Quote:
Originally Posted by Cappy
I'm sorry, but you are talking in circles. You were orignally talking about how profitable the land is and now it has negative value. Remediation will cost the city/prov money regardless, so why do it for the purpose of building a stadium in which they gain no money.
I honestly see no logic in the land value arguments put forth here. It is a red herring.
|
The land currently has negative value. The city gets the land AND the building for 200M, it gets cleaned up, could be worth a lot of money in 20 years. Who knows maybe the prov and fed and Flames kick in for cleaning.
The city will own a bunch of prime land in a great area with a whack of commercial development, condos, and you don't think that's a factor?
The point being, man, that you're taking a polarized view on a very complex issue with a lot of uncertain variables, and insinuating people who have a different view than you need to educate themselves, including people who have way more knowledge of this than you like 2 city councillors who appeared to be quite supportive today.