 1:24 AM

I am sure the Argos will love their new stadium at York University. They'll have to send the Hamilton Council a big thank you fruit basket.

dennis1

Jul 28, 2010, 2:00 AM

RTH - Raise The Hammer website

http://www.raisethehammer.org/blog/1836/province_backs_city_on_stadium_location

Thank you.

dennis1

Jul 28, 2010, 2:32 AM

This will go down as a turning point in Hamilton's history I promise you.

dennis1

Jul 28, 2010, 2:36 AM

I am sure the Argos will love their new stadium at York University. They'll have to send the Hamilton Council a big thank you fruit basket.

Argos? The new stadium will be at the Port Land/Docks area in downtown Toronto east. It will be NFL caliber with 75,000 - 80,000 seats. This would solve the stadium issue for the NFL problem and guarantee small prices for seats as there would be more.

If Young is going to force the end of the CFL in Ontario by doing this then he better be prepared to face the consequences.

BCTed

Jul 28, 2010, 3:01 AM

I am sure the Argos will love their new stadium at York University. They'll have to send the Hamilton Council a big thank you fruit basket.

I am willing to bet that this does not happen.

BCTed

Jul 28, 2010, 3:02 AM

Argos? The new stadium will be at the Port Land/Docks area in downtown Toronto east. It will be NFL caliber with 75,000 - 80,000 seats. This would solve the stadium issue for the NFL problem and guarantee small prices for seats as there would be more.

If Young is going to force the end of the CFL in Ontario by doing this then he better be prepared to face the consequences.

Where did you come from?

Janbe

Jul 28, 2010, 3:15 AM

dennis1

Jul 28, 2010, 3:32 AM

Where did you come from?

Hamilton. I'm just posting, I don't mean to offend.

thurmas

Jul 28, 2010, 3:36 AM

How does a football stadium help a downtown it makes it worse because it sits empty so many days, say the ti-cats use it 10 days a year, soccer and highschool football maybe adds what 40-50 days a year of use you still have 300 days a year its empty.Here in winnipeg we didn't even consider building downtown because it is a stupid idea.baseball parks and hockey arenas might work downtown because of how many more nights they are used but football stadiums kill downtowns they are meant to be in suburbs.what i don't understand is mcmahon is shared by the stamps and uofc molson is shared by the als and mcgill and the new bomber park by the uofm and bombers why can't mcmaster expand their stadium for cfl puposes with this pan am fund.

SteelTown

Jul 28, 2010, 3:39 AM

bigguy1231

Jul 28, 2010, 4:03 AM

Hamilton is about to lose the Hamilton Tiger cats if they choose West Harbour.
15,000 empty stadium at West Harbour with no tenant.

You can not force them to play in that stadium at West Harbour.

RIP Hamilton Tiger Cats 1950-2010.

The Ticats are not going anywhere. They will stay in Hamilton and play at whatever stadium is built, whether it be the West Harbour or some other location. This whole idea of building on the East Mountain is just a red herring to get the best rental deal possible. They basically don't want to pay rent.

The ten days a year that they will use it does not give them any say over where it is built. 15 million dollars doesn't give them any say either.

bigguy1231

Jul 28, 2010, 4:11 AM

So according to RTH the province will support whatever decision City Council makes on the stadium location.

Quote from Ted McMeekin
""the 'legacy' is the stadium itself," adding, "any stadium should be built with the entire community in mind and not any particular stakeholder in the community.""

Double whammy good news.

The only person that has even hinted that building the stadium is tied to a deal with the Ticats has been Ian Troop and that was probably proded out of him by Dave Brailey who wanted the stadium at Confederation Park.

If they even attempt to remove funding for a Hamilton stadium the Premier and local Liberals will quickly put a stop to it. The whole idea of including Hamilton in the Pan Am proposal was to get us a new stadium. The Ticats don't even come into the equation.

BCTed

Jul 28, 2010, 4:28 AM

Hamilton. I'm just posting, I don't mean to offend.

I'm not offended. I'm curious.

BCTed

Jul 28, 2010, 4:45 AM

It includes a track and a bubble during the winter. Plus there's concerts and special events (probably a great place to go and sit to watch the fireworks from West Harbour).

McMaster already built a brand new stadium, Ron Joyce stadium. No room to make it any bigger.

You can build a bubble over pretty much any soccer field --- not sure why you have to do it over a field in a stadium. The track is not likely to receive a ton of use. And I can't imagine that a stadium lends itself especially well to the viewing of fireworks --- you are likely better off with flat, bare ground for that.

The West Harbour would probably do much better with some kind of bandshell or amphitheatre.

I don't really mind either site, but I really wonder what it is that the pro-Harbour people believe this stadium will do for the area.

It is a bit strange that these people mention that a plus for the Bay/Barton site is that it would help spur on development, while a minus for the East Mountain site is that there is nothing around it.

And people who do suggest that the East Mountain site has nothing around it are not quite correct ---- there is at least a Kelsey's, a Milestones, a Tim Hortons, a Marble Slab ice cream shop, a smoothie shop, a movie theatre, an Indigo, other food or entertainment-based businesses, all directly across the street from the East Mountain site and there is a very large bowling alley only a couple of blocks away --- a lot more stuff to do there now than there is within the immediate vicinity of the West Harbour site and there will probably be more added as time goes on.

dennis1

Jul 28, 2010, 4:48 AM

the ticats will stay. they are bluffing.

Berklon

Jul 28, 2010, 9:39 AM

It is a bit strange that these people mention that a plus for the Bay/Barton site is that it would help spur on development, while a minus for the East Mountain site is that there is nothing around it.

And people who do suggest that the East Mountain site has nothing around it are not quite correct ---- there is at least a Kelsey's, a Milestones, a Tim Hortons, a Marble Slab ice cream shop, a smoothie shop, a movie theatre, an Indigo, other food or entertainment-based businesses, all directly across the street from the East Mountain site and there is a very large bowling alley only a couple of blocks away --- a lot more stuff to do there now than there is within the immediate vicinity of the West Harbour site and there will probably be more added as time goes on.

I don't really think those stores and restaurants are a major selling point for a stadium and doesn't really offer much for atmosphere. There's no "hanging around" factor involved before/after. The West Harbour in itself will be an attraction, and not just the stadium and businesses around there. A stadium gets more people down into that area of town and spurs more development and business where it's much needed.

East Mountain is what it is. Not much different than other areas that have big box stores, restaurants and movie theatres (ie. Meadowlands)... the only difference is that there'll be a stadium. Basically it's a stadium in the middle of sprawl.

BCTed

Jul 28, 2010, 11:05 AM

I don't really think those stores and restaurants are a major selling point for a stadium and doesn't really offer much for atmosphere. There's no "hanging around" factor involved before/after. The West Harbour in itself will be an attraction, and not just the stadium and businesses around there. A stadium gets more people down into that area of town and spurs more development and business where it's much needed.

East Mountain is what it is. Not much different than other areas that have big box stores, restaurants and movie theatres (ie. Meadowlands)... the only difference is that there'll be a stadium. Basically it's a stadium in the middle of sprawl.

As of right now, there is absolutely zero "hanging around" factor at the new stadium site --- there is nothing there. What is the attraction of the "West Harbour" you speak of? A park? I guess some Tiger-Cats fans might decide to have picnics before games.

While the East Mountain site is near big box stores, the West Harbour site is near industrial/urban decay.

A stadium would not spur on much business, if any, on its own --- I will repeat some of the other posters and say "look at Ivor Wynne."

I don't really know if I have a preference for one site or the other. I just don't see the big benefit from placing a stadium at Bay/Barton --- it's not even really at a harbour.

markbarbera

Jul 28, 2010, 11:07 AM

The only person that has even hinted that building the stadium is tied to a deal with the Ticats has been Ian Troop and that was probably proded out of him by Dave Brailey who wanted the stadium at Confederation Park.

If they even attempt to remove funding for a Hamilton stadium the Premier and local Liberals will quickly put a stop to it. The whole idea of including Hamilton in the Pan Am proposal was to get us a new stadium. The Ticats don't even come into the equation.

Ian Troop is the CEO of HostCo. He ultimately chooses the site locations, not the premier and not any mayor.

Funding is for a stadium for the Pan Am Games, it is not for the city.

The whole idea of including Hamilton in the Pan Am proposal was to get a new stadium - because we needed a new one to house the Ticats. We have no other need for a stadium of this size. So yes they do figure significantly into the equation, like it or not. And without them at the West Harbour stadium there is no legacy, no tenant, and no need for a permanent stadium structure there.

highwater

Jul 28, 2010, 1:29 PM

Ian Troop is the CEO of HostCo. He ultimately chooses the site locations, not the premier and not any mayor.

Funding is for a stadium for the Pan Am Games, it is not for the city.

The whole idea of including Hamilton in the Pan Am proposal was to get a new stadium - because we needed a new one to house the Ticats. We have no other need for a stadium of this size. So yes they do figure significantly into the equation, like it or not. And without them at the West Harbour stadium there is no legacy, no tenant, and no need for a permanent stadium structure there.

Mark, you should read this before you make any more assertions:

http://www.raisethehammer.org/blog/1836/province_backs_city_on_stadium_location

Also, did you see Bob Young's commentary in the Spec yesterday? He said nothing about refusing to play at the site council chose (sorry no link). He may have just been being politic, but there wasn't so much as a hint of an underlying threat. There has been an enormous public backlash to the Ticats' threats and he may finally be realizing that he is alienating a sizable portion of his fan base. He certainly walked back his rhetoric in his latest commentary.

I've said it before, but I think it bears repeating. When Young made his initial threat, he thought he was just threatening a weak mayor and an unpopular council in an election year. I don't think he had any idea that many Hamiltonians would take the threat personally, and that so many of us are so passionate about our city and understand true city-building. My prediction: the Ticats will play in a stadium over-looking our beautiful bay, and PanAm visitors and the nation will finally see the true beauty of our city, and not the back end of a Home Depot.

SteelTown

Jul 28, 2010, 1:39 PM

Province backs any city decision on stadium

Paul Tipple
7/28/2010
http://www.900chml.com/Channels/Reg/NewsLocalGeneral/Story.aspx?ID=1257861

A local Liberal MPP has suggested the province will support the City of Hamilton's choice of a Pan Am stadium no matter where it's located.

The website, "Raise the Hammer", has published an e-mail from Ted McMeekin where he says the province is committed to a Pan Am stadium for Hamilton and will support whatever decision city council makes.

He goes on to say any stadium should be built with the entire community in mind and not any particular stakeholder in the community.

The Tiger-Cats have said they will only contribute money to the stadium if it is built on the east mountain rather than the west harbour.

Council is expected to make its decision on a site on August 10th.

SteelTown

Jul 28, 2010, 1:51 PM

I've noticed the tone from Bob Young has changed from

"I don't care where the fucking stadium goes"
.......
"East Mountain or no stadium"
.......
"I have confidence they will make the right decision for our city"

oldcoote

Jul 28, 2010, 2:05 PM

Hamilton is about to lose the Hamilton Tiger cats if they choose West Harbour.
15,000 empty stadium at West Harbour with no tenant.

You can not force them to play in that stadium at West Harbour.

RIP Hamilton Tiger Cats 1950-2010.

Laying it on a bit thick, huh?

The Ti-Cats are going nowhere.
a) There is nowhere for them to relocate.
b) Bob Young would be absolutely crucified if he did.
c) The CFL would NEVER allow it.

If Bob hates the West Harbour as much as he's letting on, his only option is to sell the team.

bigguy1231

Jul 28, 2010, 3:31 PM

Gurnett71

Jul 28, 2010, 3:53 PM

SteelTown

Jul 28, 2010, 4:01 PM

Moments like this I’m really proud of the grassroots movement. Forums like this and others can really make an impact. I just hope we can keep it up.

Based on the excellent fresh perspective from the Future Fund committee I really think Hamilton should have a control board with committee members from all sectors.

markbarbera

Jul 28, 2010, 4:19 PM

Do you only comprehend what you want to see and hear and ignore the rest. There has been enough written on the subject over the last few years, that if you actually read it you would know that the original intent of including Hamilton was to get us a stadium.

You are geting no argument from me there. What you don't seem to get is why the intent was there.Hamilton is getting a stadium as part of the Pan Am bid so the city has a new home for the Ticats. Hamilton would not have been considered for the stadium if there was not an identified need for a new home for the Ticats (aka a legacy for the facility). An empty stadium with no tenants is not a legacy.

markbarbera

Jul 28, 2010, 4:44 PM

Mark, you should read this before you make any more assertions:

http://www.raisethehammer.org/blog/1836/province_backs_city_on_stadium_location

Highwater, the article in RTH is has its usual biased spin on the email from McMeekin. It is unfortunate the entire email was not posted, not just selected bits and pieces selected to prop up the editorial position taken by that blog site.

For the sake of argument, let me paste the quotations from McMeekin's actual email:

The Province is committed to a Pan Am stadium for Hamilton and will support whatever decision the City Council, in its infinite wisdom, finally makes.
This is typical political speak. Nothing of any substance here. What is he going to say, "The city is out of its freakin' mind"? (His use of the phrase "infinite wisdom, finally makes" carries a certain nuance)

a solid business plan needs to be developed that emphasizes a growth in tax base and not a growth in tax burden.

This can be interpreted any number of ways. Some will argue an East Mountain location will require additional servicing that would be a tax burden. Others will say a West Harbour stadium requiring additional servicing with no tenant lined up is a tax burden. It is very hard to gauge context when only bits of an email are published. Some say either option is a collosal waste of tax dollars that will place too heavy a tax burden on the city.

There is a third quote, which probably got a lot of West Harbour proponents all aglow, which read any stadium should be built with the entire community in mind and not any particular stakeholder in the community.
What may be missed from readers of this quote is the preamble where McMeekin qualifies that statement as his personal view and not that of the government.

So exactly what new information has been gleaned from this email? Nada.

markbarbera

Jul 28, 2010, 4:51 PM

Also, did you see Bob Young's commentary in the Spec yesterday? He said nothing about refusing to play at the site council chose (sorry no link). He may have just been being politic, but there wasn't so much as a hint of an underlying threat. There has been an enormous public backlash to the Ticats' threats and he may finally be realizing that he is alienating a sizable portion of his fan base. He certainly walked back his rhetoric in his latest commentary

It's a shame that others can't walk back from their over-the-top rhetoric, right? Some people have been pretty nasty, unfairly labelling Young as a deadbeat among all sorts of other nasty things.

Young may have sounded conciliatory, but I would not read that as an abandonment of his position. Rather, his campaign seems to have really ramped up the last day or so, judging by website activity. And I see an informational session/rally for the EM (http://www.goeastmountain.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/Learn-The-Facts-Understand-The-Opportunities-East-Mountain-Support-Event.pdf) is coming up next week.

markbarbera

Jul 28, 2010, 4:59 PM

Ward 8 councillor Terry Whitehead has a poll on his site, http://www.terrywhitehead.ca/ that he will apparently "help form his decision" (http://thespec.com/News/Local/article/815661).

So far, WH 233 (74%); EM 81 (26%)

Whitehead's website may have been hijacked and had its source code modified. I haven't ever visited the site prior to today, I just browsed to it and the poll shows me as already voted for the West harbour.

Edit: It appears it is filtereing by IP address, which is a problem is delivering by proxy address from behind a firewall as I do from my office (someone else from my office must have already voted). I did get the vote prompt from my netbook. Obvoiusly not the best scripting going on at Terry Whitehead's website.

go_leafs_go02

Jul 28, 2010, 5:18 PM

I got 2 solutions that will make everyone happy!

1) WEST Mountain
2) EAST Harbor.

:D

In Short, my preference is easily for the WEST Harbour. Definitely think putting it up in big-box ville will be sad and awful in the future.

I would like to see major improved connections to the 403 along York Blvd be created if West Harbor, to accommodate transit, GO shuttles from Aldershot (train-meet), as well as parking.

Happy medium should be met - so to be that's WEST harbour with plenty of easily accessible parking.

SteelTown

Jul 28, 2010, 5:26 PM

Looks like we can lock up Bratina's support for the West Harbour stadium site.

http://www.raisethehammer.org/blog/1838/bratina_can_support_revised_west_harbour_plan

markbarbera

Jul 28, 2010, 5:27 PM

In Short, my preference is easily for the WEST Harbour. Definitely think putting it up in big-box ville will be sad and awful in the future.

I would like to see major improved connections to the 403 along York Blvd be created if West Harbor, to accommodate transit, GO shuttles from Aldershot (train-meet), as well as parking.

Happy medium should be met - so to be that's WEST harbour with plenty of easily accessible parking.

Bob Young agrees with you, but the city refuses to consider road improvements to serve the West Harbour site. Thus the impasse.

Anders Knudsen

Jul 28, 2010, 6:46 PM

for you who are so sure a West Harbour site means no tenant, answer me this:
Bob Young bought a team that plays in a residential neighbourhood with bad access and no parking. He gets offered a new stadium in a residential neighbourhood with bad access and a little bit more parking, which also happens to be within 500 metres of the 403. Tricky access along those 500 metres, but whatever. Whatever you think about revitalization, doesn't throwing a fit over this gift seem just a little bit bizarre? Any sound businessman would have done what Young is doing - go hard for maximum revenue - but there'd be no business sense in dropping the team as a result.

highwater

Jul 28, 2010, 11:50 PM

It's a shame that others can't walk back from their over-the-top rhetoric, right? Some people have been pretty nasty, unfairly labelling Young as a deadbeat among all sorts of other nasty things.

Seriously? You're seriously going to try to create a false equivalency between the comments of a private citizen who cares passionately about her city and the threats of a high profile public figure who has his hand out to the tune of $100m?

I take back nothing I've said. Young only has $15m on the table. As this will only cover a small fraction of the increased costs of his preferred sprawl stadium, he is effectively a deadbeat. Deadbeat. Deadbeat.

highwater

Jul 28, 2010, 11:51 PM

Money-grubbing, selfish deadbeat.

highwater

Jul 28, 2010, 11:54 PM

And lest you think I am hiding behind my wafer-thin 'anonymity', you should hear what I call him in real life.

If I ever had the chance, I would have no hesitation in walking right up to him and asking him why he hates our city, and why he wishes us harm. Frankly, I'd love to have the chance.

paleale2

Jul 29, 2010, 1:02 AM

Group offers to build west harbour stadium TheSpec.com - BreakingNews - Group offers to build west harbour stadium

By Danielle Wong

The White Star Group has sent a letter to city council announcing it is prepared to enter into an agreement with the city, province, Katz and AEG Management Group and the Tiger Cats to build a new west harbour Pan Am stadium.

The e-mail, which was sent to councillors and Mayor Fred Eisenberger late Tuesday, says the White Star Group is willing to build a retractable roof stadium at the west harbour site and provide funds over and above the $110 million slated by municipal, provincial and federal governments.

The group is proposing to build and own the stadium and give the city a leaseback with the option to buy, “with the understanding that Katz, AEG, would manage the facility and the Tiger Cats organization would work out with the management the preferred 10 Games committee requirements.”

Tourism executive director David Adames said tonight it’s too early to tell how much a game changer the letter is.

The letter will be discussed at the mayor’s Pan Am advisory board’s next meeting Tuesday.

Adames said he will be calling White Star property owner Marino Rakovac Thursday to learn more about the proposal.

dawong@thespec.com
905-526-2468

markbarbera

Jul 29, 2010, 1:02 AM

Seriously? You're seriously going to try to create a false equivalency between the comments of a private citizen who cares passionately about her city and the threats of a high profile public figure who has his hand out to the tune of $100m?

I take back nothing I've said. Young only has $15m on the table. As this will only cover a small fraction of the increased costs of his preferred sprawl stadium, he is effectively a deadbeat. Deadbeat. Deadbeat.

Money-grubbing, selfish deadbeat.

And lest you think I am hiding behind my wafer-thin 'anonymity', you should hear what I call him in real life.

If I ever had the chance, I would have no hesitation in walking right up to him and asking him why he hates our city, and why he wishes us harm. Frankly, I'd love to have the chance.

Wow, I really feel embarrased for you after that tirade.

Bob Young a Hamilton-hating deadbeat, what a ridiculous notion!

Young purchased a building downtown and renovated it into a headquarters for his web design business in a time where offices were abandoning the downtown. What a Hamilton-hating deadbeat!

Young provides well-paying employment to dozens of Hamilton residents through the businesses he bases here in Hamilton. What a Hamilton-hating deadbeat!

When the city's pride and joy, the Hamilton Ticats were on the verge of bankruptcy, Young bought the team to keep it entrenched in his childhood home. What a deadbeat!

For year upon year he endured operating losses as the Ticats played out of a worn-out civic stadium, into which he put millions of his own funds to keep it out of a state of disrepair. What a Hamilton-hating deadbeat!

After bargaining in good faith with the city for nearly two years, during which he had to endure city staff consistently ignored his warnings about the financial unsustainability of their preferred stadium choice, and a council that refused to entertain any of the suggestions he had that could make the site viable for the team, let alone any of several alternate lower city sites Young was willing to consider. Yet Young is the deadbeat! Unbelievable!

In a time when all previous CFL stadia were 100% publicly financed, Young is offering up $15 million towards construction of the new stadium, plus 100% coverage of operating costs for the first ten years, plus a Grey Cup, plus a NASL soccer franchise, yet he is the deadbeat. Unbelievable!

Seriously, these rants have veered from the amusing to the embarrasing to the downright ridiculous and abusive. Highwater is normally a well-thought-out rational contributor here, but this tirade is way over the top.

Mr moderators, are you all fine with this ssp heading back down to the toilet it has managed to avoid for nearly a year now?

Jon Dalton

Jul 29, 2010, 1:23 AM

This is a crucial moment in the city's history and no matter where you stand on the issue, we all know the out come of the stadium will have a tremendous impact on our future. It's nice to see some serious passion in the discourse here, given how dire the situation is and what's at stake. To me, that distinguishes someone who truly believes in their city. If there was ever a time for the board to get a bit emotional, it's a time like this.

Jon Dalton

Jul 29, 2010, 1:28 AM

The White Star Group has sent a letter to city council announcing it is prepared to enter into an agreement with the city, province, Katz and AEG Management Group and the Tiger Cats to build a new west harbour Pan Am stadium.

This is the guy who owned Roque Cafe at King and Wentworth, that failed bar/laundromat complex. Not exactly the stuff dreams are made of. Who's got the money bags, I wonder?

markbarbera

Jul 29, 2010, 2:07 AM

The other shoe drops...

Move Pan Am track events to Toronto: Athletics Canada

TheSpec.com
John Kernaghan

The track and field folks want to take their part of the Pan Am Games and run down the road to Toronto.

Athletics Canada confirmed Wednesday it has asked the 2015 host corporation to move the Games’ premier events from Hamilton to develop a stronger legacy.

AC CEO Joanne Mortimer said the organization was concerned a track at a stadium for the Tiger-Cats would be taken out post-Games to accommodate football.

She added concentrating track and field in Toronto, in the centre of Ontario's most populous area, made sense in terms of athlete development.

Both city spokesperson David Adames and Ticats president Scott Mitchell said they were committed to track and field.

Toronto 2015 CEO Ian Troop said recently that if track is out in Hamilton, soccer would be a possible replacement with a strong amateur sport legacy.

http://www.thespec.com/News/BreakingNews/article/815938

It may be just me, but replacing the track events with soccer geared to amateur sport legacy no longer sounds like a domed 30,000-seat stadium with restaurants, hotel, casino and condos...

markbarbera

Jul 29, 2010, 2:31 AM

And to counter the misgivings on the Province's position on the whole mess:

McGuinty sits out Pan Am Games stadium dispute
Published On Wed Jul 28 2010
Robert Benzie Queen’s Park Bureau Chief
thestar.com

Premier Dalton McGuinty is staying on the sidelines in the battle over where to build a stadium for the 2015 Pan American Games that will also become the new home for the Hamilton Tiger-Cats.

In a move that has even some Liberals scratching their heads, McGuinty is not intervening to ensure the sports complex is constructed in Steeltown’s derelict West Harbour as Hamilton Mayor Fred Eisenberger wants.

“We want to work with the community and find a solution that is reasonable and broadly acceptable,” the premier told reporters Wednesday at Queen’s Park.

“So I am hoping that sooner rather than later we can come to some agreement as to where we might locate this thing.”

Despite the fact the city of Hamilton has already spent about $8 million assembling the land with hopes the stadium will spark a waterfront renaissance, McGuinty is leaving open the possibility it could be built in an East Mountain wheat field owned by the province’s Ontario Realty Corporation (ORC)....

http://www.thestar.com/news/ontario/article/841445--mcguinty-sits-out-pan-am-games-stadium-dispute

BCTed

Jul 29, 2010, 3:10 AM

dennis1

Jul 29, 2010, 4:34 AM

The other shoe drops...

http://www.thespec.com/News/BreakingNews/article/815938

It may be just me, but replacing the track events with soccer geared to amateur sport legacy no longer sounds like a domed 30,000-seat stadium with restaurants, hotel, casino and condos...

It honestly should have been there in the first place. They are the 2015 Toronto games after all.

SteelTown

Jul 29, 2010, 11:08 AM

Stadium suitors offer cash

July 29, 2010
Danielle Wong
The Hamilton Spectator
http://www.thespec.com/News/Local/article/816176

The White Star Group is offering to put up cash to build a west harbour Pan Am stadium under a leasing agreement with the city.

The company said it is willing to build a retractable-roof stadium, providing the necessary capital beyond the $110 million slated to come from municipal, provincial and federal governments.

It's the latest salvo in the city-wide debate over where to put a 2015 Pan Am Games stadium, with the city backing the west harbour site and the Tiger-Cats pushing for an east Mountain location.

On Tuesday, White Star e-mailed a proposal to enter into an agreement with the city, the province, the Ticats, and the Katz Group and AEG Management Group, which are involved in a pitch to control Copps Coliseum and the future Pan Am stadium.

But Ticat president Scott Mitchell said the football team "will never play at the west harbour."

"I had a good laugh when I read (the White Star letter)," Mitchell said last night. "I don't think they have any agreement in place. They never had a conversation with us."

White Star principal Marino Rakovac, who owns property near Bay and Barton streets, said the offer hinges on the leasing structure, adding White Star would own the stadium and give the city a leaseback with an option to buy.

White Star last week released a design proposal for a multi-use stadium and associated development at the site. A subsequent statement said the company was ready to proceed with its plans along with Vince Molinaro of the Molinaro Group Inc. and McMaster Investments.

Tourism Hamilton executive director David Adames said Tuesday's letter "definitely builds" on that concept plan, but it was too early to tell if the proposal was a game-changer.

Adames plans to call Rakovac today to ask for details on where the funding will come from, what the leasing structure would look like and how Infrastructure Ontario would work in conjunction with them.

These are the same questions Rakovac plans to ask the city, the property owner said last night.

As for where the promised capital will come from, Rakovac said there would be a mechanism to fund construction once White Star and the city agree on a leasing structure.

The Katz Group yesterday replied to his e-mail and asked how the city received the proposal, Rakovac said.

Speaking with reporters at Queen's Park yesterday, Premier Dalton McGuinty stayed on the sidelines in the battle over where to build the stadium.

"We want to work with the community and find a solution that is reasonable and broadly acceptable," the premier told reporters.

That McGuinty is not intervening to put the sports complex in the west harbour, as Mayor Fred Eisenberger wants, has some Liberals scratching their heads.

"A downtown venue was part of the bid book," said a Liberal who worked on the effort to bring the Games to the Golden Horseshoe.

The source noted even the west harbour locale was a stretch for Pan Am officials, who privately preferred somewhere closer to Toronto.

The Pan Am advisory committee will discuss White Star's proposal at its meeting Tuesday and seek more information so they can include it in their report for Aug. 10, when city council will vote on the east or west stadium, Adames said.

The city and Ticats have until Aug. 31 to reach an agreement on the Pan Am site.

highwater

Jul 29, 2010, 1:52 PM

Wow, I really feel embarrased for you after that tirade.

Bob Young a Hamilton-hating deadbeat, what a ridiculous notion!

Young purchased a building downtown and renovated it into a headquarters for his web design business in a time where offices were abandoning the downtown. What a Hamilton-hating deadbeat!

Young provides well-paying employment to dozens of Hamilton residents through the businesses he bases here in Hamilton. What a Hamilton-hating deadbeat!

When the city's pride and joy, the Hamilton Ticats were on the verge of bankruptcy, Young bought the team to keep it entrenched in his childhood home...

I'm sure he's kind to children and puppies as well, but now he is proposing something that is going to hurt us economically and environmentally for years to come, and damage any hope we might have of being perceived as a progressive city.

He is willing to hurt us and wants our money to do it, and by God that makes me angry. Any good he has done in the past will not make up for the lasting damage he will cause if he gets his way.

It does however make you scratch your head at his behaviour. Why, after all he has done, does he want to leave this divisive mess as his legacy? I honestly think he had no idea that Hamiltonians loved their city enough to defend it, but he has certainly lost the next generation of Ticat fans.

Seriously, these rants have veered from the amusing to the embarrasing to the downright ridiculous and abusive. Highwater is normally a well-thought-out rational contributor here, but this tirade is way over the top.

Mr moderators, are you all fine with this ssp heading back down to the toilet it has managed to avoid for nearly a year now?

You're telling the moderators on me because I called a public figure a deadbeat? Now I'm embarrassed for you.

What you call staying out of the toilet, I call arid and bloodless, which is why, with the possible exception of this thread, I've been posting less and less over the last year.

Jon is quite right. This stadium debate is in many ways about the very soul of our city. It's ok to get bloody emotional. We wouldn't be on this forum at all if we didn't give a crap.

I'm not sure why you have made it your constant mission to suck the life out of this discussion by demanding every utterance by fellow forumers be backed up with source material, but as far as I'm concerned, the tone you have taken with your fellows here has done alot more to squelch lively debate on this thread than the odd colourful descriptor lobbed at a public figure.