Comment 53322

By Robert D (anonymous) | Posted December 20, 2010 at 16:02:13

TellMeItAin'tSo said:

"This has been a train wreck ever since you all jumped in the West Harbour bandwagon. And now you blame Bob Young..."

You make it sound like the West Harbour was some ill-conceived notion that was slapped together and all us lemmings simply followed it blindly to disastrous results.

I think your comment seems to ignore the fact that no alternative site has undergone as much study, debate, public discussion, and consideration as the West Harbour has. It is the best site for a stadium according to numerous studies and decisions of council. Supporting these studies and decisions should not be considered "jumping on the bandwagon" as they were subject to significant thought and debate. Our support was not won on some whim.

The ti-cats "alternate sites" of the East Mountain, and now the CP railyards, by contrast, were very much slapped together last minute without proper studies and planning, which is why we're only finding out now that the costs are substantially more than first advertised. Maybe I could say council was too fast to "jump on the CP lands" bandwagon? Or that ti-cat fans were too quick to jump on the "east mountain" bandwagon?

Maybe Bob Young didn't "screw the city", but he sure has painted himself into a corner, because after several years of discussion, negotiation (both behind the scenes and public), planning with his private partners, paying for his own studies, he has nothing to show for it. Yes, Hamilton has wasted the same discussions, staff time, etc. with studies and also has nothing to show for it, but the difference is this: Council doesn't need a football stadium, and Bob Young does.


My own point of view, I don't like that this continues being framed by both sides as a "failure" of the other to compromise, or a failure of negotiation.

Each side in a negotiation has certain minimum requirements. The ti-cats have a business plan, and had minimum requirements of a new stadium in order to make their plan succeed. The city has a plan, and had minimum requirements of the new stadium in order to dedicate city funds towards it. If the ti-cats and the city couldn't come together to decide on a site that's acceptable to both (ie. that meets at least the minimum requirements of both), it's regretable, but that doesn't mean either one "failed", or that one was trying to screw/murder the other. Maybe there are just no sites within Hamilton that would be acceptable to both parties? Whose "fault" would that be?

Should the city have lowered their standards to please the ti-cats? Should the ti-cats have just thrown their business plan out the window and played at the west harbour? I don't think it's required that either of them move any lower than their "minimum requirements". Maybe in this case there just wasn't any mutually acceptable solution.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

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

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools