Raise the Hammer

@Sask

I would disagree with your initial point as to what the Cats are required. The Public has very pubically voiced a desire for the West Harbour location and there is a vested interest by the city to remediate the brown-field currently at that location. It's a abandoned and toxic waste site next to a residential area where kids play and close to rail access and parkland. City Council has a duty to the people who elected them to follow through with the desires of their consituents of which the city of Hamilton re-elected nearly all of them, or elected new councillors opposed to Confederation Park (specfically Brenda Johnson and Judi Partridge) in the most recent election.

As a business partner, investor and tennant for such a major project and are seeking to direct it's location, you need to show the math. You can't just say "Well this site doesn't work for us and this site does" without showing why and how one site trumps the other and why your interests outweight the public interest. After all, how can anyone justify a $60 million expediture ANYWHERE without being able to see how they are going to benefit from it. I've never heard of a business partnership where one partner was left completely in the dark and the other had all of their information readiliy available to the other and the public.

Not only has the team not produced any data as far why the West Harbour won't work, they haven't even produced ANY figures or studies as to why the other sites will. They haven't even given us a business plan, a profit by site projection, or any private sector partnership assurances or have even referenced any third party research group or stadium expert. They claim they have performed these studies, but refuse to release them for reasons that certain won't harm their posistion in the negotations if they are even loosely rooted in factual evidence. Even if they are disputed, releasing the numbers publically allows for the general public to vet the numbers and apply pressure on city council if the West Harbour is as abyssmal as they are making it out to be.

The only thing they have produced is they let the city privately see is their current finncial figures, to pretty much confirm they are losing money at Ivor Wynne and comments without professionals to back them and a couple refrences as to how much other cities have made on Grey Cups of which Hamilton's last Grey Cup costed both the team and the city a lot of money and failed to sell out. The city is putting over $160 million towards the effort, that they did the leg work on, not the Cats who have at best promised $20 million, a NASL soccer franchise and an offer to maintain the facility for the first 10 years (the time which maintanace will be at it's lowest).

They also claim, a brand new stadium at the West Harbour will cost them more then playing out of the outdated Ivor Wynne. I don't know how that's even possible given it is a great PR story to fix that brownfield, it is planned to have direct GO Station access, it is a 1km walk from the city's new bus transit terminal at MacNab St. and is right next to a park that has ample room to tailgate at, with more parking then the CP Rail site offered that they were fine with and around 3km from the 403.

The Cats are a business, and they need to make money, I understand. However if they aren't willing to at least work with the city and produce some figures and facts, then how are they helping the situation?

Comment edited by -Hammer- on 2010-12-23 18:02:24