[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Ice_Weasel

The other aspect of the argument that I can’t grasp is the completely binary point of view that assistance in any form is at the direct expense of social spending. There are many forms of mutually benefitial partnerships that would result in a net increase to City finances versus the do nothing alternative. The city owns land to the west of downtown. Guess what – this land is toxic and nobody wants it which is why it has been vacant since, well, forever. So the city can continue to own this land, make no revenue from it, and thus have no additional revenue for anything else. Or…it can structure a deal with the flames whereby this area is developed, increasing the tax base of the property and collect money that it would otherwise not have. Arguing the alternative is akin to arguing for higher taxes and not understanding that it is the tax base, and not rate, which is ultimately the most important.

Then you haven't been following the issue. The city has looked at remediation costs and development options for the land west of downtown and crunched the numbers. From an article in the Calgary Herald:

The city’s own 2010 West Village blueprint proposed office towers and housing for 12,000 people. Readying the area for development was initially estimated at $300 million to $400 million, mainly for rerouting roads and cleaning soil contaminated by a chemical plant.

Last year, council directed the East Village development agency to consider replicating that district’s financing scheme in West Village. The complex tool is a community revitalization levy, a loan from the province to spruce up blighted districts. The city repays the loan through property taxes gained from new developments in the revitalization zone.

Calgary Municipal Land Corp. is figuring out if the dollars add up, but council hasn’t asked to run the numbers with an arena, said Michael Brown, the agency’s chief executive.

Edmonton used a downtown revitalization levy to pump $120 million into the Oilers arena, donating city land and related amenities like an LRT connection and “winter garden.”

Nenshi’s office has warned against this kind of move.

“If they proposed West Village, they’d be nuts,” policy analyst Josh White wrote to his colleagues in January 2013. “We told them two years ago the challenge with this site … The business case only makes sense if you can fully build it out at very high density. An arena sucks up a huge (piece) of land, leaving a lot less to pay back a CRL (community revitalization levy).”