Halifax Stadium Discussion

[elly63]

Details of the CFL stadium proposal in Halifax
3Down Staff 3downnation September 26, 2019

The details of the CFL stadium proposal in Halifax have been made public.

Halifax council voted unanimously to move ahead with a staff report on the proposed stadium plans, which have been submitted to the municipality. Shannon Park was the chosen location to build a stadium with 12,000 permanent seats expandable to 24,000 for CFL games on a 38-hectare area.

According to the proposal, phase one of the design would cost just under $94 million. There would be an extra $10 million for the cost of the land. The mobilization date is October 19 with completion of the project set for June 1, 2022.

Halifax regional municipality chief administrative officer Jacques Dube released a statement along with the specifics of the proposed facility:

SSE forwarded the latest version of its proposal on Tuesday, Sept. 17, 2019, following some initial questions and requests for clarification by municipal staff.

In the interest of transparency, the municipality sought approval from the proponent, SSE, to release the proposal publicly. SSE has consented to public disclosure of the proposal – with the exception of five appendices (A, G, H, I and O) containing information that is the property of a third party.

SSE is currently working with the third party to review and redact information, as necessary, prior to releasing these documents publicly. Once any required redaction has been completed, and approval has been granted, we will be publicly disclosing the remaining documents.

From the Halifax CAO release:

The Schooner Sports and Entertainment proposal assumes that some or all the funds for the municipality’s financial support would be generated from a tax incremental financing (TIF) model.

Five funding options are outlined in the SSE proposal regarding the manner (timing, mechanism, etc.) in which the municipality may consider using the funds generated from the TIF to contribute to the stadium.

Option #1: Maximum Financial Contribution of $2M Per Year Over the Term of the Loan with TIF Revenue Going Directly to SSE
Option #2: Upfront Cash Payment
Option #3: Smaller Upfront Cash Payment with Committed Cash Payments over the Term of the Loan
Option #4: Loan Guarantee
Option #5: Sliding Scale of Committed Cash Payments

CFL commissioner Randy Ambrosie has said the possibility of an Atlantic Schooners hinges on a stadium deal. The league and SSE are one step closer to making the dream a reality.

[q12]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/schooners-cfl-stadium-dartmouth-1.5310516

Hopefully Sam Austin gets booted next election...

Let's not bother getting all the details or discuss any options for stadium infrastructure in a city with zero permanent outdoor stadiums, just vote against it like every other council has in the past.

He used to post on this forum before he was elected, I thought he was more reasonable then.

I still don't understand how a $130M art gallery gets funding approved without any objections...

[someone123]

It's okay for him not to be in support of it but in polls a large number of people in Halifax do want a CFL stadium. Around half of the city or more; hundreds of thousands of people. So it seems rather extreme to argue that this isn't even worth getting staff to study the idea.

I got a kick out of the article saying that the costs will run into the millions of dollars. It seems like Halifax's city council is better than it used to be but still tends to undervalue regional projects. It's like the city applies the same standards to financing of anything, whether it's a bike overpass somewhere or a hockey rink in a suburb or convention centre or stadium for the whole region. It is the same in the popular media. The dollar values are compared but there's not much accounting for the fact that one project might be a $40M local amenity paid for by the city while another might be $100M regional infrastructure with cost sharing. It's like driving a 20 year beater car around while you have a $50,000 shoe collection because you can bring yourself to spend $200 over and over but not $30,000 once.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by q12

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/schooners-cfl-stadium-dartmouth-1.5310516

Hopefully Sam Austin gets booted next election...

Let's not bother getting all the details or discuss any options for stadium infrastructure in a city with zero permanent outdoor stadiums, just vote against it like every other council has in the past.

He used to post on this forum before he was elected, I thought he was more reasonable then.

I still don't understand how a $130M art gallery gets funding approved without any objections...

One can only hope he gets turfed. He has been a huge disappointment, and his arrogant "I know best" attitude is ample cause for him to be tossed to the curb bump-out.

The art gallery is a ridiculous spend but it has provincial and federal vote-buying money in it, which makes it slip through easily.

[spaustin]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

his arrogant "I know best" attitude is ample cause for him to be tossed to the curb bump-out.

Tossed to the curb bump-out... good one You can't say I haven't been clear in my positions on the issues of the day.

[ILoveHalifax]

I would not fly to Halifax for a weekend to go to an art gallery but certainly would fly in to see a CFL game; I am not the only one. A CFL team would give repeated exposure week after week and tremendous civic pride; It also fuels tourism.

[teddifax]

I hope the naysayers in Halifax don't win again.... I think the stadium is a win for Halifax and would love to see if built. So many want to hold Halifax back. I love Halifax, but there are so many people that seemingly don't want it to succeed.... WHY?

[q12]

This thread was started 10 years ago this month on October 24th, 2009 by Honored Member fenwick16.

I think the HFX Wanderers have shown the passion fans in this city have. The need for permanent outdoor stadium infrastructure is real. There has to be a reasonable approach to this so we don't end up on this thread another 10 years from now...

Imagine this city today without the Scotiabank Centre. Or today without the Wanderers Grounds (even with it's temporary infrastructure).

• Video Link


https://twitter.com/Geewhit/status/1158501335597244421

[MonctonRad]

RIP Fenwick - you are indeed missed.

[ns_kid]

Originally Posted by spaustin

Tossed to the curb bump-out... good one You can't say I haven't been clear in my positions on the issues of the day.

I have no use for the negative personalities sometimes engaged in here and elsewhere on social media, and I thank you again, councillor, for your willingness to engage with citizens.

That said, I respectfully disagree with your contention that you are "clear on your positions".

It was just six months ago you chose to engage city staff in a quixotic attempt to frustrate a development in your district. Even you admitted it was a "long shot", knowing full well that any fault in the matter lay with the municipality's own arcane and archaic development rules. "Our bylaws are broken", you said, yet you still brought a motion that required staff to waste their time and taxpayer money to find a magic bullet. They didn't, but you could tell your restless vocal voters that you fought the good fight and I suppose that was worth a few more wasted tax dollars.

We now have another developer/promoter that has invested large amounts of money and time to put forward a proposal for a major capital project, presumably in good faith. Certainly with the encouragement of the mayor on the city's behalf. Thousands of residents have plunked down deposits (full disclosure, I'm among them) to give this proposal some endorsement. Yet you now declare your opposition, without the benefit of any staff study or research, voicing great concern about the alleged waste of taxpayer resources.

"What are we doing [is] six months worth of detailed analysis and work, because that's not free," you are reported as saying. "There's ... a cost there. You're putting staff on to this instead of doing other work."

Consistent you say? Perhaps so. I suppose in both cases you see yourself as standing up for vocal naysayers and thumbing your nose at some pesky developer who dares to think this city is open for business.

In your great concern for overworked staff and lost tax dollars I suggest, again with respect, your consistency does not bear close examination.

[teddifax]

Municpal elections are not that far off... I want a councillor that is pro-development not against. I will choose my next elected official based on this. I believe our current Mayor Savage is for it, as for my councillor... my mind will be made up once I see the list of nominees and just what they are supporting.

[spaustin]

This won't be popular in this forum given that it's a development forum and a stadium thread, but here it goes.

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

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

http://www.samaustin.ca/council-update-stadium-floating-yellow-heart/

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

Carry on.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by spaustin

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

It does seem like it's at a weird point in the continuum between privately led and publicly led projects. If the city were to lead the construction of a stadium on its own I don't think the municipal costs and risks would change much. Then again, maybe a real part of the value the CFL promoters are providing is that they're actually pushing to get this done while HRM council has waffled for decades on multiple stadium projects.

Another thing I've noticed is that the financing is not very clear. I've read a few articles and skimmed the report and didn't get a coherent high-level breakdown of all of the proposed revenue sources, costs, and risks. One could say that this is just my fault for not digging deeper but the reality is that most people won't. I like most people am naturally suspicious of projects with financing schemes that can't be or aren't explained clearly (budget $X, city pays $Y, province pays $Z).

[q12]

Originally Posted by spaustin

HRM doesn't have a bottomless pit of money.

The municipal government now takes in almost one
billion dollars in revenue annually.

Source: https://halifaxpartnership.com/sites/def...Halifax_Index_jun14-2019_INTERACTIVE.pdf


Hey Sam, some of that tax money you have is mine, and last time I checked you have a boat load of new tax revenue thanks to thousands of new taxpayers moving to this great city. The population of HRM is passing 450,000 in 2020 (aiming for as high as 470,000 by the end of 2021). If a large percentage of the population would not mind having a relatively small portion (in relation to the city's budget) of those tax dollars go to a piece of missing infrastructure then council needs to take this seriously and not dismiss this based on preliminary information.

Not to mention stopping this now is BAD FAITH negotiating and sends a message to future investors of this city that don't bother doing business here.

We already have a black eye over the Commonwealth Games fiasco...

At least two councillors on The Rick Howe Show have committed to voting against Sam's motion.


https://halifaxpartnership.com/sites/def...Halifax_Index_jun14-2019_INTERACTIVE.pdf


https://halifaxpartnership.com/sites/def...Halifax_Index_jun14-2019_INTERACTIVE.pdf

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by q12

Hey Sam, some of that tax money you have is mine, and last time I checked you have a boat load of new tax revenue thanks to thousands of new taxpayers moving to this great city.

Don't forget the tax increase Sam supported despite the city posting a surplus. HRM has more money than they know what to do with. Except, perhaps, to spend on things that citizens really value, like streets without holes, sidewalks, picking up hurricane debris (I drove down Bell Rd yesterday and was shocked to see dry piles of brush and branches that have been on the curb for weeks still there), Transit that is actually an attractive option, and upgrading of our obsolete street network. But when it comes to bike lanes, narrowing of streets, curb bump-outs, and virtually any "progressive" thing, no price is too high.

The population of HRM is passing 450,000 in 2020 (aiming for as high as 470,000 by the end of 2021). If a large percentage of the population would not mind having a relatively small portion (in relation to the city's budget) of those tax dollars go to a piece of missing infrastructure then council needs to take this seriously and not dismiss this based on preliminary information.

Not to mention stopping this now is BAD FAITH negotiating and sends a message to future investors of this city that don't bother doing business here.

We already have a black eye over the Commonwealth Games fiasco...

At least two councillors on The Rick Howe Show have committed to voting against Sam's motion.

Sam does not want to negotiate, that's the point. He sees an initial proposal as reason to cut this off at the knees because he wants to spend money on things that fit the current planning dogma. A reasonable representative would see this for what it is, a starting point, and allow things to proceed. The fact that Halifax has no outdoor venue whatsoever like this and hasn't for years would be seen by most as something that should be investigated. Maybe it doesn't have to be tied to a CFL team. Maybe something in a more accessible location that isn't quite so grand would suit not only university sports and concerts but also the Wanderers and other emerging outdoor sports teams even if the CFL isn't the end goal. But no. He wants to cut it off without even risking discussion because who knows, it might actually happen. It is reminiscent of Gloria's old tactics when she didn't like something.

I have to laugh when he uses the argument that it would be too costly to allow staff to analyze this for a few months. Every single meeting of Council has this bunch getting up on their hind legs and asking for a staff report on something, all of which take months if not years to actually resurface. How much does all that cost? Was the attempt to torpedo the hotel on Prince Albert Road done pro bono?

This is just the latest example of the councillor showing the dismissive streak he has towards anything that doesn't line up with his view of the world. There seems zero recognition that his constituents do not all share his views and that he is not always correct. This is not a good trait for an elected official who has to juggle a plethora of responsibilities and views in representing his district.

[Haliguy]

Sam doesn't want a stadium, that's pretty clear. To just shut it down at this point without seeing it through further is not someone who thinks Halifax should have a staduim. Maybe this not the right deal, but I do know HRM deserves to have of stadium and we should see the process through anyway. Not having any sort of permanent stadium for a city this size seems kinda sad.

[elly63]

Originally Posted by Haliguy

Sam doesn't want a stadium, that's pretty clear. To just shut it down at this point without seeing it through further is not someone who thinks Halifax should have a stadium. Maybe this not the right deal, but I do know HRM deserves to have of stadium and we should see the process through anyway. Not having any sort of permanent stadium for city this size seems kinda sad.

Totally agree, and if it was such a bad or nonnegotiable deal, then why haven't the rest of the councilors tossed it to the curb. The fact that Halifax doesn't have a decent sized permanent outdoor athletic facility isn't sad, it's pathetic. And yes it should be built to be sustainable even if the football team goes up in smoke.

[elly63]

Glad to see there is consensus here on seeing this issue through. While we all may not agree on whether a stadium should be built at least we can agree to get all the information we can, negotiate, compromise and at the end if it all fails, at least we can say we did all we could do. And people are right this motion sends a terrible message, Halifax is closed for business.

That's how Moncton pipped Halifax for years, getting a new stadium, arena and major concerts, a can do vs can't do attitude.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by spaustin

This won't be popular in this forum given that it's a development forum and a stadium thread, but here it goes.

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

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

http://www.samaustin.ca/council-update-stadium-floating-yellow-heart/

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

Carry on.

Sam, I want to thank you for posting about this, knowing that you were going to be facing a barrage of comments that you will have to defend. It shows good character to put yourself out there and state your beliefs and reasoning on the subject, especially knowing they won't be the most popular views expressed.

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

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

My question is simply this: If HRM is being expected to pay for the stadium but not have ownership or a share in potential profits, then why don't we just negotiate for a better deal? Or, just build the stadium and budget for the development/maintenance costs, and then have some kind of control over the situation?

My case being:
- It seems to be widely believed that we need some kind of outdoor stadium that would service the citizens of a continually-growing city.
- There also seems to be a consensus that it would be a great asset to amateur and school/university level team sports.
- There seems to be some significant motivation from the CFL to populate the area with a team, plus an opportunity to provide a permanent home for the Wanderers.
- With an actual venue for stadium-level concerts we would open up the door to events such as these, rather than the so-so events previously held at the commons, and without the costs associated with converting such grounds into a concert venue and the teardown/repair costs after the fact. More aptly, these events just don't happen here anymore - instead places like Moncton host them (not that there's anything wrong with that, MonctonRad... ) and Haligonians will travel to Moncton to attend (and spend their money there).

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

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

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

Just my 2¢...

[elly63]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

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

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

Bingo!