Quote:
Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle
Whether that's the right point or not, people need to stop thinking of business cases for whether the city does or doesn't (or at what level) contribute to a project like this as a one size fits all.
|
I tend to agree with that. The Flames aren't going to look at Seattle or Long Island and say "whelp... now we have to do that" but by the same extension Calgary also doesn't have to look at Edmonton and say "Gee whiz, I guess we gotta we gotta pay what they do".
I'll say that they're rhetorical points against the Flames (so merely a PR problem)... but that's all they are since I don't think anyone really believed that.
I will note the 49 year lease... if the Flames want to accept an ironclad 49 year lease agreement and prorate what they claim was their contribution out 49 years I think we can do business on an arena quickly.