Just because the committee approved it today, doesn't mean Lansdowne 2.0 is a done deal.

We encourage everyone to write to their councillor and tell them to vote NO on November 7th.

Here's a tool for you to easily send a pre-written email: www.horizonottawa.ca/stop_lansdowne

Bottom line: The updated financial picture is only marginally better, and key risks flagged by the Auditor General still exist.

Sutcliffe claims critics are spreading misinformation but ironically, that’s exactly how many would describe this week’s announcement.

At today’s Council meeting, a motion from Councillor Lo to suspend the rules to add a time-sensitive Lansdowne motion failed, so councillors did not have the opportunity to vote on it.

Here's how it went down and what Councillor @shawnmenard.bsky.social had to say:

Questions Sutcliffe didn’t fully answer:

➡️ Why are bids for air rights so much higher than earlier estimates?
➡️ Do AG-flagged assumptions (playoff revenues, team success) remain material risks?
➡️ What contingencies remain if partners back out?

Sutcliffe said that since taxpayers cover only 1/3 of capital costs, they get $3 of value for every $1 invested. This is misleading.

The “value” comes in the form of private amenities and entertainment options that residents have to pay to access, not public infrastructure.

The affordable-housing headline: contracted revenues would deliver $14.4M for housing vs the 2023 estimate of $9.75M, around a $4.65M increase.

Based on the City AG’s 2024 cost estimate (~$122,651 per unit), that increase could fund around 38 additional affordable units.

Sutcliffe said revised numbers show lower costs and higher revenue than earlier estimates.

Key figures he gave:

➡️ Total project value: $418.8M (virtually identical to the $419M estimate)
➡️ Construction cost: $313M (down from $316M)
➡️ Air-rights revenue: $65M (up from $39M)

ATU local 279 is clear when they say: “Private transit is never the answer.” OC Transpo operators know this city better than any outside company.

The solution isn’t privatization, it's investing in public transit service in rural wards.

Here’s what privatization actually brings:

❌ Unsafe, poorly maintained vehicles

❌ Higher fares for riders, hitting seniors, students, and low-income residents hardest

❌ Routes cut when not profitable

❌ Zero accountability to the public, only to shareholders

Councillor Brown is promoting private transit as the solution. Privatization won’t fix rural transit, it will make it worse.

Private operators exist to turn a profit, not to serve communities. They cut unprofitable routes, charge higher fares, and lack accountability.

Rural residents in Ottawa have long faced limited public transit. The current levy reflects that. Rural households with reduced service pay significantly less than urban areas, but also receive less service: