BillyDee87

If you read this 55 page report,(page 11 is about the bundling of projects) the Auditor General is basically blaming Infrastructure Ontario for bundling construction projects to attract larger international construction companies. Worked well didn’t it?
IO is an ONTARIO GOVERNMENT CREATION.  The same people who are bringing us a 1 BILLION DOLLAR LRT.   Anyone else worried about these jokers leading this parade?

http://www.auditor.on.ca/en/content/specialreports/specialreports/2015panam_june2016_en.pdf
I understand that Infrastructure Ontario is a provincial government agency. But the builder themselves, for example, placed the speakers without adequate supports and there were other situations that demonstrated poor workmanship.
I'm interested to know why you believe that the government is better placed to provide these services than the marketplace?  Your point above seems to indicate that every party other than the different levels of government are somehow to blame.  Didn't we trust those government folks to select the best and most competent of builders?  It would seem to me that, if what you say above is true, they failed at this most basic of tasks.
"For the sake of humanity" is always the credo of tyranny.

Grover

 We all know how this went down, There is tons of blame to go around here!
The Design and build group were left with a terrible timeline due to the dysfunction between the TiCats and Council who finally had to hold their noses and agree to build at the IWS site at the drop dead very last minute or lose the Pan AM Stadium to another City. They were probably on their 4th ultimatum.
I remember the Premier stating, "I have never had so much trouble giving away money" :-[
After Council rejected Confed park, East Mountain, Longwood and other sites and TiCats rejecting West Harbour, wasting years of preparation time for the builders, everyone now blames the builders for the deficiencies. If I remember correctly it was an extremely long and cold winter that year, making building even more challenging.
I'm not letting the builders off the hook here, as I said there is lots of blame to go around!
IWS was the only solution left that didn't need rezoning and had the infrastructure in place for a 24K seat stadium.
We are so fortunate to have what we have in THF!
I don't even want to think of the consequences, if it was built in another City

Thanks to @Doc_Dave for sig

Hank01

We all know how this went down, There is tons of blame to go around here!
The Design and build group were left with a terrible timeline due to the dysfunction between the TiCats and Council who finally had to hold their noses and agree to build at the IWS site at the drop dead very last minute or lose the Pan AM Stadium to another City. They were probably on their 4th ultimatum.
I remember the Premier stating, "I have never had so much trouble giving away money" :-[
After Council rejected Confed park, East Mountain, Longwood and other sites and TiCats rejecting West Harbour, wasting years of preparation time for the builders, everyone now blames the builders for the deficiencies. If I remember correctly it was an extremely long and cold winter that year, making building even more challenging.
I'm not letting the builders off the hook here, as I said there is lots of blame to go around!
IWS was the only solution left that didn't need rezoning and had the infrastructure in place for a 24K seat stadium.
We are so fortunate to have what we have in THF!
I don't even want to think of the consequences, if it was built in another City
  I have a feeling the Argos would have been the legacy tenant at York University as the rest of the stadium money for track was funnelled towards York after the shift from athletics to just soccer in Hamilton . 

 To Hamiltons benefit the stadium is better off without the distances a track would have meant for watching football or soccer .

The stadium though I believe was reduced in quality but up sized in seating as the original was for a 15,000 seat stadium with the Ti-Cats responsible for bringing the 
stadium up another 10,000 with a upper deck and end zone seats at one end for the one at the Harbour . It looks like they did miss out on a roof that was on the early renders .

  

Lennywasout

Grover....I’m with you on THF where it is and no issues about size.  My complaint is that it’s still, after 3 years, not fixed and the lawsuits are still not settled.  Hamilton needs the economic uplift from hosting a Grey Cup.  

Count Floyd

Grover....I’m with you on THF where it is and no issues about size.  My complaint is that it’s still, after 3 years, not fixed and the lawsuits are still not settled.  Hamilton needs the economic uplift from hosting a Grey Cup.  
Lawsuits, even in Small Claims Court, can take years to resolve, depending on how busy the court is in the jurisdiction where the action commenced and whether the parties are using lawyers.

For a case like this, with multiple parties and involving millions of dollars, it will not be resolved anytime soon.

Count Floyd

Btw, this article contains some monetary details of the amounts claimed in the lawsuit in case anyone is interested:

https://www.thespec.com/news-story/6519965-tim-hortons-field-delays-finally-end-up-in-court/

Lennywasout

From this article of 2016, what does “But the city is separately claiming $4.5 million in "delay damages" against the team, as well as breach of contract damages totaling $227,004 plus taxes. “. Even mean?  Are they saying that the delay to the start of construction is on the Ticats?  Hog wash!  IO agreed to the time lines to completion, OSS agreed to it as well. So did every contractor involved.  
Would like to know how much the Cats are suing the city for?  According to Councillor Ferguson, it’s substantial.   You would think that at least the Cats and city could negotiate a settlement quickly then get on with a Grey Cup bid.  
(Wishful thinking on my part😀).

mycko75

To me, it's a pretty simple scenario.

The ticats are the tenant.  The city is the landlord.  There is a contract between the two that started on date x.  The facility was not ready by date x and the Ticats lost revenue as a result.  They sue the city for the lost revenue.

The city says, 'well it wasn't out fault.  The builders didn't finish the facility on time, or properly, and that's why the revenue was lost'.  The city then sues IO for the revenue lost that would then go to the Ticats.

I don't see how or why the city and Ticats would be enemies in this case.
The only difference between a rut and a grave is the depth.

-Hammer-

Saskatchewan/Regina doesn't appear to be having the kind of nightmare Hamilton is.

Are contractors in Saskatchewan simply less crooked than contractors in Ontario?
Yes, but that's over simplifying things.

You also had a team that worked hand in hand with the city and didn't balk at the location a year before the build (despite the city previously communicating publicly for well over 4 years before the build that location is where they were looking to build and the owner of the team saying they didn't care where it was built so long as it was in Hamilton) and thus delayed construction for a year. The Riders also never threatened to move to Saskatoon if they didn't get what they wanted and

You also didn't have a city that was split pretty much 50/50 down the middle as to who was right in this argument and who despite years of having an inept and dysfunctional council continues to elect the same councilors who enjoy an absurd incumbency rate (with the majority of council having held their position since 2006 or earlier). You also don't have councilors who since amalgamation in 2001 STILL tout deamlgamation as a campaign talking point (despite it being a provincial matter and city council having literally no say in changing it).

That's even before we discuss how poor a job the current government of Ontario does things.

Count Floyd

From this article of 2016, what does “But the city is separately claiming $4.5 million in "delay damages" against the team, as well as breach of contract damages totaling $227,004 plus taxes. “. Even mean?  Are they saying that the delay to the start of construction is on the Ticats?  Hog wash!  IO agreed to the time lines to completion, OSS agreed to it as well. So did every contractor involved.  
Would like to know how much the Cats are suing the city for?  According to Councillor Ferguson, it’s substantial.   You would think that at least the Cats and city could negotiate a settlement quickly then get on with a Grey Cup bid.  
(Wishful thinking on my part😀).
Delay damages are the amounts claimed by the city because the stadium was supposed to be ready June 1 & the Ticats weren't able to play their first game there until Labour Day that year.  The breach of contract damages are the specific penalties laid out in the contract for when timelines aren't met.

As for the amount the Ticats are suing the city for, it's in the article:

The city's claim includes $14 million on behalf of the Ticats football team, which has a lease agreement that requires the city to pursue compensation on behalf of its tenant for missed games due to construction delays.

The Cats & the city cannot settle the suit because they are not the only parties named in the suit.  In other words, any settlement has to include ALL parties named in the action.

-Hammer-

From this article of 2016, what does “But the city is separately claiming $4.5 million in "delay damages" against the team, as well as breach of contract damages totaling $227,004 plus taxes. “. Even mean?  Are they saying that the delay to the start of construction is on the Ticats?  Hog wash!  IO agreed to the time lines to completion, OSS agreed to it as well. So did every contractor involved.  
Would like to know how much the Cats are suing the city for?  According to Councillor Ferguson, it’s substantial.   You would think that at least the Cats and city could negotiate a settlement quickly then get on with a Grey Cup bid.  
(Wishful thinking on my part😀).
I would think that if the city is seeking 35 million, the number the Cats are looking for is somewhere between that and 4.5 million, since due to the nature of the agreement with the city, claims must flow through them.

Frankly, if the team is seeking even half of that 35 million, that's crazy. I can accept lost revenue due to games is likely around a million a game, and can accept lost revenue due to seating and certain deficiencies amounts to 5 million (which I think is generous) but 17.5 million? That strikes me as WAY too much.

letsgoticats

From this article of 2016, what does “But the city is separately claiming $4.5 million in "delay damages" against the team, as well as breach of contract damages totaling $227,004 plus taxes. “. Even mean?  Are they saying that the delay to the start of construction is on the Ticats?  Hog wash!  IO agreed to the time lines to completion, OSS agreed to it as well. So did every contractor involved.  
Would like to know how much the Cats are suing the city for?  According to Councillor Ferguson, it’s substantial.   You would think that at least the Cats and city could negotiate a settlement quickly then get on with a Grey Cup bid.  
(Wishful thinking on my part😀).
I would think that if the city is seeking 35 million, the number the Cats are looking for is somewhere between that and 4.5 million, since due to the nature of the agreement with the city, claims must flow through them.

Frankly, if the team is seeking even half of that 35 million, that's crazy. I can accept lost revenue due to games is likely around a million a game, and can accept lost revenue due to seating and certain deficiencies amounts to 5 million (which I think is generous) but 17.5 million? That strikes me as WAY too much.
Agreed.  If the Ticats are really pulling in that much revenue, then the players are getting totally underpaid.   CFLPA would have a lot to say during the next round of negotiations.

Grover

From this article of 2016, what does “But the city is separately claiming $4.5 million in "delay damages" against the team, as well as breach of contract damages totaling $227,004 plus taxes. “. Even mean?  Are they saying that the delay to the start of construction is on the Ticats?  Hog wash!  IO agreed to the time lines to completion, OSS agreed to it as well. So did every contractor involved.  
Would like to know how much the Cats are suing the city for?  According to Councillor Ferguson, it’s substantial.   You would think that at least the Cats and city could negotiate a settlement quickly then get on with a Grey Cup bid.  
(Wishful thinking on my part😀).
Delay damages are the amounts claimed by the city because the stadium was supposed to be ready June 1 & the Ticats weren't able to play their first game there until Labour Day that year.  The breach of contract damages are the specific penalties laid out in the contract for when timelines aren't met.

As for the amount the Ticats are suing the city for, it's in the article:

The city's claim includes $14 million on behalf of the Ticats football team, which has a lease agreement that requires the city to pursue compensation on behalf of its tenant for missed games due to construction delays.

The Cats & the city cannot settle the suit because they are not the only parties named in the suit.  In other words, any settlement has to include ALL parties named in the action.
From the Lease agreement, to which the TiCats pay up to $1.4M/yr
(FYI- the lease at IWS was $26K/yr.)

The team's lease agreement with the city calls for compensation of up to $1 million a game for missed home dates due to construction. But the team has had to contend with other construction issues such as missing draft beer lines, damaged outdoor television monitors and hundreds of seats with blocked views.

In the 2014 season THF was not at first available until Labour day where they only had two thirds of the Stadium opened, It was not fully functional until week 20

The TiCats lost the full use of THF for 8 games of that season
Since the TiCats suspected problems with the Stadium and they back end loaded that schedule with early bye weeks and more home games in the last half of the season.
So 4 home gates at MAC including preseason = $4M
and 5 partial lost home gates = say $2M
Rent paid to MAC = say $2M
Other lost  miscellaneous revenue from delayed Stadium until week 20 = say another $4M

It's getting closer to $14M

jonny24eh

Plus there's probably a bit of "shoot high" so when it gets knocked down at the end it's still acceptable, from all parties involved.

The poster formerly known as jonny24.

Eat\'em raw!

Riggins

I don't know if there's a rule on this forum against reinvigorating the stadium debate but since it's already been brought up, all this would have been avoided if the Ticats had accepted the beautiful new waterfront stadium that was originally planned.  The problems at THF are due to the construction being rushed on a design that was half-ass in the first place.  Like seriously how did they think they would come out better with THF?  We could be preparing for a Grey Cup right now if they had just stuck with the plan.
 


Users Online

79 Guests, 5 Users (22 Spiders, 2 Hidden)

Users active in past 15 minutes:
Lennywasout, ticats28, Mightygoose, Google (AdSense) (3), Google (19)

Most Online Today: 129. Most Online Ever: 489 (Nov 26 2017, 08:38 PM)