Quote:
Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15
Do we not elect council members to represent us on decisions like this? If you don't already know your wards positions on this then you aren't doing your job.
|
Yes, but it seems rare to me that unprecedented large scale projects like this go from public info available to full green light in a single week. Obviously, this project is a bit of a unicorn for a lot of reasons, but my recollection of other complex and contentious issues is that council normally has lots of questions and seeks clarification/revision on a few points before proceeding to a vote.
I'm not sure how long last Monday's in camera meeting was, but I have to imagine most of it was presentation of details, not discussion. It seems to me that if this were following a more typical city council course:
1. there would be a lot of discussion around things like the non-guaranteed community arena, and the est. 48.7M/year revenue increase for CSEC.
2. a councillor would introduce a motion seeking a revision to better guarantee the community arena, and to seek further clarification on the 48.7M benefit to CSEC.
3. Tired negotiators would get back to the table and find a way to make a certain chunk of city investment be tied directly to the community arena. The Flames provide a tiny bit of info that let's them re-jigger that 48.7M calculation and it more/less gets swept under the rug.
4. It comes back in Sept. and passes, everyone feels a lot better about the deal.
There should probably be more than those two little points to revise/clarify, but you get my point.
But, if the Flames would rather start the multi-year process of gaining the opportunity to pay a ~$190M fee to move to another city with a building that's already 15 years old...then I for one would remember this council very fondly as the one's who "lost" the Flames.