Where Were You Dear Waterloo?
It is time to come to grips with what to do about the Waterloo Building in Huntsville. It’s a dirty job, but someone’s got to do it. The complex is quickly becoming a white elephant and it is costing taxpayers a small fortune.
In the beginning, the concept was a good one; a campus in Huntsville for post secondary education by a highly renowned Canadian University. There was federal money available because of the G-8 Summit and the potential for giving a real boost to Huntsville’s economy was too good to ignore. There was also a possible opportunity for Huntsville kids to go to university without leaving home. What’s not to like about that picture?
The problem is that the money was spent but nothing really happened. From the beginning, there was no substantive commitment from Waterloo. They did not have to pay for bricks and mortar. The lease was written in a manner that minimized their obligations, in order to provide incentive for the university to enter into a partnership with the Town. The Mayor and Council of the day took them at their word that they would develop the property into a full environmental, post-secondary facility. But sadly, it just didn’t happen.
Now we sit with an almost empty building which, along with the road that was required to get to it, cost federal and municipal taxpayers about $9 million. On top of that, since the building went up in 2010, Huntsville taxpayers have had to foot the bill for debenture payments and maintenance to the tune of $250,000 or more, each and every year.
Early in their term of office, our current Council entered into a new lease with Waterloo which provided more revenue to the Town and lowered overhead for the municipality. Sometime later, Council called for proposals for the Waterloo Building because the university was only using a portion of it and only for a few months each year. They received a single response. Subsequently, Waterloo has informed the Town that they will be totally abandoning the building this summer.
The latest chapter in this story is that the group of entrepreneurs who originally submitted a proposal for the Waterloo Building are back at the table, having made an oral presentation to Council last month. At first blush it looks like a sweetheart deal for everyone but the taxpayers. In a nutshell, the group offered to lease the Waterloo Building for 20 years for one dollar per year plus payment of operating costs but leaving the Town to hold the bag for capital costs. Further the proposal was conditional on the proponents obtaining an anchor lease, probably from a government agency. Some members of Council were wary of this proposal. Hopefully the proponents are back to the drawing board because on the face of it, there is nothing in this for the taxpayer, other than further costs, while someone else makes a profit.
In my view, Council has two choices when it comes to the Waterloo Building. They can sell it or lease it. Some would argue that selling the building at market value, would only recover a fraction of the cost of the original investment and therefore, it is better to hold on to the asset.
But why in the world would the Town agree to lease the building for a dollar so that the new leaseholder could sublet it to other renters at a tidy profit? If there are interested parties out there, whether in government or the private sector, could not the Town accomplish this without the middleman? If they can’t, if the Town really needs a middleman, then surely they need a big slice of the pie. If an entrepreneur can make a profit out of the Waterloo building, why shouldn’t the Town get their share?
Ideally, the Town should not be in the Real Estate business unless there is a strategic benefit to the municipality. If they can make a deal that would see the Waterloo Building fully leased, eliminate their costs and eventually get a return on their investment, then perhaps, given all that has gone on, they should hold on to this asset. But a sweetheart deal does not cut it. If it is not good for the municipality, for the taxpayer, it should not happen. Under those circumstances, it is better to bite the bullet, sell the building, cut our losses and get on with life.
Don’t miss out on Doppler! Sign up for our free, twice-weekly newsletter here.
Debi Davis says
I thought I heard some rumblings about Council needing a bigger council chamber. Maybe it is time to put municipal offices into that building and turn some of the Summit Centre space back into public use spaces.
Really I think we should sell the darn place.
WIll Annand says
The Huntsville High school is starting to show its age, what about moving to that building?
OR
Move the Town hall and municipal buildings there and turn the existing historic town hall into a town museum or public meeting rooms.
Paul Johnson says
Move the town offices to the “Waterloo” building? What a great idea!
The existing townhall has much better lease or sale appeal and getting all of the parking associated with town staff and those visiting the town offices would provide significant relief to the cronic downtown parking problem.
This idea deserves serious study as part of the long range planning for our town.
Karen Parr says
Affordable Housing is badly needed.
Bill Beatty says
I have a sledge hammer and I am sure I can find a FOR SALE sign !
Greg Boden says
If the building was originally built to accommodate the University crowd, that has since vacated the town, should we not avail the property to OTHER Universities or large corporations? Due to the fact that this building was associated with a school. if the town could come to a reasonable amount of payment, that would also introduce more business to enter lease agreements. More tax dollars. More interest in the community.
We need big players here to entertain this idea. Laurentian, Toronto, Sir Sanford Fleming, Ottawa, and many others. Just to name a few.
This is becoming the Olympic pool of Huntsville. Government money built it, the taxpayers pay, it’s not used.
Brian Tapley says
How much land goes with the Waterloo building? If significant expansion is possible it might make a buyer more interested.
How about this.
Sell the Waterloo building like Hugh suggests.
Build a new town hall on the old Empire site. Include more downtown parking and give everyone a nice modern place to work, all in one place, all in the center of town.
Convert the somewhat regal old town hall into more public space and a museum.
This would get rid of the white elephant out in the boondocks, give the town staff a nice new place to work and add a centrally located museum… all three good things and the downtown would be much revitalized in the process.
It’s bold and won’t be cheap but if you are looking 20 to 50 years ahead it might make the most sense.
Jim Logagianes says
Sell the building to the highest bidder and move on, Huntsville can not afford more overhead. All you poor soles who think our municipality is a bottomless pit need to get a grip. We’re broke. We can not afford to maintain the existing infrastructure and now all of you want to increase the cost of running the municipality. When we all leave Muskoka due to the cost who will pay for this bloated regional government that was forced upon us? Thanks to the late Frank Miller, Muskoka is one of the most expensive places to live in Ontario. We have more politicians per capita in Muskoka than anywhere else in Ontario. Six Mayors, an unelected District chairman and more councillors than you can shake a stick at. If you wanted to create something that is unsustainable you have achieved your goal. Welcome to Muskoka. Thanks Frank, your legacy lives on. BTW I’m currently in Greece and it seems as though their government is in a state of confusion as well. Welcome to the real world. Canada needs political reform. Our current system is in need of a reboot. What is the alternative?
Rob Millman says
The municipal government AND selected classes from the High School should be able to occupy the Waterloo building. Perhaps, the High School exchange program could be expanded significantly to make use of the residence rooms. The original Town Hall could be a museum (as many have suggested), and the new Town Hall could be sold. Club 55 would have to be retained or relocated.
The Empire property, given its location, should be a statement of the Town’s vision; not a government building or a parking lot.