[CaptainYooh]

Good opinion article in Herald today dissecting the "subsidy" argument.

http://www.calgaryherald.com/opinion...268/story.html

...Here’s a troubling scenario. Council agrees with the mayor’s push to “eliminate the subsidy” on utility levies, adding roughly another $4,041 per house to city coffers. The development industry says “fine, we’re not going to pay the community and recreation levy anymore” — that’s $4,370 less per house. City council could try withholding an agreement under such terms, but if the industry is agreeing to pay 100 per cent of those things they are legally obligated to, a court may see things differently.

Determining who pays for growth, how and when, is not an exact science — there is no magic formula. Claiming a “sprawl subsidy” during an election might be good politics, but at some point, mayor and council will need to tone down the rhetoric, and use persuasion and a more respectful approach with the industry they’re asking to pay the bills...