[News] New Arena - Plan B - Victoria Park

[JiriHrdina]

I'm more than happy to put up another poll question. Do people want options based on total dollars of public funding or percent of the project cost?

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by Bunk

I could wrap my head around up to $100m in Land/Cash/CRL if there was a demonstrated public benefit and return on investment. That seems reasonable on what will be a $450m-$500m project. I would also rather the CSEC retain ownership, not the City unless there was some revenue sharing.

Seconded.

[oldschoolcalgary]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Sure but again that's not the question I was asking

fair enough... though its a tough one to answer in black and white.

all of us have a price we are willing to pay to keep the flames... beyond that number....

[GGG]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

I'm more than happy to put up another poll question. Do people want options based on total dollars of public funding or percent of the project cost?

Total dollars to keep the flames from moving. I think % makes the numbers feel less real

[Kjesse]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

I'm more than happy to put up another poll question. Do people want options based on total dollars of public funding or percent of the project cost?

How about a question that makes sense. That would be a good start.

Current question: Do you feel not using public funds is worth the Flames moving?

WTF? Yes or no to that seem the same. The question is terribly phrased.

[FireGilbert]

I'm confused. So voting Yes means you don't support public funds even if it means the team moves, and voting No means you support public funds if it means stopping a move?

I never want the Flames to move and generally don't support public money for professional sports teams however don't live in Calgary so it wouldn't be my tax money going to the arena. What am I supposed to vote for?

[Yoho]

Originally Posted by Delgar

How about a question that makes sense. That would be a good start.

Current question: Do you feel not using public funds is worth the Flames moving?

WTF? Yes or no to that seem the same. The question is terribly phrased.

A tad harsh?

[The Fonz]

A tad, Lloyd? A tad?

[Mr.Coffee]

for those that don't like the way the question is phrased, why don't you suggest what you think it should be?

This may be an incredibly stupid question but could the city hold a referendum on something like this?

Also, it'd be good to know (if anyone does), how much of my property tax would go towards something like this? What's the actual dollar impact on me?

Anyway I basically agree with everything Locke said earlier. The opening negotiating anchor set by the Flames was too aggressive. I don't think it was worth responding to either, or should have been met with an equally insulting counter. It was absurd.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

This may be an incredibly stupid question but could the city hold a referendum on something like this?.

There is a referendum in the form of a local election in the fall. Talk to the mayoral candidates and your ward candidate and find their opinions and vote appropriately. We vote every four years on people who will represent us on these issues so we don't have to have needless referendums.

Provincial referendums aren't legally binding anyways. So it'd be pointless. (iirc someone can correct all this or flesh it out more)

[Dion]

Originally Posted by Bunk

I could wrap my head around up to $100m in Land/Cash/CRL if there was a demonstrated public benefit and return on investment. That seems reasonable on what will be a $450m-$500m project. I would also rather the CSEC retain ownership, not the City unless there was some revenue sharing.

To me it's the only way you'll get the general public to agree to something like that.

[robaur]

Nenshi is right. I don't care if he hurts Ken King's feelings.

Flames group is wrong. They have more than enough financial ability to get this taken care of by themselves. Just negotiating the best deal.

I hope city council and the mayor stay firm. If the Flames threaten to move, then call their bluff and tell them to leave. People often get blinded by the nostalgia but forget that the Flames are a business like any other and are owned by a group of normal, regular human beings...although they're extremely rich. What I mean to say is....forget the team...make this a Public vs Murray Edwards et all....

This ownership group doesn't have the balls to move this team, nor will it be allowed by the NHL....so stay firm Nenshi/council...stay firm.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by robaur

Nenshi is right. I don't care if he hurts Ken King's feelings.

Flames group is wrong. They have more than enough financial ability to get this taken care of by themselves. Just negotiating the best deal.

I hope city council and the mayor stay firm. If the Flames threaten to move, then call their bluff and tell them to leave. People often get blinded by the nostalgia but forget that the Flames are a business like any other and are owned by a group of normal, regular human beings...although they're extremely rich. What I mean to say is....forget the team...make this a Public vs Murray Edwards et all....

This ownership group doesn't have the balls to move this team, nor will it be allowed by the NHL....so stay firm Nenshi/council...stay firm.

To be fair the ownership group has put a lot back into the community and deserve some credit for that.

Daryl and Don Seaman who generiously donated the money to build Seaman Stadium as well as the Duvernay Rose Tourmaline Field House in Okotoks. Also in 2001, along with his brothers, B.J. and Don, Doc provided $2 million in funding for the establishment of the Seaman Family MR Research Centre at the Calgary Health Region/University of Calgary Faculty of Medicine. In 2007, the centre became home to the neuroArm, the world’s first MRI-compatible surgical robot, which revolutionized neurosurgery and other branches of operative medicine by liberating them from the constraints of the human hand.

Of course there's The Flames foundation.

http://calgaryflamesfoundation.com/who-we-are/

[flambers]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

for those that don't like the way the question is phrased, why don't you suggest what you think it should be?
.

If the Flames threaten to move, they won't say it based on public funds.

So the poll question is difficult to answer

Rather its based on the City's lack of willingness to negotiate or something like that...

In my opinion.

The better question "will the Flames threaten to relocate the team ......."

[Lanny_McDonald]

Here's some questions for each fan to answer. Would you care if the Flames moved? Would you still be a fan of the team? If they moved would you become an Alberta Oilers fan and make the tip up to their new building to watch hockey games? Hell, if you're willing to make someone else drive the three hours to watch a concert you can certainly do the same to watch a hockey game. I mean, what's the difference?

[Erick Estrada]

I'm as big a Raiders fan as I am a Flames fan and saw for years on Raiders forums Oakland resident fans that believed they would never move, all this Vegas and LA stuff was a smoke screen, and something would get done in Oakland. Needless to say they are all pretty bitter this week and it's kind of surprising to me how stunned and shocked they are this week given as an outsider I saw this coming for years.

I don't see the Flames ever leaving this city. I simply don't see a greener grass scenario but we saw the Supersonics also turn their back on Seattle after not getting traction on a new arena so I suppose it's a reality in professional sports that this can happen in cities where it seems like it shouldn't happen.

[flambers]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I don't see the Flames ever leaving this city. I simply don't see a greener grass scenario but we saw the Supersonics also turn their back on Seattle after not getting traction on a new arena so I suppose it's a reality in professional sports that this can happen in cities where it seems like it shouldn't happen.

Oh I agree, however that's a good example

I hope this situation never get's to the point where the owners look elsewhere.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Bill Bumface

Bingo, the city didn't ask the Flames to clean up a contaminated area.

The city didn't ask the Flames to build a field house.

They were thrown in there as way the Flames figured they could get people to justify some public funding. I don't blame them for trying.

That doesn't mean it's on the city to counter.

This whole situation is like me needing a car, so I go to the dealership and offer them a baked potato.

It's not on them to counter with something reasonable when the opening offer is terrible.

From the cities perspective the location is wrong, the format is wrong, the funding is wrong, and the public infrastructure requirements are unreasonable.

Why the hell would you "counter" that?

Should the city hire a bunch of architects and engineers and economists to come up with a design and some renderings for Victoria Park and a funding model and propose that to the Flames?

I don't believe they should. That isn't their job, that is the Flames. They wasted enough hours running the economics on a proposal they knew at first sniff wasn't going to fly.

They should simply tell the Flames "Nice try, let me know when you have something real".

It is now on the Flames to come up on something new for Victoria Park and bring it forward.

It's not on the city to do anything but sit back and wait for the new proposal to show up.

You have pretty low expectations for the city then.

I don't.

they are paid with our tax dollars to represent us in what's best for the city. Sitting back and doing nothing until something comes along they like is a fair amount below what I would consider acceptable effort, response and thought.

Glad you're happy though!

The Flames opened with the Oilers offer. That's not an embarrassment to anyone, it's a logical starting point.

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by Bingo

The Flames opened with the Oilers offer. That's not an embarrassment to anyone, it's a logical starting point.

And the city countered with a logical starting point: this isn't Edmonton, what the Oilers got doesn't matter.


I am more than happy to have the City of Edmonton pay for the Flames new arena, there isn't an amount high enough I would object to.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Table 5

Sure, and the City started their negotiation with a "LOL no thanks". For many of us, considering how awful these deals tend to be for the public, that's a pretty logical place to start too.



Ok, and now think about it from the other side. If you were the City, what is your incentive here?

If you're trying to run a cash-strapped city in the midst of a huge economic downturn, and are asked to contribute a massive amount of money that you know you'll never get back... how would you respond to a request by a group of billionaires with a half-assed plan and bad math?

Why even enter that "negotiation"? Where's the incentive? Perhaps if the Flames offered the City a cut of the ownership or profits or some semblance of getting their money back... you might call this negotiation. Until then, it's just extortion dressed up as civic boosterism.

Then you say we can't put public dollars in any project like this for the foreseeable future. Say that. Say you would like a field house but even that $200M can't be spent given the economic climate.

Or you say we don't want a structure like that on the West side. Or you already have a development plan for the area and you'd like to stick to it.

Or you counter with zero funding, but a land deal and a large share of infrastructure money for the project.

Every business proposal put to the city is an opportunity that should be looked at and not treated with arrogance and an eye to their own political career.

And I don't think the math was all that strong on either side to be honest.