Updates from March, 2019 Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Kate 21:31 on 2019-03-25 Permalink | Reply  

    Two major developers are said to be close to an agreement on the Peel Basin which would include a new baseball stadium. The mayor is super keen and thinks a REM station could be built for the stadium and the “retour des Expos.”

    Insanity, I’m telling you. In general I like Plante, and haven’t made any secret of being pro-Projet, but how can she be deploring homelessness on the one hand, talking up social housing, while applauding a project that will transfer millions in public funds into private hands to move a marginal team here and sustain its activities? It makes no sense whatsoever.

     
    • Chris 21:55 on 2019-03-25 Permalink

    • Faiz Imam 00:01 on 2019-03-26 Permalink

      If I want to maintain a positive spin on it, I could note that she’s still against any public involvement in any of this. The land is owned by the federal government who will sell it at market rates, and the developers will build what they want on it.

      But yeah… Not sure that’s exactly how it will go. The more this moves along and the more legitimacy this gets, the more room opens for the developers to extort the city into ‘partnering’ with the team.

      Also there are loopholes where the team benefits without getting actively subsidized, such as rebates on taxes or investment in infrastructure or ancillary costs.

      PS: the REM station is the one near bassin Peel. It’s gonna be built regardless to serve griffintown and old Montreal.

    • Kate 06:48 on 2019-03-26 Permalink

      Faiz Imam, I know I’ve said this before, but against any public involvement is meaningless verging on the fraudulent. You cannot have something as big as a stadium without the city’s involvement. It has to provide transit, sanitation and security for free on an ongoing basis from the moment construction begins. And the history of big-league teams in general shows a pattern of teams holding cities to ransom with threats to leave if they don’t get tax breaks and other benefits they demand.

      A major league team is first and foremost a device for funneling public money into private hands, using civic pride and boosterism as a lever. The entertainment value is a distant second.

      My resistance to baseball has recently been called “hate” and I’ve in the past been accused of shitting on the city because I don’t support it. On the whole, this blog has always been civil. Those are the hardest words I’ve had to face, and it’s over a nonexistent sports team – not over politics, sexuality, language or other hot-button issues. Odd, isn’t it?

    • JaneyB 07:59 on 2019-03-26 Permalink

      @Chris – Thanks! Done. I wonder if the REM folk who are probably pushing it threatened to support putting it in Laval or something. It’s a crazy plan for a hockey-mad city. More rinks for ice time definitely, more soccer stuff maybe but…baseball?

    • Thomas H 08:47 on 2019-03-26 Permalink

      As both someone who both abhors corporate involvement in public affairs and loves baseball, I can’t help but feel conflicted. But it’s no wonder to me that many people, like Kate, feel particularly polarized on this issue based on the amount of vitriol slung by baseball boosters. As Kate and others have pointed out, baseball fans need to put aside blind boosterism and nostalgia.

      I feel that Mayor Plante’s bizarre, quiet, and newfound support of the baseball stadium is shrouded in mystery and non-transparency, which really bothers me. First and foremost, as a citizen, but second and distantly as a fan.

      And therefore, it pains me to say that I cannot support the baseball stadium or team without exhaustively addressing the issues that have been brought up about public financing. I would want to see a written , contractual commitment from the new franchise to fund both the capital and ongoing costs themselves and the security of the stadium (including paying any SPVM officers assigned to game days) before jumping on the bandwagon.

      I do, however, feel compelled to address a few of the anti-baseball arguments I have seen many people advance on this blog. Not necessarily because I support the return of a base franchise (though I have disclosed my bias as a baseball fan), but because I think many opponents of the baseball stadium/team are being too dismissive of the popularity of baseball, and therefore undermining their case.

      — Baseball is not an old man’s sport. I am 25 years old, and attended the exhibition game last evening, and just like each of the five years before, the stadium was full of people in their 20s and 30s and MANY young families with kids under 10 years old. All this on a Monday evening. There were old men also, but often accompanied by their younger family members. The make-up of baseball fans in Montreal includes the children of former Expos fans, current Blue Jays fans who may have family in Toronto and already attend games there once or twice a year, and many former Expos fans who have become Red Sox or Yankee fans since the departure of the Expos.

      –Baseball games offer a fundamentally different experience than NHL or MLS games. The game moves slower, the overall volume of the stadium is quieter, so it is easier to attend primarily or secondarily as a social function (as I did with many of my non-baseball fan friends last night). It would have been pretty hard to convince my sports-disinterested boyfriend to attend a loud hockey game with me. Baseball games are also a magnitude cheaper than NHL games and therefore more accessible to a wider fan base. I guarantee you that Habs games are whiter, more suburban, and more affluent.

      –There is interest in baseball locally, and specifically the former Expos franchise. I have seen consistently for years that Expos merchandise sales (locally, in Canada, and across North America) rank number five through ten after big teams like New York, LA, and Boston, meaning that the brand is selling well ahead of many existing baseball teams.

      On the whole, I still cannot support baseball in Montreal until the very legitimate concerns over the public funding are addressed. I would want to see, in writing, that the private backers will not take any form of public funding for a period of 30 or 50 years. But, perhaps it is helpful for opponents of the project (like myself) who are not baseball fans themselves (unlike myself) to see that there is a broad market for baseball in Montreal, and that it’s going to take a bit more than “baseball is for old geezers” jabs to dismantle that. Opponents need to focus more squarely on their very compelling concerns over private involvement in our public affairs and point to the experiences of other cities that have had a raw deal.

    • Tim 09:18 on 2019-03-26 Permalink

      Building a stadium without a firm commitment from MLB for a team is a risky proposition. It puts Montreal in a position of weakness from a negotiating point of view. Building a stadium without a team in Quebec City did not bring the Nordiques back.

    • Blork 10:10 on 2019-03-26 Permalink

      Speculation: this might just be good politics. If Project Montreal is only known to the less-progressive crowd (who are numerous and love to vote) as the party of expensive parking, bicycle lanes, and other things they find annoying, then this will show at the next election. But if the party can throw a bone to the people who are more concerned with Montreal being “fun” and a great place to live when you have money, then it might help them in the next election.

      That might sound cynical, but I think it’s just reality. A government has to serve all of its constituents, and sometimes that means taking backwards steps. But if you have a long-term plan for forward steps then you have to plan for some backwards steps along the way in order to ensure you’re still in the game to make those forward steps.

    • walkerp 10:36 on 2019-03-26 Permalink

      Let’s get an NBA team here first. Or maybe WNBA.

    • Uatu 10:41 on 2019-03-26 Permalink

      I dunno about the viability of MLB. I guess if it doesn’t work out then a baseball stadium could be used by a minor league team.
      Or maybe they could play cricket .
      The family angle mentioned above works now at the big o with lots of parking and space. I wonder if it will be the same when there’s less space to stretch out. The most memorable parts of going to expos games in high school was eating a hotdog with my feet up on the seat in front of me, talking to my friends about girls while a game was going on in the background. Also getting home around midnight via public transit because I lived in Brossard…
      In any case it’s in the hands of the young and most young people I know are soccer fans and during yesterday’s Bronfman announcement ,it was hard to see anyone under the age of 40. So there’s that….

    • DeWolf 11:04 on 2019-03-26 Permalink

      I think Blork is right on the politics. There are a lot of people who admired Coderre’s cigar-chomping “big city mayor” persona and the goodies he delivered. They’re usually the same people who blame Plante personally for the fact that we had an icy winter. This could help win them over, especially if Coderre attempts a comeback. “The mayor who brought the Expos back” may be a very good thing to people who aren’t especially invested in municipal politics.

      My concern about this is the placement of the REM station. The Bassin Peel station’s location has not yet been fixed. If it is built next to the future stadium, it will anchor a new development area, which would be good for ridership and getting people out of cars. But I have a bad feeling that this project may not come to fruition, in which case we’ll have a REM station marooned in the middle of nowhere, away from the heart of Griffintown where people actually live and need better transit.

    • mare 11:51 on 2019-03-26 Permalink

      @Thomas H
      With only a few edits you could let Mayor Plante know via the link above.

      @Dewolf I’m sure some developers will propose something else to built there that the Federal government (probably a Conservative gevernement after the next elections) thinks is a good idea. They can dig up that plan for a permanent circus tent for the Cirque de Soleil for instance.

    • Ian 12:34 on 2019-03-26 Permalink

      As somebody who doesn’t give a crap about major league sports I’d be a lot more impressed f they could figure out infrastructure before building new touristy crap that the existing infrastructure can’t support. Call me nuts if you will.

    • qatzelok 13:10 on 2019-03-26 Permalink

      **A too-late spoiler alert**

      `Le premier des deux matchs hors concours opposant les Blue Jays de Toronto aux Brewers de Milwaukee a lieu ce soir. La tenue de ces matchs préparatoires au Stade olympique est l’occasion de remettre le retour des Expos dans l’actualité.’

      This is just a fake news advertorial for another Paid-ticket event.

    • Vazken 16:08 on 2019-03-26 Permalink

      I love the Expos and I would love to see a return but only if no public money is used other then what the city would have to kick in normally. Also, the spending in baseball is out of control and I can’t see the expos competing with 40 million a year contracts unless there’s a REALLY deep pocketed owner.

      A NBA team sounds like a good idea, they have a stadium built already. (yes, salary is out of control there too)

    • Faiz Imam 17:48 on 2019-03-26 Permalink

      Hey Kate. I don’t know what it is about the way I write that gets me so misunderstood, but it’s happened again.

      the first paragraph of my comment above was designed to be overly, unrealistically charitable to set up the rest of my point, which was that I fear this is a slippery slope towards more and more of a public investment.

      I agree with you 100% that if this happens, the city will inevitably be entangled in it and that it will go poorly. Not to mention a noon-multifunctional stadium is huge waste of space in that area with such high density and so much missing features(school, community service, green space)

      Also, I used the term “hate” a few days ago and It was not targeted towards you AT ALL. I was actually replying 100% to Uatu and to what I perceived was a attack on the sport of baseball as a whole. Hence my use of jays and league wide statistics to defend the game. Same as Thomas did above.

      Going back to that comment, looks like they were talking about Montreal specifically, so my use of words was unwarranted.

      Not sure what other reactions you’ve been getting, but I really don’t want my part in this to be misunderstood.

    • Kate 19:57 on 2019-03-26 Permalink

      Faiz Imam, thanks for the clarifications, and no worries.

      Blork and DeWolf, that’s canny analysis. Plante may be perfectly well aware there won’t be another MLB team here but that looking keen on the idea may bear fruit. Thanks for helping me see it that way.

    • Chris 20:50 on 2019-03-26 Permalink

      Blork, the party of bicycle lanes? They’ve done just about nothing in that department.

    • Blork 09:58 on 2019-03-27 Permalink

      Chris, from the point of view of the “less progressives” it’s less about what they’ve done and not done and more about the perception.

    • Marc 10:22 on 2019-03-27 Permalink

      I was curious if a new team could call themselves the Expos and use the old logo and came across this article for anyone interested. https://everythingtrademarks.com/2015/09/05/you-can-go-home-again/

    • Morgan 14:56 on 2019-03-27 Permalink

      @Dewolf et al, I saw that Plante said it would be relatively easy to add another REM station to serve the new stadium because it’s an above-ground system. I get the impression they may not build the station now, but maybe could lay the foundations or at least make sure there will be space for it.

      (I believe this would be a second station in addition to the currently-planned Bassin Peel one, which I’m guessing will be in Griffintown).

      There’s going to be significant development in that area in the next 10 years, stadium or not, so it would make sense to plan for it.

  • Kate 21:05 on 2019-03-25 Permalink | Reply  

    City hall’s mobility squad is being beefed up after a successful year of keeping traffic moving downtown. It’s moving into more boroughs and being given more staff and the power to issue fines.

     
    • Kate 21:02 on 2019-03-25 Permalink | Reply  

      TVA says taxi drivers sowed chaos downtown Monday with a demonstration, although no other media seem to have reported it.

       
      • steph 22:25 on 2019-03-25 Permalink

        How is this bill going to bankrupt 22,000 quebec families when there’s only 8800 permits in the province? Lets not forget that a bunch (I don’t know how many) are owned by companies/investors and simply rented by taxi drivers.

      • Ian 12:32 on 2019-03-26 Permalink

        That’s how the CAQ is positioning it, too – all you cabbies who rent your medallion will have 12 grand more in your pocket at the end of the year. We’ll have to wait and see I guess.
        @Kate this was getting covered on the radio all day yesterday, kind of a ply-by-play so people would know where the ding dongs were “rallying public sympathy” or whatever they thought that would do… but it was at least on the cbc website (I didn’t check any others) and very present on many channels on twitter.

      • SMD 12:42 on 2019-03-26 Permalink

        Le Devoir covered yesterday’s slow-down and today’s actions as well, noting that today an alliance of disabled transit users are also speaking out as the new law does not ensure access to accessible taxis.

        @Ian: “Ding dongs”, really?

      • SMD 12:43 on 2019-03-26 Permalink

        Oops, meant to also link to this article from today: https://www.ledevoir.com/politique/quebec/550704/reforme-des-taxis-d-autres-manifestations-a-prevoir-mardi. Can you please add it, Kate? Thank you!

    • Kate 20:46 on 2019-03-25 Permalink | Reply  

      Montreal priest Brian Boucher has been sentenced to 8 years for sexually abusing two underage boys.

       
      • Kate 20:44 on 2019-03-25 Permalink | Reply  

        A student at Marianopolis has died suddenly of a meningococcal infection as she celebrated her 18th birthday on the weekend. Public health authorities are checking that her close contacts are protected from the bacterium.

         
        • Kate 20:38 on 2019-03-25 Permalink | Reply  

          Last year’s census of the homeless found 5,800 visible homeless people in Quebec, mostly men between 30 and 49. The number in Montreal is substantially the same as were counted in 2015 – 3,149. A homeless person was defined as someone sleeping outdoors or in a shelter on April 24 last year.

          Immigrants, indigenous and LGBTQ folks are disproportionately represented among Quebec’s homeless.

           
          • Kate 08:06 on 2019-03-25 Permalink | Reply  

            The CAQ says its secularity bill, expected later this week, won’t go so far as to mandate changing the hundreds of saints’ names used for towns, streets, schools and other features of public life.

             
            • Blork 09:23 on 2019-03-25 Permalink

              I can’t say that bothers me. It’s one thing to say that the crucifix hanging in council chambers or the national assembly is there for “heritage” reasons or whatever, but it’s a whole other thing to mandate wide-scale sweeping place and street name changes. That is hugely disruptive and expensive, and is pretty much pointless.

              One can happily live on rue Saint-Charles in Saint-Guillaume without feeling like you’re under the yoke of Catholicism. Those are literally just names, and they do say something about the history of Quebec (and I am not in favour of erasing history). Completely different from going to City Hall to defend your hijab while being lorded over by a crucifix.

            • jeather 09:27 on 2019-03-25 Permalink

              I also agree that changing the street etc names is unnecessary. Has there been any serious push to do so? I hadn’t heard of that.

            • dwgs 09:29 on 2019-03-25 Permalink

              Agreed. It would be nice if we could agree that we should refrain from naming anything new for the saints though…

            • Kate 09:31 on 2019-03-25 Permalink

              Not that I’ve heard, jeather. The article says the bill will be worded in a way that doesn’t allow existing names to be challenged on its behalf, is all.

              However: I think schools ought to stop having religious names, given that we no longer have Catholic school commissions and religion is no longer taught in public schools. Many CSDM schools are still named after saints or other Catholic entities or concepts. I wouldn’t want to send my kid to École Christ-Roi or whatever.

            • dwgs 09:41 on 2019-03-25 Permalink

              @Kate, and the newest school in NDG was named… St Raymond. They say that they named it after the neighbourhood, not the saint per se but come on, you couldn’t find something better?

            • Blork 09:47 on 2019-03-25 Permalink

              I totally agree to stop naming new streets and institutions after saints. And I do not object to renaming existing schools, but only if they don’t rename them after people. Can you imagine how many “École René-Lévesques” and “École Jacques-Parizeaus” we’d end up with?

            • jeather 11:11 on 2019-03-25 Permalink

              I am still sort of annoyed about renaming of University given this. I agree that NEW places shouldn’t be given saint names whether after the town or the street, but let’s just stop renaming old public things please.

              Out of curiosity, what does the secularity bill say of the cross on the mountain? (I do not object to it and assume it will be excluded in some way or another.)

            • Kate 12:09 on 2019-03-25 Permalink

              Bill’s not out yet, jeather. I gather from this item and the CAQ’s general take that a lot of existing Catholic stuff will be grandfathered. But we’ll see.

            • Ian 12:10 on 2019-03-25 Permalink

              I don’t think it’s a good idea to rename streets or towns for the same reason – when they renamed Saint-Louis to Laurier after the town of Saint-Louis du Mile-End was amalgamated, a good chunk of historical awareness of place was simply erased.

            • Joey 13:11 on 2019-03-25 Permalink

              I can’t say I see a lot of value in maintaining the name of my kid’s school, Ecole-Saint-Enfant-Jesus, which some smarmy person will be all too happy to tell me is named after a *parish* and not, you know, the son of god. Re-naming public schools after people, places or things that are not merely the most direct form of tacit Christianity can be a very good thing for all involved. It would give the students, teachers and staff a chance to develop and adopt a real identity beyond merely being the school near the church of the same name.

              Granted, I’m Jewish and thus much more sensitive to these issues than most people, but the extent to which the fundamentals of Christianity (at least the kids’ version) are deeply ingrained in our public, secular school system is troubling, especially when there is so much hostility toward minority religions in Quebec. Our public schools don’t teach religion, but they do reinforce that Christian holidays and traditions – Christmas, Easter, etc. – are the norm. Obviously that’s unlikely to change. And kudos to our school’s openness to diversity and increasing cultural awareness and sensitivity (and for allowing my family to come present the story of Hannukah to my son’s class) – but it would be so much more rewarding to explain to my son that his school is named after a notable resident of our neighbourhood, and not someone else’s deity.

              Anyway, the moment the City erects a public school called Ecole Muhammad, I will gladly drop my beef.

            • Tee Owe 16:01 on 2019-03-25 Permalink

              Jeather – the Guardian report on this but get it wrong, that the cross on the mountain is also a crucifix – a cross is a cross, a crucifix is a man being crucified on a cross – very different IMO
              https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/mar/25/montreal-take-down-80-year-old-crucifix-from-city-chambers
              Sorry, don’t know how to insert a link, but you can copy-paste it

            • Ian 16:58 on 2019-03-25 Permalink

              @Joey I’ve been pushing for my kid’s school to allow me to come give a talk to the ERC class on secular humanism but they won’t allow it. We have had Muslims, Jews, and Christians of varying stripes, but no atheists, agnostics, or humanists.

            • Chris 18:32 on 2019-03-25 Permalink

              Ian: what reason do they give?

            • BB 18:46 on 2019-03-25 Permalink

              “Granted, I’m Jewish…”

              So was Jesus, incidentally.

              “Anyway, the moment the City erects a public school called Ecole Muhammad, I will gladly drop my beef.”

              So, you’re not taking a principled stance after all. You simply have a beef with Christianity.

              Yes, there are more names for public spaces alluding to Christian themes and personalities but that is simply commensurate with the contribution of Christian ideology to Quebec society and Western Civilization in general.

              No need to be thoughtless iconoclasts and condemn everything to the memory hole, erasing that historical awareness of place and other things that Ian refers to.

            • Faiz Imam 19:19 on 2019-03-25 Permalink

              As we have covered before, there is a huge dearth of women and indigenous people in our place names, not to mention other visible minorities.

              In the past we have been quite ready to remove British and English names and replace them with french ones, was that not erasing history? I think there is a huge opportunity to hit two birds with one stone here. But its a question of political will and a cultural consensus of what peoples and values we choose to highlight.

            • Chris 19:20 on 2019-03-25 Permalink

              “Our public schools don’t teach religion” Don’t they? They should, academically of course, not as indoctrination.

            • Joey 19:27 on 2019-03-25 Permalink

              Well, my beef was with the politicians and commentators who claim the high ground of “laïcité” all the while reinforcing the predominance of Christianity in our supposedly secular society. But it turns out I was distracted from the real beef, as always, with blog comment trolls. Thanks for keeping me focused!

              @Ian could be a fascinating charter case.

            • Kate 21:34 on 2019-03-25 Permalink

              Chris, certainly kids should be educated about the major religions, their beliefs and customs. It’s part of being a well-rounded citizen and a Montrealer to understand about the part played by religions in our society.

              But Ian, it’s shocking that the ethics class can’t have a segment on living without religion. That’s important and I wonder what can be done about it.

            • CE 21:50 on 2019-03-25 Permalink

              I wouldn’t hold my breath getting a school name changed. I took a French class at École St-Louis and had a teacher who was lobbying hard to get the school renamed in honour of Émile Nelligan. Despite the fact that Nelligan was a renowned québécois poet, his work was studied by the students in the school, and he was born across the street, the school board insisted on keeping the school named for a French king who wasn’t even actually a saint.

            • thomas 07:08 on 2019-03-26 Permalink

              @CE perhaps the school is named after Louis IX who is a saint.

            • Kate 07:12 on 2019-03-26 Permalink

              There used to be a Catholic parish called St-Louis in the area. Their first church, on Roy near Laval, burned down decades ago, and they put up a new one at the corner of Roy and Berri. This was sold off to a non-Catholic denomination years ago. So the parish doesn’t even exist any more, yet the school goes on carrying the name.

            • Ian 09:41 on 2019-03-26 Permalink

              There used to be an école Saint-Louis on Fairmount & Saint Dominique where les Habitations Émile-Nelligan is now so in a way, CE, I guess your teacher got their wish … as for the high school still on Fairmount, I always thought it was named after the former town of Saint-Louis-du-Mile-End, not the parish, specially since that’s within the Saint-Enfant-Jésus-du-Mile-End parish, I think.

          • Kate 06:22 on 2019-03-25 Permalink | Reply  

            Although police said the man who attacked a priest during a service at St Joseph’s Oratory didn’t have a political motive, there was a police presence during Sunday services there. Whether this was to reassure the public or whether police are concerned the attack wasn’t necessarily the act of one isolated nut is not clear.

             
            • Chris 18:36 on 2019-03-25 Permalink

              That article doesn’t say anything about motive. Last I saw, no motive was yet known. Did I miss them somehow ruling out political motivations?

            • Kate 21:41 on 2019-03-25 Permalink

              Chris, I saw something early on about cops ruling out political, religious or “terrorist” motives. Friday, the Journal said “« C’est un geste isolé d’une seule personne », a toutefois confirmé l’agente Caroline Chèvrefils, de la police de Montréal” and Radio-Canada “Pour le moment, rien n’indique que le suspect fasse partie d’une quelconque organisation.” But by the next day, Saturday, La Presse was saying “dont on ignore les motivations.” The suspect has been sent to Pinel for evaluation which suggests to me that the police picked up right away that the guy may be mentally unsound.

            • Chris 23:14 on 2019-03-25 Permalink

              geste isolé d’une seule personne -> does not mean the motive wasn’t political.
              not part of an organization/group -> does not mean the motive wasn’t political.
              mentally unsound -> does not mean the motive wasn’t political.

              No doubt the cops know more than we do, but I don’t yet see that political motivations can be ruled out.

            • Kate 07:10 on 2019-03-26 Permalink

              They may find the attacker was fixated on the Catholic church or its priests – or even that specific priest – for some personal reason. Is that political? Don’t forget, the order associated with the Oratory has had to pay out a lot of money after sexual abuses stretching over decades. The man who was attacked is, as far as I know, free of any suspicion in that matter, but he may simply have been available when the attacker decided to act.

            • Raymond Lutz 07:40 on 2019-03-26 Permalink

              Are les Gilets Jaunes terrorists? Was Polytechnique massacre a terrorist attack? La question est importante car depuis le 11 septembre, toutes les nations occidentales ont passé des lois _particulières_ qui ont pour prétexte de lutter contre le terrorisme mais vise essentiellement à permettre une surveillance accrue des citoyens écologistes ou altermondialistes, cf Misguided Spying and the New Zealand Massacre – Consortiumnews.

          c
          Compose new post
          j
          Next post/Next comment
          k
          Previous post/Previous comment
          r
          Reply
          e
          Edit
          o
          Show/Hide comments
          t
          Go to top
          l
          Go to login
          h
          Show/Hide help
          shift + esc
          Cancel