Quote:
Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle
I'm not towing any line. The city wants and needs this arena, the Flames want and need this arena. When you look at the costs all in, no matter what format or source they come from, my only belief is that the city and the Flames both have very very significant stake, desire and needs for this project, so both should be paying.
|
I don't take any issue with any of that both should be paying... but the Flames contention is that while both should be paying only 1 party (them) should be profiting. If both should be paying then both should be profiting and if the flames want a bigger stake in the profits then they ought to pay an equivalent stake in the investment.
Quote:
|
and the truth is I do actually feel the CSEC evaluation of the cities 1/3 a 1/3 a 1/3 proposal was closer to accurate than how the mayor articulated it
|
How so? Here is the cities response...
https://www.scribd.com/document/3595...ring-proposals
... The cities position seems pretty clear & accurate to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erick Estrada
Well what if my current car...
|
You have the role reversed I said it's your neighbor (not you) that get's to drive the car. I'm 99% certain you'd actually tell your neighbor to #### off (after first laughing and then saying "Oh, you're being serious"). If it's that other 1%... could you PM me your address? because I now know who I want to live next to.