Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame
No, it's not. The bid committee had its own unique challenges for size, scope, number of events, infrastructure upgrades, and IOC demands.
The same situation applies with the 2026 bid, even if the amount of dollars involved and the priorities have shifted.
It's not invoking "emotional bait" unless you're talking about making the sell based on feelie touchies which you seem to think is happening. There is far more to it than that.
This is a chance to building new, upgrade, and take advantage of facilities that have served 30 years to the Calgary public and, with another Olympics in tow, can continue to serve Calgarians for another 30 years with the right level of investment from multiple parties.
The 1988 Olympics will always be inextricably tied to this 2026 bid, but is that a bad thing since those games were considered a success? It would be far more of a fallacy to try and sell the Greece or Brazil games as "success", which this isn't.
|
I would be totally onboard with this if we were going to see fast tracked transit (green line, airport line), a new NHL arena, football stadium and improved roadways and parks etc. None of this has been covered and doesn't look to be happening unless something drastic happen in the coming days. Most of these legacy buildings will be renovated, maintained or re-built on their own merit whether there is another Olympics here or not.
What is the benefit to the taxpayer who is going to be bent over for the next 25 years covering the cost of this two week party other than temporarily delaying the demolition of the Saddledome and McMahon? In my opinion farming portions of it out to Edmonton and re-using many old buildings the way it has been proposed is going to look really cheesy and downright stupid when the price tag comes in as not nearly cheap enough to justify compared to going all new and hosting everything here imo.