First he says no to the Longwood stadium, and now he says no to Aerotroplis. Does this guy do anything but say no to projects that will benefit Hamilton? I'm starting to think that the only reason he says no is so that he, as one of the only councillors who says no to everything, can read get his name in the paper or hear it on the radio (i.e. "City Council ratified the motion 13 to 2, with Brian McHattie and Sam Merulla being the lone holdouts"). Hopefully the residents of Westdale turf this fossil on election day.
Agreed. These 2 have been here too long. No forward thinking.
sad thing is, McHattie will be re-elected..........because of voter apathy
Probably and he will be at the Stadium opening ceremonies gladhanding and taking credit for our fantastic new stadium built in his ward. :roll:
...and so will Merulla due to lack of candidates and voter apathy as well.
Well...can't argue with his position on "Aerotropolis" (wow, that's a grandiose name), but definitely hear you. Both those guys are just grandstanders.
Hmmm, would "Aerotropolis" be funnelling resources to "urban sprawl" like so many said with a EM stadium project?
I have to wonder why we are going to build ANYTHING at Aerotropolis or as some prefer to call it,
"the airport industrial area." This area, as I understand it, is green space. Is that not why Collins
stopped the stadium at Confederation Park in it's tracks?
Some say this project may be overly ambitious. Are those people referring to normal cities or Hamilton?
Incidentally, you can count on McHattie and Merulla being re elected. (IMHO)
Last I read on the matter, the economic benefits of the project were less than the costs (in which case I'm shudder with McHattie on this one). I've no idea whether that's a Hamilton specific thing, though, or whether that would be the case no matter where such a project would be built.
I agree with the airport lands being developed for future employment opportunities as there presently isn't many (any?) large tracts of land to accommodate a major business that may wish to set up here.
Part of the Council debate focused on how businesses are bypassing Hamilton and going to places like Brantford, Burlington, etc. and how other areas are being aggressive in attracting businesses to their airport lands (ie, Kitchener, London).
My problem is the argument used (which I agree with and is central to the stadium debate) by many Councillors to support airport development, that being the City can't force would-be investors/businesses to use or build on brown fields if they don't want to.
Isn't that what the Mayor and WH supporters are trying to do with the stadium and the TiCats?
Examples were given of the recent Canada Bread and Tim Hortons development, how they didn't go looking to develop on brown fields and the City didn't try to force the issue, or the companies no doubt would have said "Thanks but no thanks and goodbye. We're going to Brantford, Burlington, elsewhere... ".
Brown field remediation and downtown renewal (while noble and desirable) are taking precedence over a sound business case for the stadium and a business is being forced to go where it doesn't want to go... and it's using money intended for the stadium first and foremost.
Big difference in the scenarios is the City's (taxpayer's) money going into the stadium vs the other private investments but the bottom line is still whether in the end it makes practical and financial sense in selecting the proper and workable site for a business to be successful.
When you actually read reports and are in touch with people not just the loud minority, it gets recognized. McHattie and Merulla are shoe ins..... I'd gamble to guess that the rest.... not so sure.
Fred doesn't appear too popular on the mountain with regard to lawn signs. Dianni doesn't appear too popular with people with ethics or historical knowledge. Where's our "Jack McDonald"?
I predict the Cats do a major number on the Eggs tomorrow night.
The other No voter was....drumroll....
Hopefully everyone votes ALL of these clowns out in two weeks time.