Last week, the Finance and Corporate Services Committee held a special meeting to discuss Lansdowne 2.0. After hours of public delegations and debate, the motion to proceed passed at committee. The final Council vote will take place on Friday, November 7th.
I voted in favour because the proposal meets all the requirements previously set by Council. But, most importantly, it ensures that we do not waste so many of your tax dollars upgrading Lansdowne. I would rather put your tax dollars towards other important priorities. Thank you to all of you who wrote to me making sure that I know that you want to prioritize your tax dollars on transit and roads and social services and infrastructure. Supporting this plan for Lansdowne, in the proposed model, does that. If you are confused by this, I would encourage you to read the reports at www.kanatanorth.ca.
As Lansdowne is a City-owned asset, we have a responsibility to maintain it. This deal ensures long-term care and upgrades by OSEG, with only a modest annual debt-servicing cost and no tax increase. Uniquely, it also offers the City a chance to generate revenue—something no other City asset currently does. I wanted to share a clip of some of the questions I asked the City’s Chief Financial Officer, Cyril Rogers, on what this means financially for the City. You can view that at Finance and Corporate Services Committee – October 30, 2025.
Some other points I wanted to share are the following: At the meeting, it saddened me to see that so few delegations highlighted the inaccessibility of our current arena and stands. Our current Lansdowne arena is not accessible to many of our Ottawa residents. This is unacceptable. I cannot ethically support delaying this project or investing your tax dollars in an old, leaky, end-of-life building that many of our Ottawa residents and athletes cannot even independently use.
In addition, the increased air-rights revenue and funding will both help the City take care of its asset and build more affordable housing, benefiting residents across Ottawa—especially those struggling to find a place to live.
To those of you who would like to keep a roof over the North Side’s stands, staff explained that the new design will allow for a future roof to be added, if there are funds. Importantly, the design doesn’t preclude a roof being built in the future.
Given my role as the City Councillor for Canada’s Largest Technology Park, and a strong advocate for economic and business development, I was interested to hear the presentations in support of the staff recommendation by Invest Ottawa, The Ottawa Board of Trade, Ottawa Tourism, Ottawa Festivals, Canadian Live Music Association, the Commissioner of the CFL, the Commissioner of the OHL, multiple hoteliers, and the Glebe BIA to name only a few business organizations.
Just to be clear about what a no vote would have meant, rejecting the proposal would mean that the City’s taxpayers bear the full cost of upgrades and ongoing maintenance, as taxpayers did before Lansdowne 1.0. These exorbitant costs eventually led to Lansdowne’s deterioration. I can understand that there may be community confusion around the financials, and I encourage residents to review the full details at Lansdowne 2.0 – Kanata North.
PWHL
Recent discussions about the Lansdowne arena have been challenging, particularly around the PWHL’s public lease negotiations. While I fully support the Ottawa Charge and women’s hockey—having played myself and supported my daughters in the sport—this issue extends beyond the game. It involves financial considerations tied to the league’s ownership and business model.
The PWHL is owned by a U.S.-based billionaire with interests in major sports franchises. Revenue from Charge ticket sales largely benefits the league’s owner, and lease terms can influence the team’s valuation for future franchising. A lower lease may benefit the league financially, but not necessarily Ottawa taxpayers.
During their delegation, PWHL representatives stated they need an additional $1 million annually to meet profitability goals. Given their projections for increased support and a potential move to a larger 11,000–12,000 seat arena, I found it difficult to justify expanding the current facility. They also would not commit to staying in Ottawa past 2031. As a City, we cannot base our long-term financial goals solely on 14 home games a year for one sport. I do have hope that there can be positive negotiations going forward, however, as the PWHL reps made it clear that they love Ottawa. Talks continue, and I feel that Mayor Sutcliffe did an excellent job of getting to the core of the issue.