Trisan Centre naming still irks King's mayor

YorkRegion.com
March 22, 2017
Simon Martin and Adam Martin-Robbins

Do you ever drive by the Trisan Centre in Schomberg and wonder how it got its name? Just stop and ask King Mayor Steve Pellegrini and he will be sure to give you an earful. Before the 2010 election, King council approved a deal to put the construction company’s name on the $14.9 million facility for 50 years in return for $300,000, which works out to $6,000 a year.

Pellegrini, who railed against the deal before the 2010 election, said that’s equivalent to the cost of renting space on a bus shelter.

After winning the election, Pellegrini found himself in the uncomfortable position of having to sign the final agreement with Trisan and says when he told the company he couldn’t do it, the owner agreed to reduce the term to 25 years.

Still, Pellegrini says the naming of a major recreation facility should fetch $1 million.  

Just look at Newmarket. They fetched $5 million ($500,000 a year for 10 years) from Magna to name a state-of-the-art, $39 million recreation centre.

Vaughan recently approved a corporate partnerships program that would see the renaming of facilities.

York University political science professor Robert MacDermid says there are potential problems with these types of deals.

“Elected representatives want to do things for their constituents; they want to have new infrastructure. So, if a developer can make a contribution to that and get their name on that thing, it gives them some leverage, I think, over planning officials and elected representatives when it comes to making a decision about a development down the road,” he said. “Even at the time they’re negotiating the naming rights, there may well be some discussion about a quid pro quo.”

MacDermid also points out some governments or institutions give away naming rights for a tiny fraction of what the facility actually costs, which seems unfair to taxpayers who bear most of the cost.

He said municipalities should take a different approach.

“I would be in favour of recognizing that this (corporate sponsorship) exists and trying to acknowledge donors in other ways that are more modest, and so decrease the leverage they might have over planning officials and councillors,” he said.