Why is it important to study history? Some will say it is because those who do not learn from the mistakes of the past are doomed to repeat them. I believe this is true.
If one goes back into the archives of Freedom Party one will find publications by Marc Emery.
The Downtown London Metro Bulletin (link to video) was first published in 1981. As I started to read the online copies of the publication, I had to give my head a shake. Although what I was reading was written by Marc Emery some 34 years ago, it was like I was reading something written today. I am amazed at how City Hall and voters keep making the same mistakes over and over and over again.
Downtown renewal? Ever hear city politicans talk about that? Marc starts at 1967 with some of many failed schemes by London City Council that have plagued London for almost 50 years.
Downtown businessmen can note that the 3 major [downtown] renewal projects (all failures) - the Centennial Hall (1967), Talbot Square (1972-1977) and the London Regional Art Gallery (1980) - has cost, in locally paid taxes alone, $9,200,000. Yes, that's approx. $9.2 million (includes land, buildings, losses, but not interest or certain administrator factors that are not available) down the tubes.
Since DOWNTOWN PAYS about 13% of all local taxes, divide that by the 890 businesses/property owners downtown, and you have an average COST OF $1343.82 per business!!!!! ($9,200,000 x .13 t 890). This does NOT include provincial or federal money which equals the municipal amount.
Source: Downtown London Metro Bulletin, May 15, 1981. (Page 5)
The failed downtown renewal schemes have continued unabated.
Pedestrian Malls? This reoccurring absurd idea pushed by some city politicians (link to audio) has been coming and going for decades.
Pedestrian malls have been discussed a long time too. They were seriously discussed in 1965 and 1971....
Source: Downtown London Metro Bulletin, September, 1981. (Page 42)
The Research-[Administrator of] Zoning at City Hall, Jerry Tikalsky, [commented] that the City has not done any studies on East London Business Area (Dundas St. between Adelaide & Elizabeth) before, during or since the pedestrian-only mall fiasco of some years ago. Or at least the researcher was not aware of any studies. This, despite the fact the City poured hundreds of thousands of dollars into the experiment about 7 years ago.
Source: Downtown London Metro Bulletin, May 15, 1981. (Page 6)
Their pedestrian mall, which in 1973/4 cost $500,000 was split 50/50 between City & merchants in the area (their BIA taxes are 35% of their business taxes!!). The first 6 months was pedestrian-only, but opening in October of '73 was hardly an intelligent thing to do, but what else can you expect when BIAs and the City get together to create their utopias? Their pedestrian mall (changed to traffic [thoroughfare] in summer 1974, although buses were always permitted, giving pedestrians a hard time) didn't so much as kill the area as hasten its demise. It was precisely because London East was desperate that they took a gamble - and lost.
Intrinsically, this was not the worst however.
What the mall experiment did to London East however, was draw the whole City's attention towards a dying neighbourhood, and that was the seal of doom. Word of mouth poison like "London East, no way, its dead out there, ---the mall killed it" became widespread. Of course, merchants reeling from lower sales and continuing lower could hardly afford to advertise heavily to reverse the tide.
Source: Downtown London Metro Bulletin, October, 1981 (Page 46)
The pedestrian-only Dundas St. mall that was proposed by the Board of the B.I.A. was originally scheduled for May 23, a week from now. At press time, Random Notes does not know if the closing of traffic from the main [thoroughfare] will be attempted later this summer. This will be decided at the Board meeting on Tuesday, May 12 , covered elsewhere in the Bulletin. At this time, despite the fact that the concept was to go into effect May 23, London Transit officials, City Engineer, City Clerk & City Administrator have not even received a copy of the Laventhol Draft Report (on the closing) which details the plan. Thus, the administrations and thus the elected officials will need about 4 to 6 months to even consider & approve any such proposal. The transit company and most city depts. (Traffic, Engineering) have not yet been approached on the idea. So whether you favour a mall concept or oppose it, you won't see it this year anyway.
Source: Downtown London Metro Bulletin, May 15, 1981. (Page 10)
THE PAST: CITY HALL'S RECORD OF INTERVENTION:
Centennial Hall:
Built in 1967 at a cost of $1.2 million, this project has cost the London taxpayer between $27,000 and $75,000 each year, totalling over $700,000 up till this year, In 1984, the city taxpayer was forced to pay an additional $750,000 as his 'contribution' to it $2 million renovation. In the meantimes, Centennial Hall continues to be underused and has been regarded as unsatisfactory for performing arts events.
[According to the London 2015 Approved Budget, taxpayers will pay $105,000 to Centennial Hall in 2015, an increase of 4.6% from 2014. City Budget projections are a 64.8% increase from 2016 to 2018. City Hall still wants a 'Performing Arts Centre' built that has been proposed for decades and will cost tens, if not hundreds, of millions of tax dollars.]
London Regional Art Gallery [Museum London]
The London Taxpayer's original 'contribution' for this project was $1 million, which was spent on land at the fork of the Thames River. An additional $6 million came from federal and provincial taxpayers.
When the London Gallery was located at the London Public Library back in 1974, it had an annual budget of $209,000 with an attendance figure of 60,000. Currently, with its annual budget of $1,224,00, last year's attendance figure was 68,000. Thus, a %10 increase in attendance was achieved with a %350 increase (adjusted for inflation) in real costs. In the interim, the Gallery lost hundreds of thousands of (yours) dollars, and was even forced to close for a two-month period to prevent even further losses. And despite these expenditures, both the interior and exterior of the Gallery have been consistently criticized as to their appropriateness to display works of art.
[According to the London 2015 Approved Budget, taxpayers will pay $1,614,000 million to Museum London, an increase of 4.1% from 2014. City Budget projections are a 17.6% increase from 2016 to 2018.]
Talbot Square:
Back in the early 1970's, [sic] London city council decided to expropriate all land between Dundas Street, Talbot Street, Queen's [sic] Avenue, and Ridout Street for an 'urban renewal project' called Talbot Square - a utopian vision of 'job creation', big investment, etc. (sound familiar?), to be created by the building of the hotel and mall complex.
As every London taxpayer should know, this shinning example of downtown regeneration sponsored by 'benevolent' government went completely haywire. After paying more for the land than it was worth, construction was halted, lawsuits were flying, and two years the only visible result of the project was a huge hole in the ground. The land was finally sold to Bell Canada at a $2.5 million loss.
[This location is were the architecturally significant Perrin confectionary factory stood that once employed approximately 500 Londoners. To this author, the City Plan for the area around the former McCormicks factory resembles the failed Talbot Square plan.]
Grand Theatre:
Ostensibly a non-profit corporation (non-profit was right!), London city council has, since 1078, given the corporation a total of $317,000 in capital grants, plus an addition $685,992 in operating grants and tax exemptions. You can add to this figure the emergency $125,00 loan the Grand was given in 1984 to proven the bank from foreclosing on its outstanding loans.
The Grand's budget went from $2 million in 1982-1983 (with box-office revenues of $1.2 million) to a whopping $4.4 million in 1983-1984. Despite grants, subsidies, and $1.5 million revenue received at the box office, the deficit still remained at $1.4 million. Although the artistic director, Robin Phillips, resigned, no one else on the board of directors of the Grand Theatre did, although they were responsible for the disaster.
Centennial Museum and Lawson Museum:
For those who may not know, Centennial Museum is the small odd-shaped building beside the central library [305 Queens Avenue] where the annual library book sale is held each year. Lawson Museum is located on Western Road. Last year, London taxpayers paid $220,569 (and more - printing and administration costs are not included here) for the to museums which had a combined attendance of 15,123. Thus, the subsidized cost per visitor was $14.50!
Other Projects Remember, that in addition to the aforementioned, city council also gives capital grants, operating grants, tax exemptions, etc., annually to various other art and culture groups like the Children's Museum, Orchestra London, R.C.R. [Royal Canadian Regiment] Museum, etc.
[Budweiser Gardens pays no property tax.]
Two other projects worthy of note include Eldon House, which, despite the fact that it charges admission, was subsidized by the city [sic] to the tune of $4.23 per person. In 1983, it was visited by 14,177 people. [According to the London 2015 Approved Budget, taxpayers will pay $263,000 to Eldon House. City Budget projections are a 35.4% increase from 2016 to 2018.]
Source: The London Citizens' Guide To The Tax-Paid Pan-Am Games Bid, by Marc Emery.
My advise is to know the history of the failures City Hall has created over the years, always leaving the taxpayers of London with the bill, so one will be better informed and prepared for the next time a city politician has an 'exciting new idea' for London. (When a politician uses the word "exciting" that should be taken as a warning...)
© Trevor Dailey
