Quote:
Originally Posted by Cappy
Remediation will be a provincial/municipal cost as KK noted. He didnt say anything about paying that cost, nor did he about infrastructure - it can be assumed their plan is to have the city front that.
The Flames current lease with the saddledome doesnt have any revenue sharing and the majority of arena's in all leagues do not off this deal. City owned but costs and revenue go to the team.
Again, I, and several others have already commented on the city ownership of the stadium. It offers no benefit. They receive no revenue from it and it is a depreciating asset with one tenant that pays no rent.
Lastly, and again, it has been mentioned already, the land has been earmarked for development once east village is done. The city doesnt want to dilute both areas by opening them both up. The results have been great in the east village and once the area is sustainable they plan on working on getting west village going. It is a prime area of city owned land and they want to get their money's worth. This issue was raised in the leaked emails that Markusoff wrote on in the Herald. They feel the Flames are pushing the city into developing an area that doesnt have the funding to sustain success.
As noted, there are benefits, but I think the people on here are either looking past the issues or speculating too much on the potential to justify the fact that they really want the new arena. I do to, but I feel like there are numerous ways the city can help without paying for half to 2/3 of the cost (even 1/4 as you claim). Every arena in Canada, except Edmonton, was private money. The NY Jets and Giants 1.6 billion stadium was private money. We dont have to pay for the majority to get a quality project and the arguments used by KK and Co. are utter BS.
|
+1,000,000 points
Beyond site remediation and free land, there is no justification for governments to offer subsidies to get this arena built. When the saddledome is past its useful life, the Flames will build a new arena with their own funds. It is still 10 years away from that time.
1) The CLR is a subsidy because it simply diverts taxes that would have otherwise gone into the general municipal tax pool.
2) The ticket tax is a subsidy of $6 million per year at an interest rate of 3%.
Is the dome past its prime? Yes
But does it justify spending $700mm so I can pee and get a beer faster between periods? it does not.