Cambridge Mill owners backing out of former Galt post office project? ( follow the comments)

By  | April 11, 2015 | 7 Comments | Filed under: Cambridge Council 2014/2015

 

super man

comments
By Linda | APRIL 09, 2015 08:56 AM
Another informative Article by Bill Jackson

By xDEX | APRIL 09, 2015 09:34 AM
I question why the whole steering committee was not in on the news. So even within the committee, secrets are being kept from others. Maybe now we won’t need to waste dollars on that useless pedestrian bridge either and use the money where there is more NEED. Sounds like the Mayors “visions” need to be reevaluated. Landmark was probably waiting to get their approval for a double the allowed height hotel/condo in a no build flood plain area. Poor planning once again. Finally, articles with substance that are not being manipulated.

23) Comment
By Sum Ting | APRIL 09, 2015 10:39 AM
Well done Mr Mayor and the other civil servants involved start to focus on Municipal matters and not private partnership issues. Hope Pearle Hospitality (landmark) hands you your ass in a lawsuit for entering into such a deal. Maybe whoever partners with this project will also ask for forgiveness on their tax bill just like Dunfield Theater. This is all being done for the greater good of Galt (Cambridge) they say….

By LES | APRIL 09, 2015 10:42 AM
Renovating this building at a cost of $12 million is crazy. The city shouldn’t be anywhere near this. Their are much more pressing issues that our tax dollars should be spent on.

By MrKenn | APRIL 09, 2015 11:14 AM
Can we now drop the entire idea ? Since this historical building was a FEDERAL post office, should not the federal government pay ? That would be a good platform plank for the tax and spend Liberals
By Neil | APRIL 09, 2015 12:03 PM
Nice job mr. mayor. We all know what happens (and what it costs us) when the government cancels a plan so maybe the city should go after this group for restitution . Forget the bridge and this building and fix up the city. If we really do need another library then build it somewhere that is accessable to all.
by Joe | APRIL 09, 2015 12:11 PM
Something is fishy near the river and it’s not the carp. Hopefully if true , Cambridge Mill must pay to get out of the contract if indeed there was one . Also if true , use a tender process so all interested parties may bid. Personally if I were a local restaraunteur I would not tender a bid . There may be none in the river but this looks more and more of a red herring everyday, combined with “improvements” for the Water Street lot.
by Lucy | APRIL 09, 2015 01:21 PM
We were told this was a “Done Deal” and so the City was obligated to move forward on this. Now Landmark(Pearle) can back out? So the public has been lied to again, as it must not have been a done deal. How many more “NON” DONE DEALS are out there. How many more secret deals and lies are out there? Our Mayor needs to stop selling off our city. I personally have had enough of all of this. The whole deal should fall back on to Landmark(pearle) at their full expense. This has been suspicious since the get go.
By Jim | APRIL 09, 2015 01:39 PM
I remember when the city sold this building for a dollar and the buyer made a fortune leasing it and not putting the money into it that is needed to fix it up. It has needed work for years and years.

And here comes Superman.. I mean DEX…

By Dex | APRIL 09, 2015 07:56 PM
Aahh the Critics are all out today I see. @Lucy, can you point to that article? the announcement perhaps? stating that there was a done deal? I do not remember such being made. I think everyone just heard the rumour about a tentative deal that Pearle is no longer pursuing. Now it’ll go to Tender. I remember that being a complaint from…well most of you.. that it didn’t go to tender.

By Dex | APRIL 09, 2015 08:03 PM
@Joe, I agree, Local Restauranteurs would not want this spot. With a great view of the river, being in an old building with historical significance. Prime position for catering Library Fundraisers. Terrible. @Sum Ting, you’re right, the City shouldn’t enter into private partnerships, even if they do provide needed services for the City or generate another revenue stream.

by Dex | APRIL 09, 2015 08:07 PM
@DIGS, aka xDEX. You should be more creative in your pseudonyms. But I think it is interesting that Councillor Liggett fought to get on the Steering Committee. She said she was going to dig to the bottom of things, especially the deal with Pearle Hospitality, she was going to bring accountability to Council, how did she not know what was going on? And she’d be the last to know? Has she been missing Steering Committees like she did the Budget meetings? Ward 4 Residents can’t be impressed that their representative doesn’t even know what’s going on when she sits on the Committee.

( can you tell that superman/Dex doesn’t like Councillor Liggett?? Because she can’t be bought or bullied…. only one amongst them with balls, the rest in my opinion are nothing more than a bunch of … well.. I will leave that to your imagination..

 

By Joe | APRIL 09, 2015 11:34 PM..
At Dex. You almost sound like a city official . As for revenue generated …from what ? Restaurant items . How many parking spaces will be lost on Water Street to library employees , taking away from shoppers . Overdue fees on books as revenue ? A library without books . User fees ? Funny how heritage building owners must stick to heritage ie. Colour of shutters and brick yet we can add a glass gangplank to the library .

****

JOE IS SHOCKING ME, HE IS FINALLY SEEING THRU THE BULLSHIT..

http://www.cambridgetimes.ca/news-story/5546685-cambridge-mill-owners-backing-out-of-former-galt-post-office-project-/

Facebooktwittergoogle_plus

7 Responses to Cambridge Mill owners backing out of former Galt post office project? ( follow the comments)

  1. lvann_11@sympatico.ca'
    Karen Mathews April 11, 2015 at 5:18 pm

    On again off again yet we still are sticking to a restaurant and not a library as we were told in the beginning. What are we doing putting any kind of business in this building for in the 1st place. Now a tender must be offered??? Something is wrong here and it comes from down on water street. The Mill people want a blind eye turned to their new building development and laws to get bent for them to build on this river site that limits on numerous items. Is it any wonder the mayor has hidden the facts on the restaurant? The mayor should also be held accountable as well as those council members that voted for the restaurant go ahead plan. This is a deep one.

  2. lvann_11@sympatico.ca'
    Billy St. April 11, 2015 at 10:28 pm

    Another screw up by city hall and our council. Council needs to wake up. They knew this was going on yet sold us on this.

  3. cambridgeawareness14@gmail.com'
    david April 12, 2015 at 8:38 am

    That DEX character goes on non stop. Even when he is wrong, he attempts to turn it around and make up his own meaning of things to try to justify all his comments. Read this comment where it proved DEX was wrong with one of his comments as the public was told the “Old Post Office” deal was a “done deal”…and then how DEX flips it to work how he wants it to go. If it wasn’t a done deal, then it shouldn’t have been written like that in the paper. As so much of this has been done behind closed doors, how else is the public to know. And the only reason for Jan not knowing things going on would be because the Mayor is intentionally keeping her out of the loop. DEX needs to get his head out of backside and stop blowing out all his BS.

    By Lucy | APRIL 10, 2015 05:50 PM
    @DEX…article written in Cambridge Times and what the public reads states “done deal”…written Nov 6, 2014, titled: Rationale lacking for $12.5M library project excerpt: “The decision to turn Galt’s former post office into a new branch of the city’s public library might be a done deal…”

    By Dex | APRIL 10, 2015 07:33 PM
    @Lucy, your post showed some shock related to Pearle’s decision to back out of what you called a “Done Deal”. And as you quote it’s the decision to turn Galt’s Former Post Office into a new branch of the library that’s a done deal. However, in relation to a FOI regarding the Restaurant agreement, Ilidia Sa Melo, states “negotiations, agreements and decisions pertaining to this initiative are still very much underway.” So were you outraged by Pearle pulling out of what you thought was a Done Deal? Or were you under the impression everything associated with the Old Post Office library was a done deal?

  4. lwhetham@live.ca'
    Gladys Smith April 13, 2015 at 9:30 am

    This was never about a Library, this was always about getting at the Library Budget the City needed the 6 million dollars that sat in the Library Budget and then came up with the idea of a small, little digital Library (to get at the money in the Library Budget) The Council knows that they can not do a deal with any one Restaurant it has to go to Tender and do not be surprised if the same Company gets the Restaurant but it will be done legally (cough, cough)

  5. lvann_11@sympatico.ca'
    Jeff April 14, 2015 at 7:24 pm

    Council in Cambridge is an embarrassment. How could they not know what is going on? They are playing us.

  6. Leskadar@rogers.com'
    Bozo April 14, 2015 at 9:41 pm

    Councillors know only what senior staff and the Mayor let them know. The back room work is criminal and historic.
    People need to contact their councillors and get the low down directly.

  7. lvann_11@sympatico.ca'
    Jeff April 16, 2015 at 8:48 pm

    Bozo. The perfect name for the council members. Criminal you betcha. Every member that voted for this should resign.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Archives