There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?
Recent Articles
- Justice for Indigenous Peoples is Long Overdueby Ryan McGreal, published June 30, 2021 in Commentary
(0 comments)
- Third-Party Election Advertising Ban About Silencing Workersby Chantal Mancini, published June 29, 2021 in Politics
(0 comments)
- Did Doug Ford Test the 'Great Barrington Declaration' on Ontarians?by Ryan McGreal, published June 29, 2021 in Special Report: COVID-19
(1 comment)
- An Update on Raise the Hammerby Ryan McGreal, published June 28, 2021 in Site Notes
(0 comments)
- Nestlé Selling North American Water Bottling to an Private Equity Firmby Doreen Nicoll, published February 23, 2021 in Healing Gaia
(0 comments)
- Jolley Old Sam Lawrenceby Sean Burak, published February 19, 2021 in Special Report: Cycling
(0 comments)
- Right-Wing Extremism is a Driving Force in Modern Conservatismby Ryan McGreal, published February 18, 2021 in Special Report: Extremism
(0 comments)
- Municipalities Need to Unite against Ford's Firehose of Land Use Changesby Michelle Silverton, published February 16, 2021 in Special Report
(0 comments)
- Challenging Doug Ford's Pandemic Narrativeby Ryan McGreal, published January 25, 2021 in Special Report: COVID-19
(1 comment)
- The Year 2020 Has Been a Wakeup Callby Michael Nabert, published December 31, 2020 in Special Report: COVID-19
(0 comments)
- The COVID-19 Marshmallow Experimentby Ryan McGreal, published December 22, 2020 in Special Report: COVID-19
(0 comments)
- All I Want for Christmas, 2020by Kevin Somers, published December 21, 2020 in Entertainment and Sports
(1 comment)
- Hamilton Shelters Remarkably COVID-19 Free Thanks to Innovative Testing Programby Jason Allen, published December 21, 2020 in Special Report: COVID-19
(0 comments)
- Province Rams Through Glass Factory in Stratfordby Doreen Nicoll, published December 21, 2020 in Healing Gaia
(0 comments)
- We Can Prevent Traffic Deaths if We Make Safety a Real Priorityby Ryan McGreal, published December 08, 2020 in Special Report: Walkable Streets
(5 comments)
- These Aren't 'Accidents', These Are Resultsby Tom Flood, published December 04, 2020 in Special Report: Walkable Streets
(1 comment)
- Conservation Conundrumby Paul Weinberg, published December 04, 2020 in Special Report
(0 comments)
- Defund Police Protest Threatens Fragile Ruling Classby Cameron Kroetsch, published December 03, 2020 in Special Report: Anti-Racism
(2 comments)
- Measuring the Potential of Biogas to Reduce GHG Emissionsby John Loukidelis and Thomas Cassidy, published November 23, 2020 in Special Report: Climate Change
(0 comments)
- Ontario Squanders Early Pandemic Sacrificeby Ryan McGreal, published November 18, 2020 in Special Report: COVID-19
(0 comments)
Article Archives
Blog Archives
Site Tools
Feeds
By realfreeenterpriser (registered) | Posted August 09, 2010 at 21:28:03
Mayor Fred Eisenberger and Members of Council,
Each time a municipal council spends public money, even on the most minor things, it’s making an investment in our community. That investment should always be measured by the value that taxpayers receive and whether or not it provides the most benefit for the most people. In short, is it being spent wisely, for the common good and in the public interest? For you, as a Councillor, fulfilling that measure is a public trust. On Tuesday August 10 you will be asked to spend tens of millions of dollars of public money and to choose between two proposed sites for a stadium for Hamilton. The decision you have to make is daunting but it is also defining; defining both of you and your vision and indeed of our city. It will undoubtedly be the most important decision of your political life and it will signal either Hamilton’s coming of age or its regression back to the failed ways of yesterday.
The differences between the two sites are stark-
One rehabilitates a brownfield; the other paves a greenfield.
One promotes various forms of transportation; the other is virtually exclusive to cars.
One will bring an LRT; the other will surely preclude it.
One uses city-owned land, the other takes tax-paying employment land off the map.
One expands our tax base, the other shrinks it.
One brings critical mass to our downtown; the other further sucks the life out of it.
One promotes our waterfront; the other takes people away from it.
One fulfils the intent and purpose of the Future Fund, the other does the polar opposite.
One comes in within budget; the other will cost an extra $50-80 million of public money.
and most importantly
One keeps years of election promises to downtown businesses, the other betrays them.
But if those differences aren’t enough to convince you that the West Harbour site is the one that provides the greatest benefit for the most people and businesses in Hamilton, ask yourself this simple question, which site does the LEAST harm to our city as a whole.
Hamilton is an emerging post-industrial city unlike any other in the Province. We are not Mississauga nor do we want to be. Similar cities in the United States, like Pittsburgh and Cleveland and Baltimore have revitalized themselves by doing precisely what we have an opportunity to do, what YOU have an opportunity to do; build stadia downtown, open up the waterfront and provide public transit. Only a West Harbour location lets you do those things while an east mountain location precludes them and is more expensive to boot.
The Tiger-Cat announcement of late today was as predictable as the sun coming up tomorrow. After being part of the Pan Am “team” and committing to “work with whatever site is chosen”, the Tiger-Cats have double-crossed you, as a Councillor, and us, as a city with a string of last minute threats, ultimatums and political interference, all designed to siphon the most public money into the fewest hands. Don’t let them do that.
The people of Hamilton know that the West Harbour would provide the Tiger-Cats with the newest and best stadium in the league and a site infinitely better than Ivor Wynne. And, unlike a lot of cities, they’re prepared to support that. But they also want as many people and businesses as possible to share in the benefit of such a massive expenditure, that is, essentially, a public subsidy.
They want you to honour your public trust and ensure that public money, their money, is spent wisely, on the common good and in the public interest. Only the West Harbour does that. It’s best for all of us, not just some of us.
Permalink | Context