Quote:
Originally Posted by Tinordi
Also it's not a fact that the building needs to be replaced, it's a frame.
The Flames aren't losing money because the building. They're still very solvent. Fans still go in droves to the game. There is little in the way of need for a new building it's just a big want for some fans and the owners.
That's the starting point. If the owners want a new arena to grow their revenue then great, pay for it yourself.
The second annoying argument is the conflation of the land remediation with the arena. The land remediation will happen when it makes economic sense to do so. The city can sell the land net of the remediation costs and still come out much further ahead than building an arena on it that wont pay back any taxes. This is another frame. That all of a sudden, cleaning up that land is a huge public policy priority. Did anyone in the city care prior to 2 months ago that the area needs to be cleaned up before it is developed? No. Why so now?
|
I agree with your first point, but I am not so sure on the second. KK was pretty clear that he thought the CalgaryNEXT initiative could be a facilitator in getting the province and the city to get started on the clean up. Without a scheme of this scope, the city/province could remain in a stalemate, as the province indemnifies the city for creosote issues, so long as they don't dig up the site. That is a recipe for inaction if I ever saw one. I am not sure selling the land net of remediation costs would work well either. Is the city going to sell it for negative $197 million? Is that not a subsidy to the ultimate purchaser?
I have been saying for a while, that more focus needs to be spent on the purchase greenlit by Bronco in 2009. Did they do any due diligence? Did they simply ignore that due diligence? If there was no priority to clean up the site, why did they buy the land? How did they manage to negotiate an indemnity on the creosote problem, but only until they develop the site? What the hell good does that do?