Ticats/City of Hamilton Stadium Talks Thread

This Guy Makes Special ED From Crank Yanks look like a Genius

For both Bob Young and the mayor, because it would save both parties.

Remember, Bob Young is relying on $102m of piublic money right now. Would you caharcterize that as, " waaaa,waaaa,waaaa.......Dalton, Fred and Stephen help save my arse" ?

Of course you wouldn't.

And keep in mind, the funding formula is not mayor Fred's.

But, I for one, would NOT charactreize it as such. I find it to be oversimplistic and childish.

I would characterize this as nothing more than part of the process of finding the right funding formula to satisfy both the city's and Tiger-Cats' needs.

This has to work for both sides, not just for one.

Of course, what does the Mayor care about taxpayers cash anyhow when he blows $656 dollars on a room while on a secret, silly trip to say a bunch of jibberish to Gary Bettman...............did council approve this waste of money?


Talk about, " waaaa,waaaa,waaaa" :roll:

How that's relevent to the stadium debate, I don't know.

I'll bet his mother wears army boots too.

And yeah, what does he care about taxpayers money when he's supporting spending $60m for a stdium that will benefit the Tiger-Cats.

:lol: now that's funny!

had to post My Option of Mayor Fred

Dam the Man is Clueless

Just Kidding Fokes .. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

The mayor said the west harbour site fits Ontario's "Places to Grow" strategy that stresses urban intensification over sprawl.
Oh I think it is foolish to dismiss him as clueless, as he's taking a successful page also out of what's worked in the US in such situations if not perhaps elsewhere in Canada! [b]Oh I know it is Canada hold off a second before firing away, but some matters are common to urban areas there too so stop right there and read on a bit before pulling that trigger![/b]

I'll pass along freely from south of the border that this is just plain-old hat urban politics down here and it works well apparently. And the more urban the more it is employed by local mayors mind you in order to just corner more local votes. It's no different really than managing to stack a deck of cards.

The ONLY interest of these ruling parties when you hear that line is the expansion and consolidation of their local political power and that of their local cronies with some usual federal ties of course.

Basically it's just a "legal" version of The Sopranos that works about the same including perhaps some of the vice, bad hair, obnoxious behaviour, apparent constipation epidemic of the East Coast US crowd, bad gelled hair, and bad shirts.

Too bad some of those numerous douchebags here in Philly and nearby in NJ and NY give we Italians all such a bad name with no thanks to Hollywood on that note either, :roll: but there you have it for an accurate analogy for what is down by such politicians in the name of "containing urban sprawl" and "urban revival" and so forth.

The only place I have seen this urban development strategy work well in the US in all fairness is in Washington DC, but Washington DC is an anomaly with no real local industry aside from overwhelmingly jobs tied to the federal, state, or local governments even with "private sector" contractors and various local businesses with almost all their core business from them.

The strategy works in DC because almost all people there have a vested interest in bigger government no matter how it is sliced, which is the very same reason usually I dismiss the views of such folks for sake of the rest of the country and why I hate that place more than any other where I have lived included here in Philly.

  1. Obviously you've never been to NYC. Rooms in Manhattan start at about $350 on weekends. The extra $300 was propobly for state taxes and an upgrade to a private bathroom.

  2. If he stayed at the 'Econo-Lodge' you would be bashing him for 'making the city look cheap' .

You don't like the mayor, we get it. These cut and paste posts are getting a lil boring though. Think you can come up with something original some time?

Really? We’re going to nitpick a business trip that clocked in at around $1000 in expenses? I’m ball parking here but that cost the city’s tax paying citizens somewhere around 0.3 cents per person.

I’d understand if Bettman and Eisenburger spent $50,000 of city funds at Paris Hilton’s birthday party but a $656 stay at a hotel in Manhattan is hardly a greedy expense for the mayor of Canada’s 9th largest municipality. Its also a worthwhile expense to simply ensure there’s at least warm relations with the people at the NHL.

If my posts are contrary to your support for "all things Fred", it doesn't bother me at all what your position is.........so the same should hold true for you..........debate my thoughts, but for heavens sakes, trying to censor my opinions as if I'm not allowed to have any is poor debating.......

ps............I never make "cut and paste" posts as I always attach my own commentary to anything I quote


                You quoted the Mayor saying: "The premier at some point might want to identify what his vision for Pan Am is ".

                The Mayor must not be reading the Spectator.
                On April 14th John Kernaghan wrote a report which included this:

                 "McGuinty led the campaign to win the Games based on the lack of sports and recreation facilities in the province and the opportunity for renewal projects like Hamilton's west harbour and Toronto's west Don lands, where the athlete's village will be built."
                   I could not find the original quote from McGuinty but John Kernaghan seems to me to be a very solid and reliable reporter.
                  Maybe if the Mayor has to meet with McGuinty to squeeze out some more money from him, he can take this quote with him for ammunition. <!-- s:wink: -->:wink:<!-- s:wink: -->

I agree with your opnion.
Mayor Eisenberger now says he is prepared to go begging to Premier McGuinty for another $30M to $50M of public tax money to fund a 25,000 seat stadium at the west harbour location should the facilitation process not be successful. That idea makes no sense because it does nothing more than turn a 15,000 seat white elephant into a 25,000 seat white elephant at the Rheem site and waste more tens of millions of tax dollars in the process.
How does a 25,000 seat facility at the land-locked Rheem site resolve the accessibility issue? The visiblilty issue? The fact that residents in the area do not want a stadium in their neighbourhood? In other words, how does it resolve any of the fundamental shortcomings cited by Bob Young in his letter of May 6th and suddenly allow the Ticats to be financially viable at that site?
Mr. McGuinty: Do not agree to simply commit more public money in an attempt to save this flawed stadium process. Should the facilitation process fail and before committing any additional public money, fully explore other locations that are capable of attracting the private funds required in order to support the funding formula that has been agreed-upon for the stadium.

Actually I don't support all things Fred. I'm quite unhappy about the way he's handled the situation. The West Harbor site is not 'his' idea. Its the result of a general movement through out North America towards urban intensification and the revitalization of down town cores. Fred is not a visionary nor is he clueless. He's just pushing for what is best for the City and not for what is best for the Ticats as is his job and mandate from the voters. Why pave over parks (Conf. Park) or contribute to sprawl when you can re-use an eyesore brownfield, increase local property values and boost tourism while tying in to a pre-existing mass transit network?

Whether governments pay for this stadium, or not,

bob doesn't believe he can put money in his wallet

operating his business out of the Rheem factory site.

Why is it that some people don't give a damn

whether caretaker bob makes a decent buck
providing the entertainment which they enjoy?

If their boss chopped $50 bucks from
their paycheck they'd be screaming.

I think Fred just doomed any prospect of getting any private investment for any stadium in Hamilton by announcing he will go to the Ontario Govenment to get the extra $50 - 60 million.............what a dumb move......who's going to hand over private cash now ????......why would they?

now he's put McGuinty on the spot.........but, of course, Dalton will have to say no because he's funding the Pan Am games only....

Council needs to put a gag order on Fred...........they do have that power

By the same token deer, once it becomes known that the stadium will be very nice at 25,000 with the extra dollars wherever these come from, a business or two might take notice to want to be associated with this stadium, west harbourt, Aldershot, Conf Park whatever. I assume that an inner Hamilton location won’t garner the dollars of a more visibile site but there still might be some dollars involved at least once they know it isn’t going to be a 15,000 seater.

I would think so too Earl.

Private interests may have initially shunned the project after having looked at the costs of expanding the stadium to accommodate events to draw enough people during the summer months to constitute an 'entertainment precinct' worth developing. If the venue comes for free, the investment in the precinct might now be worthwhile.

All hypothetical without numbers but it sounds right assuming that other issues like parking, access and visibility are adequately addressed or were merely props in posturing for the best deal.

How on earth do you come to that conclusion?.

debate my thoughts, ...,
He [i][b][u]is[/b][/i][/u] debating them! He rebutted your thoughts [u][i][b]directly[/b][/i][/u] regarding the cost of the NYC trip.

You, on the other hand, did not respond to that in kind, but rather hid behind accusations of censorship?

...trying to censor my opinions as if I'm not allowed to have any is poor debating.......
Censor? He can't censor them. He's not a mod.

Well stated. :thup:

McGuinty is too smart to get his hands Dirty
You won't hear from her Personaly
He get some else to do it if needed