Comment 45167

By Mark-Alan Whittle (anonymous) | Posted August 08, 2010 at 15:59:36

Remediating the site should never have been part of the stadium costs, the city jumped the gun by buying the toxified Rheem property before the bid was won, they had no idea of how bad it actually was, they do now, it's in the report. No developers are interested down there because of this cost, never have been, although pipe-dreams are plentiful (White Star Group). If a stadium is no good at either site, why does Raise the Hammer support the west harbour? If you don't support a stadium, why pick one site over the other? All this will be moot Tuesday, one way or the other. Bratina speaks about information that came up in-camera on your video post, why is that information not made public, so people can decide for themselves? The Rheem site cost taxpayers 5 million to buy. We got hosed, period. Rheem laughed all the way to the bank, and got over $600,000 in back-taxes written off when they left town. Sweet deal, but bad for taxpayers, since we are now on the hook for remediation. Cleaning up Brownfields is a noble cause, Hamilton has been at it for years, cleaning them up so taxpaying businesses will buy them, at a huge up-front cost to the city, in the hope that someone might be interested. Unfortunately, big companies like Canada Bread prefer greenfields, and that's exactly what Hamilton gave Canada Bread at a deep, subsidized discount out of desparation. They put in all the infrastructure too, sewers, water and hydro.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds