Rider Dome is dead

There were times during Winnipeg's prolonged stadium debate, with ever changing locations, designs, cost estimates and funding arrangements, where it may have seemed as though Regina would get a domed stadium built before Winnipeg even got a pile in ground. But alas, we appear to be actually building something over at the U of M whilst Regina's dream appears to be dead.

The Saskatchewan Party government said Tuesday that the current proposal will be scrapped if the federal government doesn't agree by the end of the month to help fund the project. And Premier Brad Wall said the province may not take the lead role in any future stadium proposals.

From the Regina Leader Post. An agreement with CP Rail to purchase the land expires at the end of the month, hence the deadline.

So, they need the government to chip in $100 million for this stadium ... by the end of the month ... two weeks after telling Quebec City and the province of Quebec to go take a hike. I'm thinking ... ahhhhhh .. not gonna happen.

Now there is a difference between the proposed Regina funding plan and the proposed Quebec funding plan. Regina's is a P3, and Quebec's was a "Give us some money. C'mon man, show us some love. I know you got some.. Come ooooooon. No? Alright, then let us use the gas tax. No? Alright, then fuck you. We don't need you anyhow, assholes."

Had Quebec been looking at a partnership with private investment, they may have got their cash:

In Ottawa on Thursday, Conservative ministers reiterated their government would only commit money to construction if private investors did the same. - tor sun -

But that's beside the point. The point is that Quebec didn't get any money so neither will Regina. I don't care if the money is coming from the P3 fund, or the gas tax, or the House of Commons cafeteria budget; if Ottawa contributes $100m to a stadium in Regina there will be riots in Quebec. All of Quebec, not just Quebec City.

But that's not Regina's only problem. They also have a problem with the other "P":

A lack of private sector investment may have been a "stumbling block" in getting funding approval .... the discussions seem to revolve around things like naming rights and sponsorships rather than direct investment in the project.

Looks like it's crumbling old Mosaic for you greenies for another decade. Tee hee.

***

I dropped in on Winnipeg Internet Pundits on Wednesday to add my punditry about rent controls. You can find the podcast here. My bit comes on about 45 minutes in.

I'm not really a natural, but it was fun and I thank Tessa and the gang for letting me join in.

Charge more: problem solved!

When it became known that the newest, revised, Blue Bomber stadium deal would plunge the Blue and Gold $85 million in debt, the obvious question was: how is a team that lost money four of the last five years* going to pay off $85 million??

The answer: playing well. Well, okay, that's just my solution. The official answer:

1. Facility fee of $6 a ticket.

2. Entertainment tax of 10 per cent on each ticket sold.

3. Increased ticket sales, corporate suites and parking revenue.

4. Naming rights.

Would I pay $6 more for a ticket? Ya, probably. Just having enough leg room is worth $6 to me. What's that? Oh right .. the entertainment tax ... Jeeze .. This is starting to feel like buying an airline ticket. Facility fee, entertainment tax, and whatever fees Ticketmaster screws you with when you buy through them. How much is a ticket? $40. Okay I'll take two. Kay, $120 please.

Alright: so new tax and new fee ..would I pay $10 more per ticket? Probably. I have good job and only go to a couple games a year anyhow. Would a single income family of 4 pay $10 more per ticket? That I can't answer. It might be a tough call.

I don't doubt that the first couple of years will see a boost in ticket sales, but after the novelty of the new stadium wears off the decision to buy tickets will once again come down to dollars and cents. The more dollars, the fewer tickets will be sold.

Which is why item #3: increased ticket sales, is a problem. You know how you increase ticket sales? Decrease the price. Selling more tickets while increasing the price is a dubious business plan. It might work out if this were a three year proposition, but this is a 44 year commitment here. There are going to be stretches in those 44 years when the Bombers fail to make the playoffs and struggle to get asses in the seats, and during those years the Bombers will get crushed under the weight of the $4.5 million annual mortgage payments. And what happens in that case? The province will have to bail them out. Or they go bankrupt, in which case the Bank of You and Me ends up holding the bag anyhow.

Not to mention that 44 years from now, if not earlier, this ball park won't be so "world class" anymore and will have increasing maintenance and repair costs. We may even be replacing this sucker before it's paid off.

So ultimately this isn't Bomber debt -- it's provincial debt. It is community debt. It is taxpayer debt. All of this stuff about paying off the stadium though increased revenues and TIFs and whatever is all just slight of hand. There is no private money going into this project because the powers that be committed to a specific partner with a specific project that turned out to be a dud, so however you slice it, this is a publicly-funded project.

And whatever .. so be it. I do think we need a new stadium: The seats in the current one make me feel like Andre the Giant, and investing more money into that dump would be a travesty. It's not unreasonable for a government to fund an entertainment facility like this every so often. (what is unreasonable is for a government to back a failing team to the tune of $200m over 6 years, but that's another story..) It would be nice if they were honest about it, though. (I know ... dreamland ... right ...)

Just out of curiosity ... point number 4: Naming rights. How is this new revenue? Is Canad Inns not paying for the naming rights to the current stadium? Or are they also selling naming rights for the goal posts, mascots and the touchdown canon? Oh look! Half Pints Buzz is driving the CentrePort airplane around the WRHA canon!

Anyhow... Go Bombers!

*For reference: Bomber revenues:

Bomber costs:

source

100% of people surveyed support the new stadium

Perhaps we should wait for a few other people to vote before we consider the results "statistically significant".

After all the silliness about shoe-horning the stadium into Point Douglas, the right decision was made. I will be glad to see the old stadium go, and I think this is a fair deal for taxpayers. However, I question the accuracy of this statement:

Under previously announced terms, the deal will see the city of Winnipeg sell Creswin the existing Canad Inns Stadium site at full market value

"Full market value" is what you pay when you submit the highest bid on the open market. It's not what you pay when you shut everybody else out of the market and negotiate a price over crumpets and tea in somebody's living room. I am not advocating scrapping the deal because of this clause, or anything. I am just saying they should be a little more honest with their wording, using a phrase like: "something resembling market value".

So, David Asper, have you stopped smoking?

Beyond Asperdome: Thinking Big

My first thought after seeing the conceptual drawings of Asper's vision last Saturday was: "well, you can't accuse him of not thinking big." (My second thought was "I wonder if there are more jobs for conceptual artists in Winnipeg than Architects"). Turns out he's not just building a stadium: he's building a stadium, moving roads, building bridges and underpasses, destroying buildings, renovating buildings, building a "Disney-esque" waterpark, building a hotel, building an underground lair (oops, I think I was supposed to keep that one to myself).

If you don't like the plan, don't blame Asper. You can't fault him for this. In fact, I could argue that Winnipeg needs more visionaries and big thinkers with big ideas. We live in a province that loves the status quo, and in a city who's idea of development is building neighbourhoods of stucco houses adjacent to big box stores, connected by traffic lights. Not a lot of big thinking going on there.

I think Asper should be commended for putting forth this plan. At the very least, it got us thinking and talking about a neighbourhood that is largely underdeveloped and under-utilized.

That doesn't mean that we have to accept his vision of course. I still have serious concerns about it, and I am not sure it is necessarily the best way to develop Point Douglas. I have concerns about the cost. He is ostensibly asking for less money, but after you expropriate the land and do the environmental impact studies and riverbank stabilization and decontamination, and infrastructure changes and archiving of the artifacts that are dug up, etc etc. it is going to cost a big bundle of money. I also am suspicious of the so-called "fair market value" that Asper will pay for the existing stadium site. How do you know if it's fair market value if you don't put the land on the market? That's something to keep a close eye on.

As for what's best for Point Douglas, the opinion of the residents is much more important than my own. But if the objective is to create a friendly or vibrant neighbourhood, then acres of parking lots and a seldom-used sports facility is not the solution. I don't care how many well-dressed white people they put in the conceptual drawings. Maybe there are other visionaries out there with better ideas. Or maybe it's just a matter of rezoning some lots, cleaning up the derelict properties and encouraging small-scale development with TIFs and tax breaks. TIFs could be used for more than just stadiums, you know.

Beyond Asperdome: bottom line

After writing my last eloquent post about the tight fit of a stadium in Point Douglas, I have since heard that Asper is in fact planning a 30-40,000 seat stadium. I suppose it might work if it were more of a bowl design, with smaller side grandstands and more end zone seating.

But really, who the hell knows what's going on? There are so many theories and suggestions out there on the internet that I don't even want to try to keep track, or add further speculation to the pile of speculation that's already filling up cyberspace. Instead, I'm going to lie low on this issue for a while, except to say this:

Whatever the plan is, it should not be forced on us. We shouldn't compromise for the sake of getting a deal done or compelling David Asper to quit smoking. If the terms and conditions are not right -- if the stadium is not what we need it to be, or if Asper ("Asker" as they're saying on NewWinnipeg) makes out like a bandit while the tax payers get screwed -- then there needs to be a way to stop the deal. Unfortunately I am not confident that we'll see that. Doer, while pretending to be responsible with the purse strings, will ultimately cave in to anything; Sammy would love nothing more than to leave a stadium as a legacy, especially as he has done very little else to be remembered by; David wants his empire; and Vic Toews ... I don't know if we can count on Vic.

There is only one entity that can give this proposal -- whatever it ends up being -- the sanity check it needs: you and me - the people of Winnipeg.

Beyond Asperdome: Ouch, that's tight!

Stop it -- it hurts! Ouch ouch ouch ouch!

... that's that downtown Winnipeg will be saying after we stuff a stadium up it's ass.

A 24,000 seat stadium is not big enough. It's a non-starter. If we build a stadium it should be somewhere in the 35,000 seat range, and have space to expand to host a Grey Cup. So, lets have a look at McMahon stadium (37,000) and see how that fits in downtown Winnipeg.

Just for fun. I'll be careful. I promise...

First, Point Douglas:


d'oh! Are we allowed to build a grandstand over a river? And what's that north of the tracks? A park? Are we destroying a park to build a parking lot? Just asking.

Ok, so let's check out the other location -- south of the Convention Centre:

Jesus, did anybody bother looking at a map before coming up with this one? The field barely fits in there, never mind the grandstands.

This is stupid. I don't know how this is going to turn out, but I have a feeling that once Sammy, Vic and David are done with us, we're all going to be reaching for the aloe vera cream.

Beyond Asperdome: Urban Goliath

I suspect that those who were upset that a real estate agent and urban sprawl advocate became head of Winnipeg's Property Planning and Development department will also not be impressed that a Federal bean counter is now telling us where to build a new stadium.

Well, that's not exactly what's happening, but pretty close. The Polo Park location was the best part of the old deal. Now it appears that the Polo location is out of the picture because Vic Toews has made funding contingent on the stadium being in a downtown location. Now, if there were a logical place to put it near down town, then OK. But that's not the case. The options are:

• Point Douglas, where an under-sized stadium will be shoe-horned in between rail way tracks and the river, with only three small roads (including one that goes through a residential neighbourhood) available to carry traffic to and from the games
• South of the convention center, where an under-sized stadium will sit empty for 350* days a year, doing nothing to make downtown more vibrant.

My message to Vic:

Vic: let us put our damned stadium where we want to put the damned stadium. If you want to fund it, fine. Don't force us to compromise by squeezing in a stadium that's too small in a location where it's not appropriate. If you want to fund a 24,000 seat stadium, give the money to Halifax!

*it will be used more often if it is domed, but it won't be domed because that would be crazy expensive and would also involve a big payoff to True North/Chipman who have a negotiated monopoly on large indoor events in Winnipeg.

related commentary from the peanut gallery:
Policy Frog one and two
Progressive Graham
Marginalized Action Dino
The Hack
Pissing on the Stadium
Rise and Sprawl
did I miss you? Let me know.

Another week, another $100 million bucks

It seems as though the day after I left the U of M, they started to fix everything. Nothing happened while I was actually enrolled, but then I leave and suddenly Smart Park springs up out of an empty field, the engineering building is torn down and rebuilt, a brand spanking new residence is built, a parkade goes up .... and they're just getting going. Recently they've requested proposals for a hotel on the site of the Smart Park, and this week Project Domino was revealed:

Retiring University of Manitoba president Emoke Szathmary unveiled a $100-million-plus legacy project Wednesday that will change the face of the Fort Garry campus.

All told, 13 faculties and departments will be affected by the massive undertaking.

The big question of course: where is the money going to come from?

"Of course, there's an expectation government would participate," said (Education Minister) McGifford. "I don't think I want to talk about that today." [*]

Maybe the government is finally getting a little tired of all of these people grabbing for tax dollars?

It seems that every time you watch the news or open the paper there is another request for government money. The standard operating procedure is to announce the plan first then request the money second -- create some fancy conceptual drawings and a flashy web site, then wage a PR campaign to suck money out of the government. You are all familiar with some of the recent examples:

• Upper Fort Garry ($9m)
• The new Blue Bombers stadium ($80m)
  
• and of course the grand-daddy of them all: The Museum for Human Rights ($160m plus $22m per annum for operating costs plus free land and property taxes)
  

In a way, I think Gail Asper's success in securing government support for the Museum has set a precedent for the PR-driven MO that seems to be used to get funding these days. I'll call it the "Apser Effect", if you will.

I'm not saying that I oppose the U of M Domino plan ... in fact I think our Universities are tremendously important and we should invest in them. I just question the methodology of releasing your plan to the pubic first and then pressuring the government for money through the media. Is this how they do things in other cities, or is this Asper Effect our own little quirky way of doing business around here?

New Stadium for Halifax

Another thing ... Halifax needs a new stadium more then we do. I know that somebody from Halifax visits this blog. Whoever you are, you should spread the word that the Feds are chipping in $30 mil for a new stadium here. Maybe that will put some pressure on somebody out there to get the ball rolling on a stadium for the Schooners again. It's high time Nova Scotia had a team in the CFL.

Do I hear $45 Million?

There must be an election coming or something. Or maybe Vic Toews is taking the advice of the CCPA and trying to spend our way out of a recession. I don't know what's going on, but in a matter of days we went from "not bloody likely" to $15m-$20m to $30m in possible funding for a new Winnipeg football stadium (I'll call it the "Asper Dome" even though it doesn't have a roof, just 'cause it has a nice ring to it.) With a little more sweet-talking from David, he just might get the 40 mil he's looking for.

There are other bloggers out there who are doing some great commentary on this subject, so I'll keep it short. I am torn on the issue, to be honest. There is a lot of public money at stake, and David Asper could potentially make out like a bandit. He probably has a good chuckle (or possibly an evil laugh) every time his proposal gets one step closer to reality. However, I am a Bomber fan, and I do not like the seating at the current stadium at all. It's way too cramped. If it takes $80 million of tax payer money to make me more comfortable watching a football game, well then, I'm tempted to support it.

I'm just not sure it should take that much money. Policy Frog questioned the price tag a few days ago here, (but keep in mind the project involves concurrently building the new stadium and tearing down the old one on the same site, which has to add cost.) There has also been some questions about the process that selected the Asper Dome. Nobody seems to know what the decision-making criteria was in selecting that option over the Ledohowski vision. So all I'm trying to say here is, if we're going to dump a bunch of tax dollars into this project, give us details and make the process transparent so that we we have some idea if we're getting decent value for our money.