Show Me The Money At Lansdowne

What do taxpayers get out Lansdowne 2.0?

It’s a very simple question. We already know what Ottawa got out of Lansdowne 1.0. Zippo. In fact, Lansdowne 1.0 was designed so that taxpayers got zippo.

To get that zippo, the city had to spend $129 million to renovate the stadium. Ottawa Sports and Entertainment Group had to commit $117 million to build retail and residential buildings on the site. The city was allowed to take $1 million of revenue a year from the project. That was the waterfall. Which meant that in 129 years, the city would get its money back. By then, the stadium would be rubble and we’d all be dead.

However, the deal was actually worse than that. The $1 million that the city would generate from the site would be put in a fund to repair buildings on the site. Thus taxpayers would get zippo revenue. The so-called waterfall was designed to disguise the fact that the city was simply getting fleeced. By the way, the $4.5 million that was the city’s portion of revenue from the site appears to have been returned to OSEG because the pandemic caused revenue to drop. No doubt OSEG was the only organization in Ottawa that had financial trouble during the pandemic. However, the city maintained that the money it gave OSEG was actually OSEG’s. So why did the city have to vote to approve giving that money to OSEG? If it were OSEG’s, why didn’t they just use it?

So What’s Up With This Lansdowne Land Parcel?

Did the city have to give OSEG permission to use its own money? Odd that.

So let’s look at what OSEG got and the city got. OSEG got residential, from which it generated revenue, and it got parking, from which also generated revenue. OSEG also got retail but it maintains it’s not making revenue from that. OSEG operated the stadium whose revenue was probably part of the money the city received for repairs and which eventually was dispatched.

Now here are a couple of arguments that are disturbing but commonly wheel-barrelled out in a Lansdowne discussion. Try this one. Lansdowne was much better now than it was before the development 1.0.

Yes it is. However, a latrine or a landfill would be better than what was there before. That’s kind of a low bar. The city could have sold the land for a whopping price and not had to deal with anything … like Lansdowne 2.0 or 1.0 for that matter. Or built a park that would have had to address tree-trimming and gardening rather than a half-billion dollars in capital costs.

The other argument that grates is the city would not make money from Lansdowne 1.0 without Lansdowne 2.0. Well Lansdowne 1.0 was not designed to make the city money. Unless you count the $1 million annually (that was dispatched) that would have been put into repairs. Or translated into English, zippo.

So for $330 million, what do taxpayers get for their money? Air rights? People paying for air. Is there a waterfall in that air? Is there a market for those air rights? Probably as much as there is a market for buying air.

If as a taxpayer, you’re laying out a half-billion dollars in a business venture with your ‘partners’, I’d like to know what taxpayers get out of it. As in money.

This is not a exercise in social engineering Lansdowne. This is a business deal.

If the city is putting up money to build things for OSEG to use, where’s the payback? You put up money, you get a return. What return? Lansdowne 1.0 was designed to give taxpayers zippo.

How about Lansdowne 2.0? Why don’t we ask homeowners to sell the air rights on their property. Wonder how much they would get for those rights? As much as we pay for air?

Frankly, a financial benefit, for the Lansdowne 2.0 $330 million that the city is supposed to put up for this so-called business venture, has not been demonstrated. Probably there isn’t one unless you take into account the questionable sale of air rights. Or maybe the city can sell the mineral rights? You know, mine all that land to reclaim all the car oil spilled on the age-old parking lot.

When the owners of the Ottawa Senators built the then-named Palladium, the private investors paid for it. They also paid for a fair chunk of the Highway 417 interchange that served the arena.

So why is the city giving OSEG a rebuilt and renovated stadium. This is a business deal. When did the Redblacks, the 67’s, concerts and Atletico become charities?

Now another questionable response to that one (used liberally by former mayor Jim Watson) is that Lansdowne is different from other private ventures because the stadium is owned by the city.

Well if OSEG recognizes its teams as money-making ventures, sell it the land and the stadium at market price so they can generate the revenue made by their sports teams, concerts and trade shows. When did the developers behind OSEG, rent out their apartments for free? Why is the city renting out the stadium for free?

Don’t have the money to buy the stadium? Dear me. You’ll be forced to go to the banks like the rest of we peons do. They’re happy to lend money to profit-making ventures.

Ask OSEG how it can demonstrate substantial revenue for our $330 million. Remember this is a business deal, not a hospital or a school. Not a charity.

And stuff the air-rights argument into the waterfall file.

If OSEG wants a partnership in a business deal, show us the money. Your partner isn’t making any. How much is OSEG making on the residential? Is that a way to treat your partner?

Or … the city could use its $330 million to make transit work or fill potholes or shovel snow. You know, do things the city is supposed to do rather than give away free money.

That said, this argument completely changes if you roll up wheelbarrows of free money to taxpayers’ doors.

If we all get free money, Lansdowne 2.0 is a great idea.

New City Manager Must Respect Council: BENN

If not, why are we giving away free money to rich guys? To sell air? Is it a waterfall of air?

So here’s an idea. Let’s have city staff or Mayor Mark Sutcliffe or OSEG write a short essay on what benefit is derived by taxpayers from the Lansdowne business deal.

We have lots of space here in The Bulldog to publish it.

Make your case … if you have one.

Ken Gray

 —

Don’t miss our regular features

Everything Ottawa      Full Local     Bulldog Canadian

Opinion    Comments    Breaking News   Hood Hub

Ontario   World    Get Cheap Gas   Big Money

Pop Gossip   Your Home    Relax …

Bulldog Weather    Full Local Sports

Page 2   Page 3   Page 4   Page 5   Page 6

Other features:    Full Bulldog Index    Return to Bulldog Home