Quote:
Originally Posted by Cappy
Haha sorry, I think the wink emoji on this site is terrible and hard to recognize.
I understand the argument, I'm just not convinced that it justifies the dollar figure.
|
Oh, I agree that the notoriety of the City is far down the scale of factors. I also agree the economic argument is sketchy (though not as one-sided as you think.
The main arguments are based on simply whether it's a desired feature of the city and its residents and the market deals that are common for arenas (the City wants to push against the market, I know, but the owners probably figure that it's a reason to take their position).
Nenshi has said his "vision" is a revitalized Vic Park with an arena. OK, is the City willing to pay any money for that? I don't see loans or loan guarantees as a monetary contribution except to the extent they are interest free or something like that. Nenshi has said things about dollars being OK if there's a "benefit to the community". So both economics (mainly increase in property values in the area and therefore the tax base), and intangibles come into play. And if the City is serious about the Olympics, they can't expect owners to just contribute 100% to a facility that would be used in those games (or even in the bid).