Halifax Stadium Discussion

[CorbeauNoir]

Originally Posted by halifaxboyns

I'm going to ask the dumbest question (I've not yet gone for my walk to get coffee, so sorry about this) but what are the minimum standards for CFL?

I remember someone saying for Greycup it was around 45,000 but I can't think for the life of me where to find this information?

I don't have any numbers in front of me but from what I recall the CFL generally wants something like ~25k seats for regular games and ~45+k for the Grey Cup. (ed.)

What I don't really understand is that the numbers are about the same for what FIFA is after for WWC-acceptable venues, and that is ostensibly what this prospective stadium is being built for in the first place. So why the hell is a 10k-seat stadium being suggested at all? I know that those parameters have been proposed for a while now but it still makes absolutely no sense to me.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by CorbeauNoir

I guess someone should go back in time and tell TNSE that building the MTS Centre when virtually nobody in the NHL was breathing a whisper about Winnipeg was a huge waste of time, then. There's something to be said for approaching projects with - christ forbid - some kind of initiative or ambition (then again, this IS Halifax...).

Great point.

Halifax leads the league in the number of people who can find reasons why we as a city should not do something.

[RyeJay]

Originally Posted by CorbeauNoir

I recall the CFL generally wants something like ~25k seats for regular games and ~45+k for the Grey Cup. (ed.)

What I don't really understand is that the numbers are about the same for what FIFA is after for WWC-acceptable venues, and that is ostensibly what this prospective stadium is being built for in the first place. So why the hell is a 10k-seat stadium being suggested at all?

Because apparently a community stadium is all that a city, still taking baby steps, can manage.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Halifax leads the league in the number of people who can find reasons why we as a city should not do something.

If there were a clearer plan and message for the stadium a lot of the speculation and opposition would probably disappear, and many people who are disengaged now would be more excited.

Even then though I agree that the negativism is a problem. Many people are blind to it. They think they are listing a bunch of perfectly rational problems with an idea, and they might even be right. But they are not seeing the whole picture and they put too much energy into tearing down ideas instead of being constructive.

You don't get ahead in life without taking risks. It may be tempting to wait around for perfect opportunities but they basically do not exist (e.g. the fairy tale HRM stadium without taxpayer involvement -- not gonna happen!). Businesses and cities have a tendency to wither away when they become too conservative, because everybody else moves on. I believe that Halifax is a great example of this. We always hear "Halifax can't have X! It's too small!" I think that the causal relationship there is a bit inverted -- part of the reason why Halifax is small is that it doesn't have much to attract and retain people. The negativism has become self-perpetuating.

I do think some progress has already been made though. Hopefully the negativism will continue to decline during this coming decade. If a stadium is built it will help by attracting some good events and making it clear that spending $20M does not cause the sky to fall.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by someone123

You don't get ahead in life without taking risks. It may be tempting to wait around for perfect opportunities but they basically do not exist (e.g. the fairy tale HRM stadium without taxpayer involvement -- not gonna happen!). Businesses and cities have a tendency to wither away when they become too conservative, because everybody else moves on. I believe that Halifax is a great example of this. We always hear "Halifax can't have X! It's too small!" I think that the causal relationship there is a bit inverted -- part of the reason why Halifax is small is that it doesn't have much to attract and retain people. The negativism has become self-perpetuating.

Hence the phrase "culture of defeat". It really is true.

[fenwick16]

Hopefully they will design it with at least 15,000 permanent seats and build it so that it can be expanded to 40,000 - 45,000 if ever required. It is easy to imagine Halifax getting a CFL team in a partially expanded stadium, and also Canada will likely host the FIFA Men's Cup sometime in the next 20 - 30 years and then Halifax would need 40,000 - 45,000 seats to be one of several host cities.

But there is reason for optimism. HRM will possibly pledge $20 million towards a stadium next week. My concern is with the provincial government. It is so much easier for them to pledge funding for roads out in rural areas where they aren't really required since no one seems to oppose more unnecessary rural roads.

[RyeJay]

Originally Posted by fenwick16

Hopefully they will design it with at least 15,000 permanent seats and build it so that it can be expanded to 40,000 - 45,000 if ever required. It is easy to imagine Halifax getting a CFL team in a partially expanded stadium, and also Canada will likely host the FIFA Men's Cup sometime in the next 20 - 30 years and then Halifax would need 40,000 - 45,000 seats to be one of several host cities.

But there is reason for optimism. HRM will possibly pledge $20 million towards a stadium next week. My concern is with the provincial government. It is so much easier for them to pledge funding for roads out in rural areas where they aren't really required since no one seems to oppose more unnecessary rural roads.

A stadium shall generate revenue. Rural roads generate pot holes.

My past criticisms of government funding of rural projects hasn't gone over too well. Regardless, hopefully the province is able to come together and support Halifax during this economically vital time.

[MonctonRad]

I doubt that the government is funding new rural roads. I'm sure that the monies being spent are on needed maintenance of existing roadways.

As long as people choose to live in the country, rural road maintenance will be necessary. These roads have mostly all been there for much more than a century and their future existence is taken for granted by the people who live there. Granted, in low population rural areas, some of these roads no longer make much economic sense, but what would be your solution? Would you enact a government program to buy up rural homesteads and force migration to larger towns and cities? We all know how popular that (rather draconian) solution was with the outports in Newfoundland.

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Granted, in low population rural areas, some of these roads no longer make much economic sense, but what would be your solution? Would you enact a government program to buy up rural homesteads and force migration to larger towns and cities? We all know how popular that (rather draconian) solution was with the outports in Newfoundland.

With the declining population in the rural counties, there are probably many areas where it would make sense to buy rural properties and stop servicing the land. Allow it might seem controversial, it might become a choice of servicing remote areas versus proper health care for the majority. However, it would have to be done in a more agreeable manner than it was in NFLD. People would have to be offered properties which are better serviced and have a much higher real-estate value than their current properties. With the ageing rural population and decline in neighbouring younger relatives, it would probably be in the resident's best interest to be close to medical care.

Although, this might seem out of context with a stadium discussion; within 10 years-time 50% of the Nova Scotia population will probably live in the HRM. At what point will HRM residents start to oppose a dis-proportionate amount of their provincial tax dollars going to under-populated rural areas? Almost all current population growth in NS is now in the HRM. I expect that to continue for the long-term.

[RyeJay]

Originally Posted by fenwick16

With the declining population in the rural counties, there are probably many areas where it would make sense to buy rural properties and stop servicing the land. Allow it might seem controversial, it might become a choice of servicing remote areas versus proper health care for the majority. However, it would have to be done in a more agreeable manner than it was in NFLD. People would have to be offered properties which are better serviced and have a much higher real-estate value than their current properties. With the ageing rural population and decline in neighbouring younger relatives, it would probably be in the resident's best interest to be close to medical care.

Although, this might seem out of context with a stadium discussion; within 10 years-time 50% of the Nova Scotia population will probably live in the HRM. At what point will HRM residents start to oppose a dis-proportionate amount of their provincial tax dollars going to under-populated rural areas? Almost all current population growth in NS is now in the HRM. I expect that to continue for the long-term.

Government purchasing of low-density lands is a trend happening all over the world (I think you may be hardpressed to find a nation not engaged in this to some respect). As opposed to waiting for a town to go broke, regional governments are cutting their losses and are feeding their cities with more population. The aquired rural lands are either put through a process of redevelopment, which is often quite feasible considering the bankrupt municipality's proximity to a successful city--or through a process of reforestation, which contributes to a country's environmental goals as well as stabilise stock levels for an existent forestry industry.

At this point in history, it's good to live in the suburbs if you want to hold on to your 'country' living.

With the cost of everything going up, and the escalating effects of climate change eating away at the fertility of our available land (drought and desertification, flooding and rising sea levels), cities really are the only economic harbours against this.

And for this to work--yes, as you've said--it needs to be agreeable. People would have to be offered properties which are better serviced and have a much higher real-estate value than their current properties. And yes: with the aging rural population and decline in neighbouring younger relatives, it would probably be in the resident's best interest to be close to medical care.

I am hoping people are able to put aside their personal attachments to the countryside. In the end, too, we are trying to save it.

[CorbeauNoir]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Great point.

Halifax leads the league in the number of people who can find reasons why we as a city should not do something.

Wow, we actually agree on something. Spooky.

[someone123]

ANS reported tonight that, assuming the city commits to $20M for the stadium, another $40M would need to be committed within two months. This seems like an incredibly tight schedule for involving the federal government and province. I wonder if there have already been talks behind the scenes?

[halifaxboyns]

Originally Posted by someone123

ANS reported tonight that, assuming the city commits to $20M for the stadium, another $40M would need to be committed within two months. This seems like an incredibly tight schedule for involving the federal government and province. I wonder if there have already been talks behind the scenes?

Something tells me at the Provincial level, most likely. Federally, I think they've been clear on the subject, but who knows.

[Empire]

Halifax Metro
http://www.metronews.ca/halifax/local/article/999779--stadium-a-no-go-for-now-premier

Local
Stadium a no-go, for now: Premier


Ryan Taplin/Metro Halifax
Premier Darrell Dexter
ALEX BOUTILIER
METRO
Published: October 18, 2011 1:00 a.m.
Last modified: October 18, 2011 1:03 a.m.



There’s no money in provincial coffers for a stadium in Halifax, Premier Darrell Dexter says.

And he thinks it’s a “wise thing” that HRM has yet to come looking.

“We’ve told them in the past that we simply don’t have the money to support that at this time,” Dexter said yesterday. “We’re in the position where we simply say don’t ask us and we won’t say no.”

Dexter said the province is prepared, however, to look at “value propositions.”

“We’re not going to turn away any business case. If you show us something that shows a concrete return, you know, we’re going to look at that,” he said.

Halifax regional council will decide today if they wish to give senior staff and Mayor Peter Kelly permission to begin soliciting contributions to the proposed stadium’s capital cost.

If approved, HRM would begin discussions with the other levels of government and the private sector to attempt to secure funding for the project, whose cost is estimated at $60 million.

Those discussions would be based on the premise of the municipality kicking in about one-third of the cost, or $20 million. But any contribution from the municipality — or from anyone else — would be conditional on council’s final decision in December.

Peter MacKay, the defence minister and regional minister for Nova Scotia, said any discussion of a federal contribution to the stadium would hinge on the formal business case, which will be delivered for council’s consideration in December.

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by Empire

Halifax Metro
http://www.metronews.ca/halifax/local/article/999779--stadium-a-no-go-for-now-premier

Local
Stadium a no-go, for now: Premier


Ryan Taplin/Metro Halifax
Premier Darrell Dexter
ALEX BOUTILIER
METRO
Published: October 18, 2011 1:00 a.m.
Last modified: October 18, 2011 1:03 a.m.



There’s no money in provincial coffers for a stadium in Halifax, Premier Darrell Dexter says.

And he thinks it’s a “wise thing” that HRM has yet to come looking.

“We’ve told them in the past that we simply don’t have the money to support that at this time,” Dexter said yesterday. “We’re in the position where we simply say don’t ask us and we won’t say no.”

Dexter said the province is prepared, however, to look at “value propositions.”

“We’re not going to turn away any business case. If you show us something that shows a concrete return, you know, we’re going to look at that,” he said.

Halifax regional council will decide today if they wish to give senior staff and Mayor Peter Kelly permission to begin soliciting contributions to the proposed stadium’s capital cost.

If approved, HRM would begin discussions with the other levels of government and the private sector to attempt to secure funding for the project, whose cost is estimated at $60 million.

Those discussions would be based on the premise of the municipality kicking in about one-third of the cost, or $20 million. But any contribution from the municipality — or from anyone else — would be conditional on council’s final decision in December.

Peter MacKay, the defence minister and regional minister for Nova Scotia, said any discussion of a federal contribution to the stadium would hinge on the formal business case, which will be delivered for council’s consideration in December.

It would be easy for the HRM Council to say no at this point, however, the money for the phase 2 study has been committed. I hope they will go ahead, finish the phase 2 study and design a 20,000 permanent seat, low-cost stadium. They can still commit $20 million dollars based on funding from the other levels of government and then hold off for a few years until it can be accomplished. It might take a few years to start construction, but at least they will have a goal to aim for.

On the other hand, HRM saying "no" at this point doesn't accomplish anything. If they can design a low-cost stadium that catches people's imagination and Premier Dexter still says "no" then he can be the scapegoat. Allowing Dexter to scuttle it at this point would be a mistake, in my opinion. They have nothing to lose by going ahead with the phase 2 study since Dexter has already taken the blame for it not to proceed. So HRM should try to satisfy the ones in favour - they have nothing to lose.

[MonctonRad]

What's up with Dexter, I thought that NS currently had a budgetary surplus - or is this another example of "creative accounting".

[RyeJay]

Dexter's "no" will change.

Kelly took forever to back the stadium, and he's the mayor of the HRM. My thoughts are that outside of the HRM, provincially, there are even fewer voters that are concerned about a stadium.

Perhaps Dexter is saying no while he still has a chance: with the findings of the multi-phased studies, accompanied by the financial boost of shipbuilding, I believe the business case Dexter's yes seeks will come to light.

[halifaxboyns]

There is also the big 'what if' of private investment, that still hasn't stepped up yet. That's still a big question as well..

[Waye Mason]

I think if Dexter is cutting 3% from health care he really can't politically put money into a stadium, not this coming fiscal, not until the budget is balanced.

[the shadow warrior]

plus Waye Mason there is the ask from the Federal Government which the Stadium Group and HRM elude to. Stephen Harper could not politically refuse the Saskatchewan Roughriders , The BC Lions , The Hamilton Tiger Cats and the Winnipeg Blue Bombers federal funding for their Stadia revamps and then fund in anyway a possible stadium for a future CFL team in Halifax that has no visible Ownership group.

The City of Quebec and that Province have been refused Federal Funding for a new NHL standard arena and that region actually had conservative party MPs. The Halifax Stadium proposal will die once again in HRM council as the great advocate for this councilor Darren Fisher has said it will not get his vote without Provincial and Federal Funding. Neither which is going to happen considering the federal department of veterans affairs is being cut by one quarter of a billion dollars.