Darn, people said stuff I agreed with so I have to open my big mouth again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Table 5
Also, if Calgarians are chipping in tax dollars, I'd like it to be treated as an investment where they also get a cut of the profits back in some fashion. Treat the team as a special case scenario, but also demand a slice of the action for the gesture.
|
No problem with that, if we get a fair slice of the action, fine, but whats fair, a fee on the ticket prices which goes to the arena fund, split between the city and the owners? That's fine to me, tax the users of the new facility.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sidney Crosby's Hat
There's definitely a place for taxpayer funded facilities. Edmonton's is 50% public and 50% private. The city's contribution is less than it was for the Terwillegar Rec Centre in the SW part of the city and the building includes a community rink. The city benefits as 30% of new property taxes (as a result of the arena district) will go towards the building and the other 70% will go towards revitalizing Jasper Ave.
The city has a stake in this, too. Like Table 5 said the Flames play a huge role in defining Calgary.
|
Also sort of agree, except this isn't Edmonton and our Arena is already in a great location, new property taxes won't be as big of an impact, even more so since just north of the current location is already being re-built by the city rezoning.
However, my understanding of Edmonton's deal is that the oilers went sleezy, and please correct me if wrong. Edmonton has to contribute x millions of dollars, but then also pay 100% of the tab for community hockey arenas which will be owned by the oilers... that doesn't make sense to me.
I am all for helping our owners, but not with free money, as long as there is return on the investment which is greater than or equal to 0 (i.e. a loan with a interest rate equal to that of the bank of Canada prime rate or something).