Quote:
Originally Posted by Bingo
I think anyone trying to build a case for either side being largely in the right is just fooling themselves.
|
It would be nice if it was a discussion about being "right" - it seems to be much more about who is "wrong" (when there doesn't necessarily need to be a culprit there, either).
It seems that most of us can agree that Gondek's tweets were probably a tactical error, though now that we are past the shock and things have played out a bit maybe it's worth a sober second look at the oft-referenced "tweet storm":
Quote:
1/6 Today, I spoke with Murray Edwards, primary shareholder of Calgary Sports & Entertainment Corp (CSEC), about the future of the Event Centre project.
He informed me of the Flames intention to pull the plug on the Event Centre deal.
Why? Here’s what I know:
2/6 The deal struck in summer of 2019 envisioned a $550 m deal w/costs split equally between CSEC & the City. In addition, the City provided land, 90% demolition of the ‘Dome, excess flood/site remediation, & levies. Total City contribution: $275m + $22.4m = $297.4 plus land.
3/6 Plus the value of the land. I supported that deal. In July 2021, CSEC asked to make changes to the above deal. CMLC removed as devel manager, both parties added $12.5m for potential cost overruns & City added up to $10m in event management costs.
Total value: $307.4 + land
4/6 I did not support that deal.
Since I was elected Mayor, Administration & my office have been working with CSEC to mitigate any additional costs. Two costs were identified: climate mitigation of around $4m and road/sidewalk right of way issues of $12.1m.
5/6 The City came to the table to assist with $6.4m in roadways leaving $9.7m for the Flames. Based on this gap, CSEC informed me they are walking away from our deal.
On a project worth over $650m, to have one party walk away for 1.5% of the value of the deal is staggering.
6/6 I wanted Calgarians to be the first to know. I am as disappointed as all of you that this is the way things are ending.
|
A pretty succinct summary of everything that has played out, but I see two instances where she should have done a lot better.
The red was poorly phrased and left a ton of ambiguity about how/when these costs came to light, and what they actually were. A lot more detail would have helped here.
The purple is just a bad argument, and comes across as putting words into CSEC's mouth.
I also think she could have/should have explained why she supported July 2019 but not July 2021.
Maybe this was a simple case of Gondek shooting herself in the foot for no good reason, but it seems more likely to me that she was expecting the PostMedia onslaught that we've seen [my speculation would be that Murray may have threatened that]. Does it seem likely that Gondek lit this grenade herself when a cordial joint statement was on the table? I acknowledge it is possible, but I struggle to square that kind of unforced blunder with someone who just demonstrated sufficent PR competency to win an election...
All that said, I'm still not sure I see anything here worthy of the outrage, indignation, and assignment of blame [to her]. I don't blame CSEC for backing out in the totality of the circumstances; though I think mutually "hitting pause" would have been in everyone's best interest (again, we'll never know if that was actually on the table from CSEC).