Quote:
Originally Posted by Tinordi
This makes my argument even more relevant, because Calgary can't issue its own bonds it's subject to provincial debt limits. Which means that Calgary can only issue debt at 1.5 times it's revenue. Which is a soft cap. The new arena will not bring new revenue which means that the amount by which Calgary can borrow for needed projects is the net amount from the arena.
So far from being a victimless crime, there is a very clear opportunity cost to the city for loaning money for the ticket tax. It means other projects such as a field house would be strained for financing.
|
Nice attempt to spin your way out of an uniformed comment, but:
a) the debt limit is actually 2x revenue - for Calgary somewhere in the $7 billion range (the City has a far lower internal cap)
b) this project would put the City nowhere near that, but even so the limit can be exceeded on a project basis subject to provincial approval,
c) the vast majority of public projects do not bring in new revenue (ie, they are not profitable - that's why they are public and not private sector)
d) risk to the arrangement lies in the details - a payment structure could be agreed upon that allocates risk to CS&E, not the City
It's obviously not a good idea for the City to keep racking up municipal debt and the organization needs to become much more efficient than it is, but acting as if backstopping a ticket tax will put the City in a precarious financial position is simply spreading misinformation.