Quote:
Originally Posted by Frequitude
So if I'm reading this right, they agree on 1/3, 1/3, 1/3? And they agree on two of those thirds being CSEC contribution and ticket tax (perhaps with some fight on interest rate which skews it really being 1/3 but let's call that noise for now)? And they agree that the last third is from the city but they disagree on how the city would recoup it...CSEC saying CRL and the City saying from CSEC via revenue sharing or an arena lease?
If that's the case I side with CSEC here. The City's stance doesn't actually involve much public money going in at the end of the day other than basically interest. Lots up front (2/3) but little to none at the end of the day. CSEC's stance on the other hand actually has public property tax money going in with the argument being that that incremental tax wouldn't exist without the arena so it's kind of a wash.
Again, assuming I have that right...
|
I like 1/3 each, with the arena being one by the flames and paying property tax into the levy to repay the cities third, along with taxes from new development in vic park.