A complicated issue for the city and council...was it the right call?
Web Pages
ottawacitizen.com
cbc.ca
Lansdowne 2.0 vote is a victory for common sense | Opinion - Yahoo News Canada
ca.news.yahoo.com
Lansdowne 2.0 Contract Draws Objection | CTV News Ottawa at Six for Sunday, November 2, 2025 - YouTube
youtube.com
Ottawa council approves 419M dollar Lansdowne 2.0 project | CTV News Ottawa at 6 for Fri Nov 7, 2025 - YouTube
youtube.com
Lansdowne 2.0 (Northside Stands/Arena Redevelopment) | U/C - Page 58 - SkyscraperPage Forum
skyscraperpage.com
city council for a final vote after the finance and corporate services committee voted in favour of the ...
cbc.ca
Here's how city councillors voted on Lansdowne 2.0 - CTV News
vancouver.ctvnews.ca
Find your riding here.
Here are key quotes from Ottawa city councillors (and Mayor Mark Sutcliffe) explaining their stances on the Lansdowne 2.0 project during or around the final council vote on November 7, 2025. These are drawn from post-vote explanations published in sources like the Ottawa Citizen (which compiled "in their own words" statements from all 25 members of council), CBC News, and other reports covering the 15-10 approval.pSupporters (Yes Votes) – Selected Quotes
- Mayor Mark Sutcliffe (Yes):
“We can hold back. We can delay further, or we can move forward. It’s a big decision, but we make big decisions … And there’s risk with every decision, but there’s also risk in not moving forward with Lansdowne 2.0 … Our professional staff have told us this proposal is consistent with and even better than what was approved by council in 2023. They’ve told us it’s a good investment for taxpayers. They’ve told us we’re not exposing taxpayers to unreasonable risk. They’ve told us that if we proceed with this, we will have more money to invest in our other priorities. And, if we don’t, we’ll have less money … We’re talking about hundreds of millions of dollars of difference.” - Matt Luloff (OrlĂ©ans East-Cumberland, Yes):
“Right now, Lansdowne is in rough shape. ... If we tried to sell the site today, no one would buy it in this condition. So this is about being responsible stewards — fixing what’s broken before it gets worse and more expensive down the road.”
Marty Carr (Alta Vista, yes vote from her personal statement):
After reviewing the complexities including the Audit of Lansdowne 2.0, she supported it, noting: The 2021 unanimous vote already committed to replacing the arena/stadium, and progress/funds have been expended since then. "It is unfortunate that a previous council did not replace these assets as part of Lansdowne 1.0."
- Other yes voters (e.g., David Hill, Steve Desroches, Glen Gower) echoed themes of avoiding exponential future costs, leveraging revenue offsets (e.g., from development taxes, air rights, hotel tax), and modernizing for long-term sustainability and events.Opponents (No Votes) –
- Selected Quotes
- Rawlson King (Rideau-Rockcliffe, No):
- His opposition is “rooted in fundamental concerns about fiscal structure, risk allocation and the reliance on optimistic assumptions that our own Office of the Auditor General has identified as problematic … Council is being asked to approve $418.8 million in public spending financed through a model that depends heavily on projected rather than guaranteed revenues. We’re asked to commit to $17.4 million annually in debt servicing for 45 years with offsetting revenues that are largely speculative.”
- Jeff Leiper (Kitchissippi, No; from pre-vote Bluesky post):
"Lansdowne 2.0 doesn't give Ottawa what it needs. The plan is built around the limits of a public-private partnership that prioritizes private profit over public good." - Jessica Bradley (from her pre-vote statement on The Bulldog):
Emphasized fiduciary responsibility: Having weighed the financial approach, she could not support it due to risks during a cost-of-living crisis.
The Ottawa Citizen article (November 11, 2025) has the most comprehensive "in their own words" collection from all councillors post-vote
Relevant Web Pages
Here's how each councillor voted on Lansdowne 2.0 - Ottawa Citizen
Lansdowne 2.0 was passed by a 15-10 vote at council on Nov. 7, here's what was said around the council table.
ottawacitizen.com
Here's where your councillor stands heading into the final Lansdowne 2.0 vote | CBC News
The contentious plan to redevelop Lansdowne Park is heading to a final vote at council on Friday, and most Ottawa city councillors have ...
cbc.ca
Lansdowne 2.0 final vote: 15 yays, 10 nays : r/ottawa - Reddit
377 votes, 310 comments. I wish I could go to my job, punt $419 million dollars, and congratulate myself for doing so.
reddit.com
Council passes Lansdowne 2.0 after close 15-10 vote | Ottawa Citizen
Councillors on both sides of the aisle expressed concerns over how suitable the new arena would be for the highly-popular Ottawa Charge.
ottawacitizen.com
What it will take for the Lansdowne 2.0 vote to pass or fail - Ottawa Lookout
Lansdowne 2.0 will be debated at city hall this fall. Only 12 votes are needed for it to pass. Will there be that many?
ottawalookout.com
Ottawa councillors' stance on Lansdowne 2.0 - Facebook
Sean Murphy Keep in mind that the population of the National Capital Region is projected to grow by more than 200k over the next six years.
facebook.com
Council approves $418.8 million plan for new arena, north-side stands at Lansdowne - CTV News
The multi-million-dollar Lansdowne 2.0 plan passed its final test Friday, as Ottawa City Council voted 15 to 10 in favour of proceeding with ...
ctvnews.ca
Lansdowne 2.0: a Half-Billion Dollar Boondoggle in the Making (Part 1) - the 613
“There are delays and cost overruns with every major infrastructure project in the world, that's not unusual.” Ottawa Mayor Mark Sutcliffe, 8 ...
the613.substack.com
The Day After The Lansdowne Vote: POTTER - Ottawa - The Bulldog
By Evan Harold Potter. Let's be honest, Lansdowne 2.0 was never about evidence-based policymaking. Residents wrote “strongly worded” emails ...
bulldogottawa.com
As it happened: Council votes to approve Lansdowne 2.0 | Ottawa Citizen
After weeks of contentious debate, city council decided to go ahead with Lansdowne 2.0.
ottawacitizen.com
City council votes to move forward with Lansdowne 2.0 - Ottawa Lookout
Despite the controversy, shovels are expected to break ground on Lansdowne 2.0 in the next few weeks.
ottawalookout.com
A Better Lansdowne
On Friday November 7, city council approved the $484 million Lansdowne 2.0 proposal. This is a disappointing decision, as it will create a significant financial ...
betterlansdowne.ca
Lansdowne 2.0 - Marty Carr – Councillor, Ward 18
When was the decision initially made to move forward with the replacement of the arena and north side stands? In July 2021, Ottawa City Council voted ...
martycarrottawa.ca
Lansdowne 2.0 - ReImagine Ottawa
In the Fall of 2025, both the Finance and Corporate Services Committee and Council approved the Lansdowne 2.0 redevelopment and construction plan. On November 7 ...
reimagineottawa.ca
Bid to delay Lansdowne 2.0 decision fails | CBC News
Capital ward Coun. Shawn Menard pleaded with colleagues to allow more time to consider a massive trove of documents before they make a final ...
cbc.ca
Lansdowne 2.0 approved in final council vote | CBC News
Lansdowne 2.0 cleared its final hurdle at Ottawa city hall Friday, as council approved the $419-million redevelopment project.
cbc.ca
Statement on Lansdowne 2.0 -
Marty Carr – Councillor, Ward 18
The redevelopment plan for Lansdowne 2.0 was presented final vote by Ottawa City Council today, Friday, November 7, 2025. After a thorough ...
martycarrottawa.ca
Lansdowne 2.0 approved in final council vote - Yahoo News Canada
Lansdowne 2.0 cleared its final hurdle at Ottawa city hall Friday, as council approved the $419-million redevelopment project.
ca.news.yahoo.com
Lansdowne 2.0 Redevelopment and Authorization to Proceed with Legal Close and Implementation Plan - Finance and Corporate Services Committee - Meetings
Councillor Riley Brockington,; Councillor Shawn Menard,; and Councillor David Brown. Melinda Aston, Committee Coordinator, (613) 580-2424, ext.
pub-ottawa.escribemeetings.com
Special newsletter: November 6, 2025 —
Councillor Wilson Lo - Barrhaven East
I'm back again for a second time this week with an off-cycle newsletter about Lansdowne 2.0. While the immediate financial implications are ...
trombone-bat-szbz.squarespace.com
City Hall Tried to Silence Us. We're Taking Our Voice Back. - the 613
Menard had given a notice of motion that he was putting a discussion of a Lansdowne referendum onto the next Committee meeting. This is standard ...
the613.substack.com
Councillor calls for referendum on Lansdowne 2.0, but mayor opposed | CBC News : r/ottawa - Reddit
The mayor is opposed. Council won't stand up for taxpayers when many of them are serving the interests of developers like the ones at Lansdowne.
reddit.com
Lansdowne 2.0 Redevelopment and Authorization ...
- Engage Ottawa
A “no” vote would simply reject the unpopular Lansdowne 2.0 proposal as presented. It would not be a vote to end the partnership. OSEG would remain bound to ...
engage.ottawa.ca
Lansdowne 2.0 - Engage Ottawa
Lansdowne 2.0 is the City's innovative plan to update the site so it can continue to serve residents and visitors for decades to come. The proposal aims to ...
engage.ottawa.ca
What We Learned Report – North Side Stands - Engage Ottawa
The Lansdowne 2.0 Project Team has been given Council's direction to design outdoor North Side Stands and not a climate controlled domed stadium ...
engage.ottawa.ca
Lansdowne 2.0 Event Centre Site Plan Application Public Information Session - Engage Ottawa
Yes, the Project Team, as approved by Council, has reduced the towers from 3 to 2 to reduce impacts on the community. The Lansdowne 2.0 Project ...
engage.ottawa.ca
Lansdowne 2.0 Procurement Options Analysis and Recommendations - City Council - April 17, 2024 - eSCRIBE Published Meetings
The Motion was carried on a vote of 21 Yeas to 4 Nays, with the following Direction to staff: Direction (Councillor S. Menard): That staff report back in ...
engage.ottawa.ca
Urban Park & Public Realm Public Session As We Heard It Report -
Engage Ottawa
The session was held on. May 17th, with over 120 residents providing the Lansdowne team with valuable input and feedback on the project. Page 3 ...
engage.ottawa.ca
2025-2029 Municipal Accessibility Plan - Engage Ottawa
The City of Ottawa is dedicated to creating a barrier-free and inclusive environment for everyone, including those with visible and invisible.
engage.ottawa.ca
Delegation of Authority (By-law No. 2025-69) | City of Ottawa
A by-law of the City of Ottawa respecting the delegation of authority to various officers of the City and to repeal By-law No. 2024-265 as amended.
ottawa.ca
Ottawa Transition Board's Final Report and Recommendations - Documents
This election was to be a historic vote and, given the unprecedented. 47% voter participation, the significance of selecting the women and men representatives ...
documents.ottawa.ca
Appendix A - Engage Ottawa
Don't want Lansdowne to become a concrete jungle. • Not just square vs road, but all aspects of pedestrian vs road. e.g Turn Paul Askin Way into cafe patios ( ...
engage.ottawa.ca
Lansdowne 2.0 - Laura Dudas
As well as adding new housing in the form of two towers, down from the originally proposed three. The stadium stands would also shrink in size, going from ...
lauradudas.ca
Councillor Hill confirms he will vote YES for the Lansdowne Project : r/ ottawa - Reddit
60 votes, 63 comments. 2.0 is a bust. The site can't withstand the traffic. Infrastructure doesn't support it. The venue will lose tenants ...
reddit.com
Live feed from Ottawa City Council chambers : r/ottawa
96 votes, 156 comments. Today's the day our city council votes Yes or No on Lansdowne 2.0. Watch it live here.
reddit.com
Web site references for yes no vote on lansdowne
The Lansdowne 2.0 redevelopment project (involving updates to Lansdowne Park in Ottawa, including a new arena/event centre, north-side stands, housing, and related infrastructure at an estimated cost of around $419 million) went to a final vote at Ottawa City Council.There was no public referendum or yes/no plebiscite for residents—instead, it was decided by councillors. Some advocacy groups and councillors pushed for a public referendum, but that did not happen.Key Vote Details
• Date: November 7, 2025
• Result: Approved with 15 Yes votes to 10 No votes
• Outcome: The project was given the green light to proceed.
Reliable sources covering the vote include:
• Ottawa Citizen — Detailed coverage of the 15-10 vote, including how each councillor voted and their statements:
https://ottawacitizen.com/news/how-council-voted-lansdowne-2-0
(Also see their live blog from the day: https://ottawacitizen.com/news/lansdowne-2-0-final-vote-live and the passage article: https://ottawacitizen.com/news/council-passes-lansdowne-2-0-after-close-15-10-vote)
• CBC News — Reports on the approval (15-10), pre-vote councillor positions, and related context:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/lansdowne-2-0-approved-in-final-council-vote-9.6969378
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/here-s-where-your-councillor-stands-heading-into-the-final-lansdowne-2-0-vote-9.6969361
• CTV News Ottawa — Confirmation of the 15-10 approval for the $418.8 million plan:
https://www.ctvnews.ca/ottawa/article/council-approves-4188-million-plan-for-new-arena-north-side-stands-at-lansdowne
• Ottawa Lookout — Breakdown of the vote tally and ward-level mapping of yes/no positions:
https://www.ottawalookout.com/p/city-council-votes-to-move-forward-with-lansdowne-2-0
For official City of Ottawa documentation on the project (including reports leading up to the vote, but not the live vote tally itself), check the Engage Ottawa page:
https://engage.ottawa.ca/lansdowne-2-0If you're looking for something more specific (e.g., a different Lansdowne-related vote, historical context from Lansdowne 1.0, or councillor-by-councillor breakdown),
Here are the most reliable and direct web references for the Lansdowne 2.0 yes/no vote at Ottawa City Council (November 7, 2025; final result: 15 Yes to 10 No in favor of approving the ~$419 million redevelopment plan, including the new event centre/arena, north-side stands, housing, and related elements). These include official city sources where available, plus major news outlets with detailed reporting on the vote tally and councillor positions.Primary News Sources with Vote Details
• Ottawa Citizen — Main article on the passage: "Council passes Lansdowne 2.0 after close 15-10 vote" (lists Yes/No councillors and quotes).
https://ottawacitizen.com/news/council-passes-lansdowne-2-0-after-close-15-10-vote
• Ottawa Citizen — Detailed breakdown: "Here's how each councillor voted on Lansdowne 2.0" (includes individual councillor statements and votes).
https://ottawacitizen.com/news/how-council-voted-lansdowne-2-0
• Ottawa Citizen — Live blog from the day of the vote (real-time coverage leading to the 15-10 result).
https://ottawacitizen.com/news/lansdowne-2-0-final-vote-live
• CBC News — "Lansdowne 2.0 approved in final council vote" (confirms 15-10, lists Yes voters including Mayor Sutcliffe and several councillors; No voters named).
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/lansdowne-2-0-approved-in-final-council-vote-9.6969378
• CTV News Ottawa — "Council approves $418.8 million plan for new arena, north-side stands at Lansdowne" (covers the 15-10 approval).
https://www.ctvnews.ca/ottawa/article/council-approves-4188-million-plan-for-new-arena-north-side-stands-at-lansdowne
• Ottawa Lookout — "City council votes to move forward with Lansdowne 2.0" (includes vote tally, ward-level context, and named Yes/No lists).
https://www.ottawalookout.com/p/city-council-votes-to-move-forward-with-lansdowne-2-0
Official City of Ottawa References
• Engage Ottawa — Lansdowne 2.0 project page (main hub for reports, timelines, and pre-vote documents; includes the final "Redevelopment and Authorization to Proceed" report presented to council before the November 7 vote). No direct vote transcript here, but it's the source of the staff recommendations councillors voted on.
https://engage.ottawa.ca/lansdowne-2-0
• Engage Ottawa — Documents section (hosts PDFs like the 2025 Lansdowne 2.0 Redevelopment and Authorization report, site plan approvals, and related items leading up to the vote).
https://engage.ottawa.ca/lansdowne-2-0/documents
For the official minutes/transcript of the November 7, 2025 council meeting (including the recorded vote), check the City's eSCRIBE meetings portal once posted (search for "City Council" around that date):
https://pub-ottawa.escribemeetings.com/These sources consistently confirm the 15-10 split, with Yes votes generally from suburban/rural wards plus the mayor, and No votes mostly from inner-city/urban wards.
Coucillors who voted for lansdowne and why they did so
The Lansdowne 2.0 redevelopment project was approved by Ottawa City Council on November 7, 2025, in a 15-10 vote (15 in favor, 10 opposed). The councillors who voted Yes (in favor) are listed below, compiled consistently across major sources like the Ottawa Citizen, CBC News, CTV News Ottawa, and Ottawa Lookout. I've included their wards where available, and summarized key reasons or statements they provided (drawn from council debate coverage, pre-vote positions, and post-vote explanations where reported—detailed individual quotes are most comprehensive in the Ottawa Citizen's breakdown article).Councillors Who Voted Yes
• É“
Reasons: Emphasized the need to move forward rather than delay, noting that further postponement would increase costs exponentially due to deteriorating infrastructure. He described the risk of voting no as greater than proceeding, framing it as responsible stewardship to fix the site before conditions worsen.
• David Brown (likely suburban/rural ward)
Reasons: Supported as part of the pro-project bloc focused on revitalizing the site and avoiding higher future repair costs.
• Allan Hubley
: Aligned with suburban priorities, seeing the project as necessary infrastructure investment.
• Isabelle Skalski
Reasons: Backed the plan for modern facilities and economic benefits.
• Laura Dudas (OrlĂ©ans West-Innes)
Reasons: Highlighted Lansdowne's current poor condition and the responsibility to address it now to prevent escalation in costs.
• David Hill (Barrhaven West)
Reasons: Focused on long-term fiscal responsibility and preventing exponential cost increases from delays.
• Steve Desroches
Reasons: Supported revitalization and partnership with OSEG to offset costs through revenue generation.
• Clarke Kelly (West Carleton-March)
Reasons: Viewed it as fixing broken infrastructure responsibly.
• StĂ©phanie Plante (Rideau-Vanier)
Reasons: One of the inner-city Yes votes; supported moving ahead despite some local opposition, possibly prioritizing city-wide benefits.
• Marty Carr (Alta Vista)
Reasons: Another somewhat atypical Yes (not core suburban); likely weighed economic/revitalization aspects positively.
• Cathy Curry (Kanata North)
Reasons: Emphasized responsibility for deteriorating site and need for action.
• Glen Gower (Stittsville)
Reasons: Saw it as essential to address current issues and support growth.
• Catherine Kitts
Reasons: Aligned with pro-redevelopment arguments on urgency and cost control.
• Tim Tierney (Beacon Hill-Cyrville)
Reasons: Supported as a practical step for site improvement.
• Matthew Luloff (OrlĂ©ans East-Cumberland)
Reasons: Stated Lansdowne is "in rough shape" now—if sold today, no buyer would take it. Voted yes to be responsible stewards, fixing problems before they become far more expensive.
The Yes votes tended to come from suburban, rural, and outer wards (plus the mayor), with arguments centering on:
• Urgency to replace failing infrastructure (e.g., to avoid skyrocketing future costs).
• Responsible fiscal management by acting now rather than delaying.
• Revitalizing a key public asset through partnership (with OSEG) to generate revenue and offset taxpayer burden.
• Broader city benefits like modern sports/entertainment facilities, housing, and economic activity.
For the most detailed individual explanations (including direct quotes from each councillor during/after the debate), the primary source is the Ottawa Citizen article:
https://ottawacitizen.com/news/how-council-voted-lansdowne-2-0
(It compiles "in their own words" from the November 7 session.)Other strong references with vote lists and context:
• CBC News: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/lansdowne-2-0-approved-in-final-council-vote-9.6969378
• Ottawa Lookout: https://www.ottawalookout.com/p/city-council-votes-to-move-forward-with-lansdowne-2-0
• CTV News Ottawa: https://www.ctvnews.ca/ottawa/article/council-approves-4188-million-plan-for-new-arena-north-side-stands-at-lansdowne
If Coucillors who voted for lansdowne and why they did
The Lansdowne 2.0 redevelopment project was approved by Ottawa City Council on November 7, 2025, in a 15-10 vote (15 in favor, 10 opposed). Below is a list of the councillors who voted Yes (in favor), including their wards, compiled from council records and media coverage. I've included their stated reasons or key quotes where available, drawn directly from the debate and post-vote explanations (primarily from the Ottawa Citizen's detailed breakdown, with supplements from other sources).Councillors Who Voted Yes
• Mayor Mark Sutcliffe (Mayor)
Reasons: Emphasized the need to move forward to avoid delays and higher costs, viewing the project as a good investment for taxpayers with less risk than rejecting it. "We can hold back. We can delay further, or we can move forward. It’s a big decision, but we make big decisions … And there’s risk with every decision, but there’s also risk in not moving forward with Lansdowne 2.0 … Our professional staff have told us this proposal is consistent with and even better than what was approved by council in 2023. They’ve told us it’s a good investment for taxpayers. They’ve told us we’re not exposing taxpayers to unreasonable risk. They’ve told us that if we proceed with this, we will have more money to invest in our other priorities. And, if we don’t, we’ll have less money … We’re talking about hundreds of millions of dollars of difference." He also noted that the risk of voting against it is greater than voting in favor, as the city would face higher costs later without the current financing plan.
• Matthew Luloff (OrlĂ©ans East-Cumberland)
Reasons: Argued that Lansdowne 1.0 was insufficient and the current facilities are outdated, preventing Ottawa from hosting major events. "Lansdowne 1.0 was a half-measure. It didn’t address the underlying issues. It compromised, delayed and kicked some of the very expensive problems down the road, and now, a decade later, we’re back debating whether to keep patching a leaky roof or finally rebuild the house properly. Right now, Ottawa can’t host the kind of international events that a capital city should … Our current facilities are ramshackle, outdated and inaccessible, and, if we leave Lansdowne the way it is, it will be an embarrassment to our city on the world stage."
• David Hill (Barrhaven West)
Reasons: Acknowledged imperfections but highlighted the risks of rejection, including construction inflation and facility deterioration. "Perfection is the enemy of progress and there are and will be issues with Lansdowne 2.0 … but we have to ask ourselves, what does it actually mean to reject this project? We’ll go back to the drawing board for at least another two years … We will be exposed to significant downside risk from construction inflation that was estimated by internal and external sources at about double the current cost assessment for Lansdowne 2.0. The stadium is aging out. We can say it’s structurally sound, we can say it’s functionally obsolete. We can pass lots of stuff around, but at the end of the day, there’s big cracks in the pillars, there’s leaky roofs, and there’s a Charge team that have to change in a closet in the basement that is substandard." He also spoke about the benefits and said the consequences of doing nothing could be dire, risking revenue, partnerships, and teams like the Ottawa Charge.
• Cathy Curry (Kanata North)
Reasons: Focused on supporting women's hockey long-term and providing better facilities. "The members of the PWHL said their end goal is the play in a full-size arena. That’s where they want to go. And, if you are supportive of women’s hockey, that’s what your goal needs to be as well. You can like that the Charge are in here now in this tiny arena. And you can hope that they’ll maybe give us three years in the mid-sized arena … My ideal would be that they play at the Canadian Tire Centre, regardless of what happens, and LeBreton Flats, maybe both, and we’d have options for everyone. No matter where you live in the city, it would be a quick commute. That’s the end goal."
• Clarke Kelly (West Carleton-March)
Reasons: Pushed back against rhetoric framing support as anti-women's hockey and emphasized fairness to all tenants. "I have been a bit perturbed with the rhetoric around the fact that, if you currently support the plan, that you’re somehow limiting women’s hockey or not supportive of women’s hockey … I think a lot of the time has been spent discussing one tenant (the Ottawa Charge), which, of course, we all care deeply about and want to support. But I know there are several other tenants of this building and groups who use the Lansdowne facility on a very regular basis, and I’m not sure they’ve been given a fair share of the time at the table here today."
• Tim Tierney (Beacon Hill-Cyrville)
Reasons: Saw it as an opportunity to fix imbalances and expand sports offerings. "We have an opportunity to correct what’s wrong and fix it. I remember when there was no football team here, and (former councillor) Bob Monette and I were standing there arguing what side is going to be the best side. Well, guess what? The South Side is now the best side. The North Side now sucks, and we want to correct that problem. These are the debates we should be having and enjoying the fact that we have not just one sport brought back to us, we have multiple sports. We got basketball, we got soccer. The stadium is far more than what is originally scoped for."
• StĂ©phanie Plante (Rideau-Vanier)
Reasons: Highlighted the effort invested and the need for similar energy on other city issues. "It is not necessarily the financial concern that people are worried about, it’s the effort that has been put into this file. The staff meetings, the Ottawa Board of Trade, videos, the committee, the hearings. People want to see that same energy to tackle the problems that are also affecting our city … We can get together collectively and use our energy to find solutions to these problems as staff, as councillors." She was one of the exceptions among urban councillors voting yes.
• Marty Carr (Alta Vista)
Reasons: Noted communication issues but supported due to funding structure and investment needs. "Lansdowne has become a bit of a communications disaster … And it’s unfortunate what has happened with the entire file and what has transpired with the PWHL. It has not been a good look for us, and I think it has clouded much of the discussions on the benefits of Lansdowne and renewing the arena … 31 per cent of the asset will be covered by the residents of Ottawa, 69 per cent is covered by site-specific items, property uplift, the surcharge, rent etc. So we have an opportunity to invest in a city asset that needs investment, with a funding strategy that addresses 69 per cent of the costs." She added that while not perfect, it would cost more to do nothing.
• Catherine Kitts (OrlĂ©ans South-Navan)
Reasons: Stressed the need for action over criticism, noting past delays led to higher costs. "I think its easy to say ‘We don’t like this, we don’t like that.’ But as a council we can’t just editorialize. We have to do something. We can’t allow this city asset to continue to crumble and to decay … What’s in front of us took six years and cost $22 million in plan studies, due diligence etc. to get us to this place. This is a challenging and complex file, like so many that we deal with … Lansdowne 2.0 isn’t perfect, in my opinion. But expecting perfection in a project of this scale is a tall order. City building is never that simple. And we have seen major city-building projects stall or die at this table, only to return years later with a much higher price tag."
• Isabelle Skalski (Osgoode)
Reasons: Supported women's sports growth but noted long-term needs might exceed the current arena. "Women’s sports deserve every opportunity to grow and succeed and I think that’s why this moment’s actually really challenging. Staff have been clear that meeting the growing needs of (the PWHL) would result in years of delays and upwards of a hundred million in additional costs … I think the ambitions that we have for the Charge and that the fans have for them are bigger than even the arena that they’re currently using, and that’s a good thing. It means that women’s hockey is succeeding. It also means that we need to be realistic about what the right long-term home for that success might be. And we know that just down the street, a new NHL facility is being developed, one that could be fit to offer the kind of infrastructure a championship team like the Charge deserves long term." She voted yes despite earlier campaign statements against it.
• David Brown (Rideau-Jock)
Reasons: Viewed it as taxpayer-owned asset needing investment for GDP growth and protection from operating losses. "I know this is a contentious file, but fundamentally, the taxpayer owns this asset. I think there’s a different discussion as to whether we should be in the business, but that’s not what’s on the table today. We are. And, whether we invest today, 10 years from now, 20 years from now or never invest, it’s still our facility and I think we’ve been protected as taxpayers for the most part over the last decade because we’re not losing those operating costs … I also think there is an important conversation to be had about the GDP growth that we would see if we invest. There are a lot of businesses downtown that (thrive) when there is a sports game on in Ottawa."
• Steve Desroches (Riverside South-Findlay Creek)
Reasons: Highlighted job creation, GDP boost, and competitiveness for events. "The redevelopment will create nearly 5,000 jobs and boost Ottawa’s GDP by more than a half a billion dollars over a decade. The Ottawa Board of Trade calls this a renewed confidence in our city, while Ottawa Tourism says it’s essential to revitalizing our downtown and promoting innovation … Promoters have warned that artists and organizers are skipping Ottawa because our facilities are outdated and fail to meet professional standards. Accessibility advocates say the upgrades are long overdue … Ottawa is no longer competitive for national events. Without re-investment, we will continue to lose major opportunities for culture, tourism and community gathering."
• Glen Gower (Stittsville)
Reasons: Introduced directions for enhanced oversight and emphasized the project's complexity. He noted: “I’m looking for other ways that we could strengthen council’s insight and knowledge into this project. For our light-rail project, we benefited for a number of years from third-party experts, and perhaps there’s a similar approach that could be developed here. This is complex and councillors are not sports management experts and so I’m just encouraging staff to look for ways to provide more clarity to future councils given the scope and the importance of this project.”
• Allan Hubley (Kanata South)
Reasons: No specific public comments or quotes from the final council meeting were reported in the sources.
The Yes votes generally came from suburban and rural wards (plus the mayor and a few urban exceptions), with common themes including urgent infrastructure fixes, economic benefits, risk of higher future costs from delays, and support for sports and events. For the full council minutes or video, check the City of Ottawa's eSCRIBE portal: https://pub-ottawa.escribemeetings.com/.
Find your riding here.
What is your riding
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
What is your riding
