Lister Block | ? | 6 fl | Renovation

[Millstone]

Originally Posted by itsbryan

I lived in the core for a year, and I know that even with the windows closed, the drunks and bimbos are so loud, it's often hard to sleep. With the Fire Station right around corner, the obnoxious wailing of sirens gets to you eventually.. it's not exactly an ideal location for people trying to enjoying themselves in retirement.

I live at Rebecca and James and the answer to these is earplugs.

The nightclub, however, may be a different story.

[hmagazine]

from thespec.com

City council has voted to buy the Lister Block, but the downtown landmark’s owner says it won’t agree to the deal.
Council voted 10 to 6 for the city to spend $25 million to buy the renovated Lister from LIUNA. They also required that the union put up a $1 million guarantee that they will build a second phase that would generate at lease $600,000 in taxes.
The union has already said they won’t agree to the condition.
“They just killed the deal,” said LIUNA vice-president Joe Mancinelli
He said the union would walk away if the city didn’t change its position by Wednesday’s council meeting.
Mayor Fred Eisenberger said he is hopeful a compromise can be reached by the meeting.

[itsbryan]

I officially want to punch Joe Mancinelli in the face.

[Millstone]

and so it goes on, and on, and on.

[FairHamilton]

Does anyone know the councillor vote breakdown?

[raisethehammer]

Originally Posted by realcity

This is what I don't understand.

Suppose the City doesn't agree to move into Lister. Then Liuna tears it down (out of spite), Liuna MUST build something in it's place. What will the building be used for? Who would be a tenant if it's office? If it's residential use, then what would it be? condos? Seniors home? If that's the case then why not guarantee to build the residential tower?

I think the City needs to call their bluff. Because even it's torn down (worst case senario) they have to rebuild something. And I don't think Liuna plans on building a new building and have that sit empty.

here's your answer: go for a walk around John and Wilson.
In Hamilton you DON'T have to build anything when you tear down a building.
Ever.

[Millstone]

The 55-page purchase order and related items can be found here.

[hmagazine]

Originally Posted by FairHamilton

Does anyone know the councillor vote breakdown?

For: Mayor Fred, McHattie, Merulla, Morelli, Whitehead, Pearson, Powers, Jackson, Ferguson, Mitchell

Against: Bratina, Clark, Collins, McCarthy, Pasuta, Duvall

I think that's it...

[realcity]

^ that's an interesting 'against'.

I like Bratina and Clark (Clark will be Mayor). I can see McCarthy, Patuta voting against anything for downtown from now on. But I'm sure Bratina and Clark had totally opposite reasons why they voted 'against' it then McCarthy and Pasuta and Duvall did. I don;t know about Collins, I think it's time they stopped voting for him.

[Millstone]

[BCTed]

Originally Posted by itsbryan

Look at the area around Lister. Across King William, Fever.. a very roudy nightclub with loud music (I have fond memories of watching the roudiness from within the Balfour building).. down the street past John.. Remedy, another night club.

Remedy = Fever

[raisethehammer]

Originally Posted by Millstone

wow....that's a shocking percentage on the poll.
Usually Hamilton's media makes it sound like council is always at fault when dealing with these stiffs.
Maybe people will finally see that LIUNA are the real deadbeat thugs in this deal.

[hmagazine]

Dear Councillors,

I’m not sure how you feel about being threatened, but when a would-be business partner says he’ll walk if you don’t do what he tells you to do (“They just killed the deal.”), surely you have to question whether or not you should be doing business with this person.

Joe Mancinelli thinks you are penalizing him by demanding a $1 million completion guarantee for the “Adjacent Development”. This in the face of his comments to the Spectator on June 20, 2008 - “It’s not a matter of if; we’re going ahead for sure.”). He said that he wouldn’t be so bold as to ask you to pay him $1 million. I hope not, given that we have almost agreed to pay him $25 million.

He says that your demand will send a bad message to the development community. Really? I would have thought that handing over $25 million in taxpayers’ money from both the municipal and provincial levels to a developer who has sat on an abandoned building for almost 10 years might send an unintended message that might create even bigger problems for development in Hamilton.

Now, he threatens you with walking away from the deal. I urge you not to take the bait. Councillors Pearson, Merulla and McHattie, all of whom voted to proceed with the deal, were clear that they would stand firm on the $1 million hold-back, in spite of continual reframing by the Mayor to suggest that there would have to be some flexibility. In fact, Councillor Pearson said that she would require a minimum of $1 million.

Further, Joe Mancinelli wants you to pay him more if he does less! If he doesn’t deliver enough commercial or residential space to generate $1 million in tax assessments, then he thinks the City of Hamilton should only hold back the tax amount that would actually be generated by what he builds. I’ve never heard of such a thing. The whole idea is to create an incentive for him to deliver, perhaps even over-deliver, on his promise, not to reward him for delivering less. In the real world, he would be penalized for under-delivering on his promise. Namely, the penalty would go UP, not down, if he developed something that delivered less tax assessment.

Even with the $1 million hold-back, in my opinion the deal is rich, but perhaps that boat has already sailed. I urge you to hold firm on your resolve to request what is already a woefully low hold-back guarantee. I believe that Councillor Ferguson knows this is true from his business experience. I know that Councillors Bratina, Clark, Collins, Duval, McCarthy and Pasuta agree. Joe Rinaldo knows better too, having suggested a much more appropriate $5 million hold-back.

Let’s be clear, I want to save the building. I also want taxpayers to be treated fairly. I believe that immediately securing provincial designation and rescinding the demolition permit are actions that need to be taken to more appropriately deal with your would-be partner.

No matter your vote today, thanks for your patience and your attempts to do what is right for the citizens of Hamilton. Do not blink! You don’t have to.

Sincerely,

Graham Crawford

[matt602]

Originally Posted by raisethehammer

wow....that's a shocking percentage on the poll.
Usually Hamilton's media makes it sound like council is always at fault when dealing with these stiffs.
Maybe people will finally see that LIUNA are the real deadbeat thugs in this deal.

Not really too shocking. This 70% No figure most likely comes from people who just want to see the building torn down already because they're sick of seeing it in the news. Little of them actually know anything about LIUNA at all, neither do they care.

[raisethehammer]

Originally Posted by hmagazine

Dear Councillors,

I’m not sure how you feel about being threatened, but when a would-be business partner says he’ll walk if you don’t do what he tells you to do (“They just killed the deal.”), surely you have to question whether or not you should be doing business with this person.

Joe Mancinelli thinks you are penalizing him by demanding a $1 million completion guarantee for the “Adjacent Development”. This in the face of his comments to the Spectator on June 20, 2008 - “It’s not a matter of if; we’re going ahead for sure.”). He said that he wouldn’t be so bold as to ask you to pay him $1 million. I hope not, given that we have almost agreed to pay him $25 million.

He says that your demand will send a bad message to the development community. Really? I would have thought that handing over $25 million in taxpayers’ money from both the municipal and provincial levels to a developer who has sat on an abandoned building for almost 10 years might send an unintended message that might create even bigger problems for development in Hamilton.

Now, he threatens you with walking away from the deal. I urge you not to take the bait. Councillors Pearson, Merulla and McHattie, all of whom voted to proceed with the deal, were clear that they would stand firm on the $1 million hold-back, in spite of continual reframing by the Mayor to suggest that there would have to be some flexibility. In fact, Councillor Pearson said that she would require a minimum of $1 million.

Further, Joe Mancinelli wants you to pay him more if he does less! If he doesn’t deliver enough commercial or residential space to generate $1 million in tax assessments, then he thinks the City of Hamilton should only hold back the tax amount that would actually be generated by what he builds. I’ve never heard of such a thing. The whole idea is to create an incentive for him to deliver, perhaps even over-deliver, on his promise, not to reward him for delivering less. In the real world, he would be penalized for under-delivering on his promise. Namely, the penalty would go UP, not down, if he developed something that delivered less tax assessment.

Even with the $1 million hold-back, in my opinion the deal is rich, but perhaps that boat has already sailed. I urge you to hold firm on your resolve to request what is already a woefully low hold-back guarantee. I believe that Councillor Ferguson knows this is true from his business experience. I know that Councillors Bratina, Clark, Collins, Duval, McCarthy and Pasuta agree. Joe Rinaldo knows better too, having suggested a much more appropriate $5 million hold-back.

Let’s be clear, I want to save the building. I also want taxpayers to be treated fairly. I believe that immediately securing provincial designation and rescinding the demolition permit are actions that need to be taken to more appropriately deal with your would-be partner.

No matter your vote today, thanks for your patience and your attempts to do what is right for the citizens of Hamilton. Do not blink! You don’t have to.

Sincerely,

Graham Crawford

man, this guy is awesome.

[SteelTown]

$1m guarantee for Lister too risky for LIUNA

June 24, 2008
Nicole Macintyre
The Hamilton Spectator

The city is ready to buy the Lister Block, but the owner says no deal.

City council voted 10-6 yesterday to spend $25 million to buy the Lister Block, but only if LIUNA agrees to a $1-million guarantee that a second phase will generate at least $600,000 in city taxes. LIUNA warned going into the meeting that it wouldn't accept the condition.

"They killed the deal," said union vice-president Joe Mancinelli.

If council's position doesn't change by tomorrow night's council meeting, Mancinelli said he'll advise his union to walk away.

Mayor Fred Eisenberger is hopeful he'll still be able to find a compromise. "I'm not giving up," he said, arguing it's fair to give LIUNA some flexibility.

Council asked staff to work out a guarantee after LIUNA and partner Hi-Rise told the city it planned an extensive second phase with two towers of senior residences. Staff recommended a $1 million bond on the condition the project would be 200 units, which would generate $600,000 in taxes for the city.

Several councillors argue the second phase is critical to offset the cost to taxpayers of the city buying the Lister. The province has given the city $7 million toward the purchase, but it will still cost taxpayers an extra $1.3 million a year compared to existing leases.

Mancinelli said the developers call the guarantee a penalty. But he said the union will agree if the conditions are less onerous.

The union wants to only guarantee a third of the size of the original proposal, which could bring in as little as $166,000 in taxes. If the development is between 40,000 and 60,000 square feet, they would give up part of $1 million. They would lose it all if they built under 40,000.

[raisethehammer]

LIUNA and Hi-Rise are raising the bar for corrupt, selfish devepers in this city.
Everytime they propose an idea, the city agrees to it, and then LIUNA-HiRise change their minds.
what idiots.

[thistleclub]

COW Report 08-022 for June 23 - Lister

[hmagazine]

1)
From: Laura Babcock [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 7:06 PM
To: 'Laura Babcock'
Cc: 'Laura Babcock'
Subject: Latest on Lister
Importance: High

Dear Hamilton Business Leader

The purpose of this email is to inform you of the latest important
development from this morning's public Committee of the Whole meeting of
Council regarding the Lister Block. If you are not interested in this
information, please disregard this email with my apologies.

Negotiations have broken down. After years of good faith by all sides
to
find a way to restore (not replicate - actually restore) the Lister, and
a
Provincial commitment of $7 million dollars to offset the City's
investment
of approx $25 million to buy the Lister and use it to house staff, there
is
one issue that may be the deal breaker.

The City Council is asking for a $1 million dollar guarantee that LIUNA
will deliver $600,000 new tax dollars every year on a Phase 2 part of
the
development. LIUNA counter-offered that it would guarantee the $ 1
million,
however rather than guarantee a future tax revenue amount for the City,
they would guarantee building an additional Phase 2 at a minimum of
60,000
sq ft. (same size as Lister). If they don't live up to the promise and
build the Phase 2 of that size, LIUNA will lose the $1 million.

At this morning's meeting, LIUNA publically stated a willingness to
continue to negotiate with City staff up until the Council Meeting this
Wednesday. However, Councillors voted that their position was final, and
not to empower staff to negotiate further with LIUNA before the final
vote
at Council.

If you have concerns that negotiations have broken down on this economic
development issue, please contact your Councillor or Joseph Mancinelli
at
LIUNA to discuss a way to move this forward for the good of the City,
the
downtown and all parties of good faith involved in this important
negotiation.

If there are factual errors in the interpretation of the events, please
let
me know.

Thank you for your attention,

Laura Babcock
President & Owner
POWERGROUP Communications
(Tel) 905 387 7580
(Fax) 905 575 0975
www.powergroupcommunications.com

[hmagazine]

Dear Councillor,

Just in case you were not able to listen to Bill Kelly's interview with Joe Mancinelli this morning, I have gone to the trouble of transcribing the interview for you to read. I assure you that it is an exact transcription. Not a single word has been left out or altered. I'm not offering any commentary, as I think Mr. Mancinelli's words say it all, including, and perhaps most particularly, two of his sentences:

"Then we lobbied the province and got $7 million for them and that wasn’t good enough."

"Maybe we should have stayed away from the City because it seems like every time we do business, or try to do business with them, they throw obstacles in our way."

I will let you read these comments in the context of the full interview and allow you to draw your own conclusions, but have highlighted the two sentences in bold face.

I wish you good luck in your deliberations over the next 24 hours.

Sincerely,

Graham Crawford

- - - -


Bill Kelly:
Joe, talk to me about where we stand on this. I know that you were very upset with the way things were going. You knew that the possibility that there were stipulations that existed before the meeting didn’t you?

Joe Mancinelli:
Well, yes, because you know Council is never satisfied, as you know. They’ve been throwing obstacles at LIUNA for the last several years and it just seems that we can never satisfy them. There’s a new condition every time we sit down with the City. So, they’re making it impossible for us to go forward. You know, at one time we had a beautiful project ready to go, and it would have been built by now, we were stopped by the politics of the City. Then, they told us that, yes they would approve a lease of $24 a square foot and we were just about to go forward, and they stopped the deal based on heritage costs. Then we lobbied the province and got $7 million for them and that wasn’t good enough. And now, we’re at a situation where we’re presenting a very solid business case where the City will own the building, not for $24 a square foot, but for $28 a square foot. Four dollars more that what they could have rented it for, they can own it completely renovated and in 20 years they’ve got an asset that will be worth far more than $25 million. It’ll be worth $30, $40, $50 million dollars by that time and they can sell it and they’ve got an asset. So, this is a much better deal than leasing, and what happens is they throw us another curve ball and that curve ball is now a guarantee for Phase 2, they want another million dollars to now guarantee that we can create enough building to create a $600,000 new tax base for the City of Hamilton.

Bill Kelly:
And that’s what some of the Councillors are telling us this morning, Joe. They’re simply saying that you guys said you were going to build this anyway, so what’s the problem?

Joe Mancinelli:
Well, we are going to build, but why should we give a million dollar guarantee? Let me give you an example, Bill. Let’s say we build enough for $580,000 worth of new taxes. No one else in the downtown is building and creating new tax dollars like we have. So, we build $580,000 worth and guess what happens? We lose a million dollars because we didn’t reach the $600,000 threshold. So, what we presented to Council yesterday was a compromise. We said yes, reluctantly because we disagree that development in Hamilton should be penalized for creating development. And that is what they are doing. They’re penalizing us with a million dollar penalty. But even so, even though we feel strongly that this is the wring thing to do, we want this project to go forward, so we reluctantly agreed with the million dollars, but said at least give us a threshold that is lower than $600,000 tax base. Let us meet something that is less than it. What if we built a building the same size as the Lister Block right beside it, or behind it? Another 60,000 square feet. That should satisfy you because what we’re doing is restoring the Lister Block, building another building the same size as the Lister Block, and they said no to that. Now, if any other developer would have come into town, and came with a proposal like that saying that they would restore the Lister, resotre the Thomas Building, which we agreed to, put up a new building where the Balfour Building was, restore the building next to Reardon’s as well. Basically, we’re restoring an entire block, and now they want an extra million dollars guarantee that we’re going to go ahead with Phase 2. This is becoming ridiculous.

Bill Kelly:
Are you suggesting this is personal, Joe?

Joe Mancinelli:
Well, I don’t know what it is. I don’t think it’s personal. No, I just think that we have a number of Aldermen and Councillors that, quite frankly, don’t understand business. They don’t understand real estate. They don’t understand business models. Quite frankly, I mean I heard a couple of Councillors that were on earlier and you know they’re saying that there is not a business model. I mean, they’re going to own a piece of significant real estate in the heart of the city after 20 years and they can sell it and instead they would rather lease. I mean, you know I think we all own homes. I own a home here in Hamilton and I bought my home back in 1984, and I know that my home is worth more money now than it was in 1984. If I would have rented from 1984 till now, I wouldn’t have the value that I have now. So, I thought that they would have been smart enough to have seen that, but it’s unfortunate that, you know, there’s a small group of six of them that just don’t get it.

Bill Kelly:
Joe, I’ve only got about 30 seconds left here. If these guys stick to their guns as they’ve told us they will in the conversations we’ve had this morning, is there a Plan B? What happens to the Lister Block then?

Joe Mancinelli:
Well, I guess we’re going to have to move forward and partner up with someone and try to do something on that site and the City, yeh they’ll get some tax dollars from whatever we do there if it’s commercial or residential or whatever. But they certainly not going to have a $25 million dollar asset over 20 years and we’ll have to go back to the drawing board. But, you know, maybe in retrospect, we should have done that in the first place because, you know, we’ve developed and built over $160 million dollars worth of construction in this community. Nursing homes on the mountain, one downtown, LIUNA station, our offices, out headquarters and hundreds and hundreds of residential units that LIUNA Hamilton Association, our pension plan is invested in strip malls and a number of others in the city and we’ve done all of that without the City’s help. Maybe we should have stayed away from the City because it seems like every time we do business, or try to do business with them, they throw obstacles in our way.