So now we know that the committee of the whole endorsed the West Harbour as the site of the "stadium". So the next step is to formally adopt the option in council during the next week. And we also know that there will not be an anchor tenant, as specified by the HostCo as condition for funding. And now a new allegation about fudged numbers to wrongly influence councillors on the committee of the whole was announced by Brad Clark on CHML?
Obviously Mayor Fred has some explaining to do. If building it will not have the Tiger-Cats there, what makes him think that it will be built in the first place? While my friends at Raise the Hammer are cheering as if this was some big victory, the euphoria should be wearing off soon, because the fact still is that this stadium may not be built at all.
There are also allegations of bad faith bargaining on both sides, but here's what I know:
- Bob Young rightfully preferred Confederation Park as the site for the new stadium. And Chad Collins somehow got that option removed, despite the fact that the HCA has been calling for some commerical interest to develop there. Football is played in the summer and Confederation Park is always hopping with activity during the summer. It is a major meeting place in the city during the summer. So it does seem to be a logical place for the stadium. Now that's logic at work, folks. So why wasn't it one of the options? That's a question that Mr. Collins will need to answer while he still has the job.
- Fred Eisenberger took a hard line stance on the West Harbour since day one. And during mediation with Michael Fenn, he did an end-around and began talks with AEG to possibly manage the new facility. That's when Bob Young knew that he wasn't listening to anyone.
- Knowing that Bob's business case wouldn't even be looked at or even considered, he did the one thing he knew he could do - he pulled out of the discussion and with it his funding.
- Let's face facts here. Ivor Wynne Stadium never had the facilities to handle the number of people that go in and out of it. Parking in people's yards, walking 5, 10 even 15 minutes to and from parking if you're not lucky enough to get a spot at Scott Park. Let's stop pretending that this creates a great game experience, because to a lot of regional supporters, it doesn't.
- The East Mountain was a compromise. And people who are using words like "urban sprawl" and "big box" obviously haven't been up there lately.
- The West Harbour still has traffic management and mobility issues to contend with, along with indirect parking arrangements. Ivor Wynne Stadium all over again.
- Apparently there is more to lose with the East Mountain facility than the West Harbour in property taxes.
- Brad Clark, fresh from his Michael Buble concert began a new firestorm about fudged numbers to make the West Harbour the only viable choice, but that could have been to deflect his own problem with him not being there to vote on the stadium recommendation. Obviously, his vote wouldn't changed a thing anyway, but emotions are running high and the city is in a volatile state as it is.
And is Brad Clark's allegation a red herring? I can't say. I didn't see these reports, but it does bring a lot of questions to the table. We'd have to see all the numbers before we can say beyond a doubt that some deception to meet an end has been in the works.
And what about the lack of an anchor tenant? Does Fred actually think he can go it alone? Is a professional soccer team coming out of the blue? There is a person that has the right to put a decently levelled team in Hamilton and that's the guy Fred just dissed.
I keep hearing west harbour proponents calling Bob Young a bully and he's been bargaining in bad faith. So let's mash this one up. Who signalled a concern and was shoved away for it? Who took a compromise and tried to make the best of it? Who was shut out of the inital discussions? And who figured out that this never a conversation from the start and just decided to walk away? Wouldn't you? And after you just got slapped around some more and they ask you to come back and talk, would you?
This is where the problem lies. When one was trying to have a conversation, the other never listened and also decided to talk with someone else about managing the facility at the west harbour. There was never a conversation. There was never dialogue and Fred expects the Cats to come back to the table after giving them the Heisman?
Something stinks here and it isn't coming from Jarvis or Wake Forest.
And that's what bothers me here. There was no dialogue. And to bring this about on Raise the Hammer is just asking to get faded out by people who disagree with you despite the lucidity of the argument. I could Twitter about this all day and it wouldn't change a thing because first of all it's not a good place to have a debate on and it's the same garbage over again.
What I'm sure of, but I don't know, is that the majority of those who support the West Harbour are the same ones who don't care about the financial viability of the Tiger-Cats, the heart and soul of this city, and would rather see them leave, potentially losing the prospect of an NHL franchise and the Bulldogs with them. And with nothing substantial going on at the west harbour after the games, does Fred really want to be in this crowd?
Oh to be a fly on the wall when Mayor Fred and Ian Troop meet...
No comments:
Post a Comment