Transit Or Lansdowne? Transit

At least former councillor Alex Cullen has his priorities in order which is more than you can say for city staff and city council.

cullen.tweet .transit

Can’t say I’m crazy about paying more for the lousy transit we’re getting in this city but I’d rather pay $8 for something that does some good rather than the $419-million frill at Lansdowne.

It would be nice if someone could give us a good reason to pour that money into Lansdowne. Haven’t heard one yet.

Ken Gray



City Wants Ideas On Saving Money … Stop LansdowneCouncil To Discuss LRT Behind Closed DoorsOttawa’s Exodus Begins: PATTONBugs On A Bus: TOP 10 LIST .your .bulldog


Don’t miss our regular features
Everything Ottawa      Full Local     Bulldog Canadian
Opinion    Comments    Breaking News    Auto
Ontario   World    Get Cheap Gas   Big Money
Pop Gossip   Your Home    Relax …   Tech
Bulldog Weather    Full Local Sports
TV/Movies   Travel
Page 2   Page 3   Page 4   Page 5   Page 6


Other features:    Full Bulldog Index    Return to Bulldog Home

2 Responses

  1. Ron Benn says:

    Councillor Tierney’s comment is nothing more than pitiful political gamesmanship.

    An $8 surcharge is not even close to a rounding error on the average property tax bill. It is such a trivial number that I am prepared to pay my share and kick in another $8 to cover Councillor Tierney’s share.

    As for what passes for logic on Lansdowne continues to astound me. Two councillors (Lo and Carr) are reported to say they only approved a $10 million expenditure to get a better understanding of Lansdowne 2.0. Is staff aware of this limitation of approvals? Weren’t there some by-laws regarding the zoning for Lansdowne approved along with that $10 million “next steps” funding?

    Coincidentally about the same amount (25% of $40 million = $10 million) will be allocated to affordable housing from the sale of the air rights. Except that that $10 million is just an accounting allocation from one city budget line item to another. It is not fresh dollars from OSEG.

    How they can consider $10 million as a nominal “see your bet” to stay in the Lansdowne poker game on one hand while claiming the coincidentally same amount a hard won bonus for affordable housing. Incredible, but not in a good way.

    As I said. Pitiful political gamesmanship.

  2. Dan Stankovic says:

    Another example of misplaced priorities and misguided thinking. The Lansdowne 2.0 funding model assumes a minimum of $20 million will come from the province/federal governments to help pay for one-half of a new stadium and an event centre (hockey arena) because “other CFL and OHL have received funds from senior levels of government and there is no reason why Ottawa could not expect some level of support”. Yet the recent OC Transpo budget assumes $0 from the Province or Feds to support transit which unlike sports is an essential public service.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Paid Content

Home   Full Bulldog Index