NDP loaning David Asper 75M or 90M - Good or Bad idea?

The Selinger government will guarantee a $75-million loan to David Asper to build a new stadium for the Winnipeg Blue Bombers.

According to sources, here’s how the new deal works: the province will still contribute $20 million while Ottawa kicks in $15 million, as originally agreed to. The added wrinkle is a loan for Asper in the range of $75 million that is guaranteed by the province to get construction started on the new stadium, which will also be used by the U of M Bisons and be ready for use by the start of the 2012 CFL season.

sper, the would-be owner of both the stadium and the community-owned team, will be given 20 months to come through with his part of the deal, which he plans to finance by building a high-end, open-air retail mall on the current site of Canada Inns Stadium.

If he can’t get the development started, the team will remain publicly owned and the city will sell the Polo Park property to the highest bidder. The province, meanwhile, will recoup its costs over a number of years via property tax revenue handed over by the city from whomever buys the sought-after site.

Beyond horrible.

David Asper has done nothing to indicate he has any business sense, whatsoever. If the Government had any sense, they would go begging, on their hands and knees, for Leo Ledohowski to rescue the stadium deal.

LOL, this does not surprise me especially after the insane budget the NDP announced recently.

I am amazed that Selinger didn't build the 130 million dollar stadium and give the football club to Asper no strings attached.

IMHO, the deal should die. But they wont let it because we have all been fooled into believing that this stadium is necessary, and Asper is the only one in the universe that can make it happen.

Shenanigans

taxpayers loan 75 million to asper, who is still technically still in bankruptcy protection with canwest. this is beyond stupid. do not the citizens of this city have a right to any accountability?

Please djh, at least pretend you've done some research.

David Asper is not in bankruptcy. David Aspers company, Creswin, is not in bankruptcy. David Asper does not run Canwest. That would be his brother Leonard.

I one of the people who must have consumed Dave Asper's Koolaid because I do believe that we need a new stadium, as the current one has proved its usefulness and should be lifecycled.

I thought Asper was going to bring $100M of his own money to the table. The public will want to know why this is now involving a $75M loan from the NDP.

I think this entire proposal needs to be scrapped, along with the no competition clause the MTS Centre has in place. As long as there is a clause in place that keeps us from building a closed roof stadium (as long as public funds are involved), then I don't see a point. An open air stadium in this climate is beyond stupid.

I'd be all for a closed stadium similar in size to the Alerus Center in Grand Forks. I believe they levied a short term sales and hotel tax to pay for it. I'd be all for a 5 year 1% PST increase and something like a hotel tax added to pay for a proper stadium that fit's our climate here.

I have no interest in ever watching the Bombers play after Labour Day outdoors. EVER.

Combine the closed roof stadium with the funds needed to replace the convention center and you kill 2 birds with one stone. Add a hotel and the waterpark (which is taking forever) to the complex and you have a real winner. Unfortunately this sounds a lot like Leo's original Headingley plan (plus a roof) and it's obvious he's not welcome at the party for some reason.

Open stadium, with a huge influx of public funds paying for a private owner to take the team is a super duper stupid idea.

Is there room to put a stadium next to the Convention Centre or could there be if the two were sort of combined, with a hotel?

Premier Sellingher is spinning it uniquely. He is lending the money to the Bombers, which in turn, will give it to Asker. But the loan is not to Asker though....it's to the Bombers.


,,,,and on a sidew note...

Waverly West is being developed to STOP URBAN SPRAWL btw. WTF???

Premier Dumbfcuk!!! WAVERLEY WEST IS URBAN SPRAWL!!!

And we wonder why kids are leaving this province?

[the above Sellingher stuff was on 'OB this morning]

Triniman wrote:Is there room to put a stadium next to the Convention Centre or could there be if the two were sort of combined, with a hotel?

The Convention Centre is crying that they are too small though...and are looking to expand themselves as it is.

The one thing the downtown does NOT need is a stadium added to the mix.

Actually....if you really think about it.....

....the way the downtown is looking, it might not be a bad idea to blow away a few city blocks and make some sporting facilities...

Why not bulldoze the Convention Centre and incorporate it into a new covered stadium that would cover the current Convention Centre lot and the parking lot across the street ? The MTS Centre has proven that parking downtown is not the huge issue it was made out to be initially.

The footprint of the combined 2 lots is more than large enough for an Alerus sized building. If you need some more width you can always build OVER Edmonton and Carlton and run both those street through an underpass under the building. Off course that would require big thinking and vision, something this city is sorely lacking. If there's really not enough space, then move it elsewhere...either to the U of M site or the Headingly site Leo proposed.

Bottom line is it can be done, and with a few innovative funding solutions it can be done with relatively little impact to the average joe and without incurring any new debt.

This could be a good deal for us taxpayers, if only we could be assured a good rate of return on the loan.
Creswin should not receive profit from the retail side of the deal until the loan is paid off.

The Stadium plan at the U of M is good. Sharing facilities with the Bisons just makes sense.

Hmmmm....two football teams using the same field...okey dokey....

I don't think this is a great idea. But I also wasn't a fan of going with his original plan because part of it had the requirement that he needed to get renters for the polo park site and before his proposal was accepted over other offers they should have told him to remove that clause, or they would go with an offer with less strings attached.
I'm amazed that we can actually build something that's going to be called a 'stadium' for such a low price these days and really question how much time has been spent verifying the pricetag. I'd actually be more comfortable lending $150M if he was trying to build a 250-300M stadium than lending $75M for a 130M stadium because $250-300M is a value that I'd believe to be a more reasonable estimate for a facility worth building. In general I'm in support of building a new facility, but I don't know if I believe the pricetag with todays construction costs and would rather see them take a more serious look at other offers instead of continually following up with Asper's even when the overall development strategy doesn't seem very sound. And with Ikea coming, drawing clients to the St. James area might not work very well. And in 20 months? Not likely.

sure almost seems like this might have been the plan since last september.

It's no different than the museum insofar as the overall adgenda appears to be:

Get out some kind of number...just pick one, get all the levels of government on board and committed with taxpayer money, then get shovels in the ground before anyone can say anything....once the shovels are in the ground, then go back to the taxpayers saying "we need more money, or your half built stadium won't get built at all"....seen it before.

Heck it's still happening...

I'd have no problem with that project halting right now and remaining half-baked forever. It would be properly branded the Taxpayers Rights Monment. Symbolically - that would be great and an inspiration to people that have had enough of the nonsense that Estoban properly describes above.

Alot of these arguments were present when the ACC was built in TO for that matter in Quebec with their new stadium . I do not hear you all complaining about that one , tax dollars in one form or another will go into it . Just like most major sites in the US of A .

Pavolo wrote:Alot of these arguments were present when the ACC was built in TO for that matter in Quebec with their new stadium . I do not hear you all complaining about that one , tax dollars in one form or another will go into it . Just like most major sites in the US of A .

Well, the reason people were complaining about the situation in toronto is because the Maple Leafs were upset that the original design of the ACC was not to their liking, and actually threatened to build their own arena and leave the ACC for the Raptors, while demanding the same concessions from the city.

As for the Quebec situation, there is tons of opposition to funding a $400 million arena with public money. In fact, it probably will not happen. If the government is dumb enough to subsidize the new $400 million arena in Quebec, NHL teams like Edmonton, Calgary, and even non-NHL teams like Winnipeg, Hamilton, and Kitchener will be demanding the same.

It will not stop there. Cities wanting football stadiums like Regina, Calgary, Winnipeg, Hamilton, Toronto, halifax, etc will demand the same concessions. Quebec has no chance of hell of acquiring $400 million from public funds to build their arena.

FlyingRat wrote:The Stadium plan at the U of M is good. Sharing facilities with the Bisons just makes sense.

My beef about the UofM location is traffic. Pembina and Bison drive northbound are going to be a parking lot until you get to Bishop Grandin. And 95% of all traffic is going to come from this direction, since it's in the far south of the city!

I think traffic will be okay. The existing stadium is completely surrounded by bottlenecks and merging traffic from dozens of parking lots all around.

I think Pembina Highway will be able to wick traffic away very quickly. Add it the Bishop Grandin exits and south to the perimeter.

It's be better than what we experience today IMO.

Don't forget the rapid bus transit line to the U of M

Ahem... the rapid bus transit line does NOT go to the U of M.

Phase II, no?