Quote:
Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle
City absolutely gets benefit from this type of project and structure, and no it hasn't been de-bunked. People on either side of the argument can come up with lots of arguments to support their case, many on both sides have merit, but there has never been anything close to a complete de-bunking as you put it.
What is very much debatable though is the amount of benefit the city will get, and how to monitise that. I won't pretend to know that answer, but I think it will be fairly easy to figure out, and is the reason why tax payers will end up spending some money on the new rink, because the government will see some form of value in having these facilities in the province.
|
The claim has always been that arenas (and stadiums) "create" business when the reality is that they just direct business (so an arena in the Stampede Grounds will mean a greater share of money gets spent around there on game days, an arena in the West Village means that money gets spent around there, an arena nowhere means that money is spread out on other entertainment options. In that sense, it has been de-bunked.
So it all comes to how valuable is directed spending to a city. Often it isn't worth what they pay which is why I'm against money going directly to any arena project. Now if property tax deals or land transfers can be worked out then I'm usually supportive in the right situation.
If you were to take the Victoria Park location, the city could find a way to reduce or forego property tax on a piece of land next to the rail tracks which is generally a low value area anyways (so the opportunity cost is low) and the arena would then be the means to direct development further in Victoria Park and the East Village. All you lose is potential revenue rather than actual dollars in exchange for increased value which may have happened anyway, it is a rather low risk tradeoff.
To make a West Village location better, the money from the city would need to come from large infrastructure changes to Crowchild/Bow Trail. In this case, those are changes that need to happen anyway because that Crowchild interchange is a massive cluster#### and nothing good will come of West Village with Bow Trail being the way it is either (this is without getting into the creosote issue). So while the city would need to contribute a lot of money, the taxpayers benefit from a much better roads system and something of value gets built on an otherwise 'dead' location.
So the benefits are indeed there, but not in the direct ways that the promoters have traditionally given, and based on the sales tax abilities of American cities, it is much easier for them to come up with predicted dollar return, even though that can still fall spectacularly short (see: Glendale, City of).