Development Rumours

[Antigonish]

Originally Posted by Haligonian88

US-based Group is Ridgehaven Holdings LLC. CEO is 29-year old Mason Williams, a lawyer and NFL/CFL agent.

Land owners are Aerotech Developments GP, a partnership between Clayton Developments and Marchand Homes.

Ridgehaven is looking at multiple sites for this entertainment district for all of Atlantic Canada. Confirmed Aerotech site is one of the sites.

Leaked slide deck suggests a shark-themed CFL team.

Would target 200 events per year. LiveNation would handle events.

Looking for a local owner (of CFL team I assume).

City/province receptive so far.

Everything about this is a giant red flag. Moving the primary events infrastructure out of the city entirely is catastrophic downstream. Add in the fact they want LiveNation to be involved is absolutely disgusting. Private money or not I'm 100% against it but what is that worth anyway?

Originally Posted by Drybrain

I assume this kind of location would be because they imagine a large part of game-day attendance would be people from well beyond HRM, even NB, and this would be an easier drive. Plus there's no obvious city centre location.

But 200+ events per year means lots more than just football games. I do detest the idea of building some entertainment megaplex 30 minutes outside the city, potentially drawing vitality away from the core so that people from Truro can drive there easier.

If they're looking for geographical centrality they should just do this in Moncton instead.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Antigonish

If they're looking for geographical centrality they should just do this in Moncton instead.

I think people often conflate accessibility or geography with factors that are good for developers making profits, like having a big greenfield site where they can monopolize everything (residences, entertainment, shops, etc.). That is actually not good for the event goers, just like the LiveNation thing.

There really is a huge draw to central NS compared to other areas in the Maritimes. Halifax's GDP is around $27B now while NB is $37B. In a decade or two, Halifax will probably surpass NB.

One of the big problems you see with the "hub" arguments is people don't correct for how much money residents have or how far away they are. Somebody who is a 30 min drive away will spend more than somebody 3 hours away. Once you add this correction, Moncton is not even close to Halifax. I don't have any recent stats, but my understanding was at one point Regina accounted for a large majority of Saskatchewan CFL ticket sales, as expected. Even in that most extreme outlier case for the CFL, it's a city with a team more than a stadium drawing from an entire province or region (all of the Maritimes of course are smaller than even just southern Saskatchewan).

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by Querce

Ah yes, those who can most afford it - classic description of new homeowners and renters

If someone can afford to buy a million dollar home then they can afford the tax bill. Someone who scrimped and saved to buy a home worth 10% of that at the time they bought it probably cannot.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

If someone can afford to buy a million dollar home then they can afford the tax bill. Someone who scrimped and saved to buy a home worth 10% of that at the time they bought it probably cannot.

Why not improve this policy with means testing, instead of implementing blanket rules that apply whether the person has $0 or $10M, or makes $40k a year or $1M a year?

While some are poor, seniors are the wealthiest demographic ever in Canada, on average.

[Colin May]

I travelled over 250 miles each way by train to attend soccer games at Arsenal, Spurs, Fulham and West Ham and lesser distances to other away games. All before the hooligans made a trip a nightmare at stations, trains and stadiums and driving was not an option.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by someone123

Why not improve this policy with means testing, instead of implementing blanket rules that apply whether the person has $0 or $10M, or makes $40k a year or $1M a year?

While some are poor, seniors are the wealthiest demographic ever in Canada, on average.

I believe HRM has some very limited means testing where you get a smallish break if you make $37k or less. But maybe that is a different program. I’m not a fan of means-testing generally. The limits are arbitrary and inconsistent and generally seem designed to avoid providing much benefit. My current favorite is the federal dental care program. That is means tested in a way that escapes providing much benefit except to the very poorest families. Imagine if we did that for health care generally.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by someone123

Why not improve this policy with means testing, instead of implementing blanket rules that apply whether the person has $0 or $10M, or makes $40k a year or $1M a year?

While some are poor, seniors are the wealthiest demographic ever in Canada, on average.

I’m wondering how this would be an improvement, however. This sounds like an intensive, perhaps intrusive process whereby, if it were carried out fairly, the City would have to assess the household income and value of possessions of each individual household to determine how much tax reduction each homeowner is entitled to. Given the city’s struggles to get the most basic things right (or any city for that matter), I can’t see how this doesn’t end up being a top-heavy bureaucratic laden process that costs more than it brings in, and at a delayed timeframe. Not to mention appeals that would certainly result from this. Sounds like a mess to me.

The current process, at least, is relatively simple and shouldn’t require much management, even if it doesn’t necessarily achieve the desired goal of penalizing well-off people (not all of which are seniors) who are getting a break on taxes.

[someone123]

If the government gives out GST rebate cheques, welfare, or disability, they require disclosure around income or wealth, and that seems uncontroversial. I think it's unfair that somebody living off of $25,000 a year may pay income taxes while a person with a $1.1M property may get a big tax break.

[someone123]

CBRE page for the casino site: https://cbrecanada.com/hfx-waterfront-dev/

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by someone123

If the government gives out GST rebate cheques, welfare, or disability, they require disclosure around income or wealth, and that seems uncontroversial. I think it's unfair that somebody living off of $25,000 a year may pay income taxes while a person with a $1.1M property may get a big tax break.

This information is collected by the CRA at tax time. Is there a precedent whereby a city in Canada collects income information?

Also, would not personal wealth be included? Assets, investments, etc? There are people who have wealth that are able to work the numbers to indicate a smaller net income that isn’t an indication of how wealthy they are? Do they deserve breaks on their property tax?

I’m just asking practical questions on how you would make it fair, yet efficient in the real world of city politics. I also don’t think that rich people should get tax breaks (even though practically it happens in all areas of taxation, not just property tax).

[someone123]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

This information is collected by the CRA at tax time. Is there a precedent whereby a city in Canada collects income information?

Also, would not personal wealth be included? Assets, investments, etc? There are people who have wealth that are able to work the numbers to indicate a smaller net income that isn’t an indication of how wealthy they are? Do they deserve breaks on their property tax?

I’m just asking practical questions on how you would make it fair, yet efficient in the real world of city politics. I also don’t think that rich people should get tax breaks (even though practically it happens in all areas of taxation, not just property tax).

The details would be up for debate but it's doable and is done.

Here in BC some municipal plans like homeowner rebates and senior property tax deferral are administered provincially. I think the province might pay the cost as well. I think deferral is another example of an improvement over the system NS has. I would also suggest creating a system where if you need relief you must apply., administered by the province, and then whatever disclosure is deemed necessary would be included in that. You wouldn't have to apply or disclose.

[Querce]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

If someone can afford to buy a million dollar home then they can afford the tax bill. Someone who scrimped and saved to buy a home worth 10% of that at the time they bought it probably cannot.

Why does their backstory matter? If they have assets worth a million dollars, they should be taxed like they have assets worth a million dollars. If they can't afford to keep up with the expenses that come with their house, they should cash out and move into a house where they can afford to pay the expenses.

[Colin May]

If you work for HRM you will retire with a pension that is not integrated with CPP and you will also receive a Long Service Award, the amount is based on the number of years of employment and your income. No other employer in Canada provides such a package.

[terrynorthend]

Stadium deal is already starting to smell, as Shaw Group touted as partners in the Aerotech site plan say they are no longer involved in the project.
Feeling like this is more of the same old vapourware.

[lirette]

I understand the hate for Live Nation, I despise them as much as everyone for what theyve done for the industry but its abit naive to think a private developer wasn't going to use them, and Im not even really sure as someone who would attend these shows that you'd want someone else running it. If they are planning for hundreds of shows and expect them to be artists that will fill the place then there is really no choice than to use LiveNation. They basically own the industry so if you want all the same artists who are coming through Rogers Stadium who else are you going to use? It would be very strange to see a footnote about this development to say they are going to use Joeblow local promoter.

Now in saying that I do think this will have an impact on things like Halifax Music Fest, because who's going to have money leftover to buy tickets for something like that when you have all the top artists coming to this new venue all summer long? How can you even surprise people for an impressive act when all the most in demand ones will already be going to your suburban airport entertainment district? Going to be tough. The entire purpose of these festivals was to bring in acts who perhaps wouldnt otherwise come, that wont really be an issue with this new infastructure.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by someone123

If the government gives out GST rebate cheques, welfare, or disability, they require disclosure around income or wealth, and that seems uncontroversial. I think it's unfair that somebody living off of $25,000 a year may pay income taxes while a person with a $1.1M property may get a big tax break.

There is a big difference between income and wealth. Not at all the same thing.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by Colin May

If you work for HRM you will retire with a pension that is not integrated with CPP and you will also receive a Long Service Award, the amount is based on the number of years of employment and your income. No other employer in Canada provides such a package.

Exactly. Perhaps some here would support setting property taxes on the future value of such pensions, HRM or otherwise, even if they are not being received at the time. Many of the arguments here seem designed to punish either good fortune or good financial planning. It is not a big leap for those voices to suggest including values of RRSP and other retirement savings in a property tax calculation.

It really begs the question of how much intrusion into private matters is required to slake the thrist for cash that govts have? Perhaps they should have access to the wills of homeowners parents so they can tax potential inheritances?

[Corker]

Originally Posted by someone123

The details would be up for debate but it's doable and is done.

Here in BC some municipal plans like homeowner rebates and senior property tax deferral are administered provincially. I think the province might pay the cost as well. I think deferral is another example of an improvement over the system NS has. I would also suggest creating a system where if you need relief you must apply., administered by the province, and then whatever disclosure is deemed necessary would be included in that. You wouldn't have to apply or disclose.

Agreed and such a program doesn't have to be very complicated. A property owner applies, provides evidence of their income, such as their most recent personal tax assessment showing their income is below a threshold, other parameters are met (residential property, owner occupied, owner above a certain age or unable to work due to a disability, etc), and the city could provide a deferral of x% of taxes, placing a lien on the property. Each year the property owner would sign a form affirming the circumstances remain the same, and the city would add the interest and the additional property tax to the lien. Once the person moves on, physically or otherworldly, the property changes hands, the lien is exercised and the city gets its money. As with any assistance program it wouldn't be perfect but it would help those who are less able to generate the income to cover rising costs stay in their homes until other circumstances dictate they move.

I say the city but this is a provincial issue so it would be better run by the Province. With such a program in place the assessment cap could be phased out and similar properties would pay similar taxes.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Corker

As with any assistance program it wouldn't be perfect but it would help those who are less able to generate the income to cover rising costs stay in their homes until other circumstances dictate they move.

And of course you can do this today with a HELOC.

Coincidentally I saw this post circulating about California's similar legislation which goes back to the 70s and produces more absurd outcomes: https://bsky.app/profile/nextdoorsv.bsky.social/post/3mmnufz3n7s24

Of the famous San Francisco "painted ladies" which are more or less identical, one has an annual tax bill of $47k and one is $2k (they sell for around $5M Canadian). It seems like that is where NS is headed if this ill-conceived policy doesn't change. Unfortunately, once you implement something like this, the sense of entitlement makes it hard to change. Long ago I remember hearing about how dumb Prop 13 was and then lo and behold, NS did something similar decades after the problems were apparent elsewhere.

[Corker]

Originally Posted by Colin May

If you work for HRM you will retire with a pension that is not integrated with CPP and you will also receive a Long Service Award, the amount is based on the number of years of employment and your income. No other employer in Canada provides such a package.

This isn't a perk, it's a limitation. Other plans I'm familiar with provide the retiree with the option of integrating. CPP and the HRM pension are separate plans so there shouldn't be an expectation of integration. For the plans that offer the choice, it's just math. An actuary for the plan provides two scenarios - one with no integration and one with integration. The integration option provides more money in the early years and then lowers the pension payment when the individual reaches 65. From the pension plan's perspective the overall cost is the same. From the retiree's perspective, they may like to get more money in those early years, while others are ok to go with the pension as is (maybe they plan to continue working elsewhere) and then get the bump when they are eligible for CPP.

For the long service award, most have been eliminated across Canada, but though that transition is often a point of contention (labour disruptions) it is typically resolved during the union negotiations, and there has usually been a bump in pay or other benefits to offset the lost long service award benefit. The elimination of the award fixes one aspect of perceived excessive benefits but not without a cost.

I feel like these property taxes and government employee compensation topics need their own thread as they pop up as random tangents from time to time. Apologies if I'm feeding into it.