One lawsuit down, bring on number two...


Here's a nice backgrounder on the fool threatening to bring forward a second legal challenge to OSEG's Lansdowne Park project:

Lansdowne Park plan infraction
Conservancy lacks credibility with Martin at helm

[url=] ... nfranction[/url]

Most people who propose a development plan have a portfolio of projects under their belt. Martin has none. He shrugs off this concern, saying: “I grew up in an architectural family. My father put up some major structures across North America.? Sorry, but professions are not genetically inherited.

This lawsuit will go nowhere and I doubt he will submit it on Tuesday. It is actually funny, the guy has no money and he states:

"The thrust of his plan is that the park will be made into a conservancy. An unpaid board of directors would operate the facility essentially in trust for the public. This is the same model used at Central Park in Manhattan"

He doesn't get it , Lansdowne Park - has never been a park just like Maple Leaf Gardens was never a garden!!

Ottawa has one of the biggest urban parks in Canada, located 1km away - The Experimantal Farm, Dows Lake, The Arbotorium, Careleton U. There are enough parks in Ottawa

It's good to see the media finally taking a critical eye to his plan. Of course, Martin now treats this scrutiny as proof that said media (both major papers) are on the take.

One of the Citizen blogs has a quote from an OSEG lobbyist. Here it is:

[url=] ... y-stadium/[/url]

"Mr. Martin’s proposal has not been subject to any form of analysis – financial, architectural, business – he has no experience to draw from and his architect is not licensed to work in Ontario. I would suggest that the credibility that OSEG has with the CFL and NASL would evaporate if OSEG would even consider linking up with the Conservancy. And realistically, I can’t imagine this hypothetical situation even arising."

Yet Martin continues to go around stating that OSEG, or at least some of its members, would be keen on fielding a team at the Conservancy's stadium.

In his dream world, the CFL would force them to proceed. The notion is ridiculous; not only can the CFL not force owners to "own", but the financial penalties (if the CFL even chose to enforce those, in light of the circumstances) are minimal compared to the losses involved with starting a team from scratch if you don't the business plan works. With their current proposal, the football team doesn't really have to make money as OSEG benefits in other ways.

Interesting, not sure what to make of this Martin fellow. :?

................And as I predicted, Tuesday came and went and he never put in his lawsuit!! lol

Did you hear why? A delay at the printer's, and a fact-check of some kind (probably on a similar case) with someone at Harvard.

Okay then.


[url=] ... residents/[/url]

John coughlosercough Martin has had his manifesto published on the Citizen's website. A summary of his "15 points":

Issues List

Items to be argued before the court will introduce evidence not previously available.

[i]1. Precedent by the Supreme Court of Canada

  1. The CFL franchise is contractually bound to play at any new stadium.

  2. OSEG has confirmed CFL sustainable on its own

  3. Mayor Watson and Council confirmed stadium development for world event

  4. Historical Precedent at Lansdowne; franchise rights do not extend to land

  5. LRT Bid tender confirms city development must go to competition

  6. There is no contract

  7. No reset; Policy direcetion of council respected in open bid

  8. Open bid does not delay 2014 deadline.Open tender takes only 60 to 90 days.

  9. OSEG director and Minto head Roger Greenberg throws down challenge

  10. Operational Costs on Front Lawn not included

  11. Report by PWC was for 30 years, not 40; based on $119M not $179M

  12. The City has not acted reasonably or in good faith

  13. The LPC Business Model compared to OSEG model

  14. Developer profits[/i]

Let's start at the beginning, shall we?

  1. If you read the article, it turns out he's completely wrong on that precedent. Not only it's context, but it's origin as well.

  2. CFL team is not contractually bound to play at any new stadium. The whole "suitable stadium" thing is a deal between the CFL and OSEG that removes the "conditional" tag off of OSEG's franchise once a suitable stadium is built. Doesn't say anything about OSEG being forced to field a team.

  3. I don't know where he's going with this one. I think it's based on a conversation between John Ruddy and someone at Carleton. Even if that were some kind of hair-brained suggestion that the CFL could survive on any wild financial model, OSEG is a corporation, an entity on its own, and isn't bound by the past behaviour of any of its shareholders.

  4. Is quite a stretch. Based on the idea that, since Council voted to participate in the bid for the 2015 FIFA Women's World Cup that a stadium has now become a required public asset and therefore, by law, needs to go before a competitive RFP process. I think a $5 lawyer could poke holes in that argument.

  5. Irrelevant. The Lansdowne Partnership Plan is a response to a broken management model that turned Lansdowne Park into it's current state. Just because something was run a certain way in the past doesn't make it a legal precedent.

  6. OSEG is the only entity capable of delivering CFL football. Any number of firms are capable of delivering LRT. Next!

  7. No idea what he's talking about. He seems to like saying that the City of Ottawa can't do something because somewhere in the past they did it a different way.

  8. Council also voted several times to pursue a project with OSEG... before the Lansdowne Park Conservancy was even a glimmer in John Martin's eye.

The next seven points have nothing to do with the legality of the process, so they'd be thrown out anyway. So I'll just ridicule them.

  1. Translation: "aww come on, i'm really not trying to kill the project, just want to delay it as long as I can and hope, by some miracle, it goes away! Why won't anybody listen to me? waaaaa!"

  2. Translation: "Mr Greenberg was mean to me! Tell him I can have my way! waaaa!"

  3. Translation: "I don't listen to third-party reviews, City Council, the Auditor General, or Judge Hackland. I am John Martin, and based on my Godlike intuition and because my dad was an architect, I deem this project to be a very bad deal!"

  4. See 11.

  5. See 11.

  6. Translation: "Has anyone heard my idea? I think it's really cool!"

  7. Translation: "I totally made this up, but if you'll indulge me, see 11."

I think his "no contract" point (#7) was that since we don't have an official agreement, we're open to looking at other options. His! :o

This one cracks me up though:

  1. Translation: "I don't listen to third-party reviews, City Council, the Auditor General, or Judge Hackland. I am John Martin, and based on my Godlike intuition and because my dad was an architect, I deem this project to be a very bad deal!"

After the OMB loss, he wrote on those boards that he doesn't like to blindly trust "experts" and prefers to apply common sense. In other words, his opinion outweighs that of people who have decades of combined education and experience in whatever field we're discussing at any given time.

For example, he provided me with a traffic estimate based on his common sense, including the addition of more busses, reduced parking, etc. Of course he neglected to take into account the number of cars REMOVED from the road by those additional busses. I'm pretty sure an expert wouldn't have missed that. :wink:

It appears he is in trouble and not allowed to go to court until he pays his child
the term "get your own house in order first" sound familiar. If he can't pay his kids how can he pay a lawyer? oh sorry this is a private matter!!!

[url=] ... story.html[/url]

John Martin reminds me of those guys you see in Western movies that come to town with a miracle cure. Puts on some nice display for the village idiots, who buy into his claims, then later realize that the guy is a scammer.

On one of the Citizen blogs, he claims that this proves that his plan is sound because the media is going after him. But the media is totally within their rights (and common sense) to investigate why he did not submit his legal challenge when he said he would.

I've thought for a while that he was just a dedicated NIMBY but there are times I seriously question his mental state and the longer this goes, the more I think he has a legitimate problem. Some of his arguments totally defy logic to the point that i sometimes expect him to show up one day "Bah, come on! I'm just messing with you guys! I don't mean all this stuff!"

a snake oil salesman!

The Mayor is hoping they can get started and have shovels in the ground before the end of the year, it starts with the demo of the South Side upper deck.

[url=] ... ays-watson[/url]

Oof! John Martin is taking a beating in the comment sections of the newspapers... :lol:


seems a little late. i was hoping september


seems a little late. i was hoping september

with the talk of how gross it is there, im suprised anyone is aposed to rebuilding it. doesnt make sense.

It's not that it is gross but the problem is you have a gem like the 19th Century Aberdeen Pavillion surrounded by acres and acres of asphalt, and then the stadium with the lower deck of the south side stands missing and just the upper deck in place.

As for shovels in the ground by september? impossible, they have to go out for tender. The demo of the upper deck will be several million dollars to a demolition company its not a job city workers could do. That's why the mayor is hoping for "shovels in the ground" by the end of the year

New construction schedule to be revealed on Ausust 18th

[url=] ... z1TW1TaOBp[/url]

Sounds good!


Well, he filed it. Must have finally scraped together the money to pay his child support.

This little tidbit comes from the comments section, so take it for what it's worth: John Martin plans to represent the Lansdowne Concervancy Nonsense in court... as in, he want's to be the lawyer. He's as much a lawyer as he is a developer capable of revitalizing Lansdowne. Depending on the legal status of the Lansdowne Park Concervancy, he may not be able to represent himself and would have to find a lawyer... but according to the comment, he didn't fill in the "legal status" section of his application. Methinks this one won't make it to a real trial.

Lansdowne plan faces second legal challenge

[url=] ... story.html[/url]

By David Reevely, The Ottawa Citizen
August 18, 2011 2:09 PM

[i]OTTAWA — A long-promised second legal case against the city over the Lansdowne Park redevelopment plan has been filed, says the man behind it.

John Martin, the co-ordinator of a vision for Lansdowne that’s different from the one the city is pursuing with the private Ottawa Sports and Entertainment Group, argues that his concept for a scaled-back renovation didn’t get due consideration from the city because councillors and officials were so taken with the proposal from OSEG.

He says that the city treated OSEG’s proposal as the only one worth considering because the group’s partners have the rights to a CFL football franchise that’s the central element of the current plan, but the team could be separated from the OSEG bid and play at a Lansdowne Park redeveloped along the lines of his vision.

To a significant extent, Martin’s case asks for a re-hearing of the court case brought by the Friends of Lansdowne citizens’ group, which Justice Charles Hackland dismissed at the end of July.

“In the citizen application before the court the learned judge was not able to know of the Lansdowne Park Conservancy bid that included a stadium for Lansdowne Park and that met all policy direction for the development of the park,? the filing says.

It says the conservancy proposal is a better deal for taxpayers and the city had an obligation to consider it.

The city didn’t agree and still doesn’t; city council’s finance committee began meeting at 1:30 p.m. Thursday to consider updates and changes to the tentative deal it has reached with OSEG.

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen[/i]

John Martin has no hope. His claim that OSEG is obligated to play at whatever stadium happens to be built is my biggest irritant in his whole pile of nonsense. My biggest hope is that a member of OSEG takes the stand and flat out states that under no circumstance would they every commit to playing in a stadium that he promises to build because he is an untrained, narcissistic NIMBY douche bag.

But said in a more professional way, of course...