Should Calgary Bid on the 2026 Olympics

[Jacks]

There is a debate with both sides just starting on QR770

[transplant99]

Did the yes side just say there would be no increase in property taxes?

Hadn't heard that before.

[chemgear]

"We won't have overruns because we're Calgary. We do things differently than other Olympic cities."

"Taxes will not go up if we get the Olympics"

"Well, what plan does the NO side have for us to get out of this funk?" WTF. That's defensive handwaving as hell, answer the questions about where the money is going to come from.

[OMG!WTF!]

The yes side simply can not or will not answer the question of who pays for over budget items. It's like they just won't even acknowledge that's even a possibility. I hate that. Just say that city of Calgary property tax payers are the ones who have to underwrite the capital and part of the operating budget. It's only fair people know that.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Did the yes side just say there would be no increase in property taxes?

Hadn't heard that before.

Don't lie. They didn't actually say that did they?

Do people actually believe anything they say now? Wow.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Did the yes side just say there would be no increase in property taxes?

Hadn't heard that before.

Did taxes go up in Vancouver for the games? Not that I'm aware of.

[Bunk]

On the Olympic Village, the Save Calgary guy made a valid point that there were errors there. The 2015 Pan Am Games Village took lessons from that and it was a big success. We should follow that latter model to mitigate risk there.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Bunk

Did taxes go up in Vancouver for the games? Not that I'm aware of.

No idea, but not sure that's relevant here.

I was under the impression a tax increase was necessary in Calgary's case, but if it isn't, then they should really get that out there as a message and show people that model.

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by Bunk

Did taxes go up in Vancouver for the games? Not that I'm aware of.

I'm not sure why they would. The provincial government was responsible for budget over runs. Not the case here

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by OMG!WTF!

I'm not sure why they would. The provincial government was responsible for budget over runs. Not the case here

Vancouvers property taxes have been increasing as well.

Bunk, are you aware of any comparable models in that regard to Vancouver? Or just unaware?

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by cam_wmh

Vancouvers property taxes have been increasing as well.

Bunk, are you aware of any comparable models in that regard to Vancouver? Or just unaware?

I just don't know the answer. Did the Province incur overages themselves? I was under the impression that VANOC was under budget in operations and capital.

[Calgary14]

I thought it was clear the City of Calgary (and therefore tax payers) are responsible for all cost overruns - has Bidco acknowledged that yet?

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Bunk

I just don't know the answer. Did the Province incur overages themselves? I was under the impression that VANOC was under budget in operations and capital.

Well the convention center was a complete disaster.

The original price tag was $495 million, which included a capped federal injection to share the cost. In the end, expenditures rose to $883 million, leaving the province on the hook for almost $400 million.

“This is the largest overrun of any public project in B.C. history,” Dix told The Tyee in an interview before the opening. “That money is now spent and gone.”

https://thetyee.ca/Blogs/TheHook/Oly...tre-expansion/

[llwhiteoutll]

Originally Posted by Calgary14

I thought it was clear the City of Calgary (and therefore tax payers) are responsible for all cost overruns - has Bidco acknowledged that yet?

No. They are sticking to their guns and saying that the feds will bail them out. Hopefully their continued insistence of this will make the federal government realize they are incorrect and agree to cover the overruns

[Travis Munroe]

I have been echoing the same statement on what plan do we have to get us out of this funk should we not shoot for the Olympics. Property taxes are going up regardless and will continue to do so each successive year we are in this rut.

We can sit on our hands, wait and pray that something happens to pick up the economy until the hopeful trans mtn goes ahead which results in increased taxes each year
OR
Take a chance on something that could give a burst to the economy until the hopeful trans mtn goes ahead and inject billions into the economy.

Had Nenshis plan of attracting outside business to fill downtown space had some indication it was working, I might lean more towards the no side but his plan doesn't seem to be working.

Taxes are going up regardless and one option gives us a chance to fast track the recovery while the other is hoping time fixes everything.

[Senator Clay Davis]

If the Olympics were the fast track to economic success, once again, cities would be tripping over themselves to bid instead of fleeing en masse as they currently are. The Olympics are a gamble that history tells us is far more likely to have no impact or negative impact than being some kind of financial windfall. I get the argument "Well if not this, then what is the plan", but perhaps the better question is "Why is this, as its proponents claim, the only plan that will work?".

[Ozy_Flame]

What are we planning to achieve? What is our objective?

Is it to use an Olympics to build and improve infrastructure and raise the profile of the City? Or are we trying to fix Calgary's economy?

I don't the Olympic bid is trying to solve the latter. And I certainly hope anyone isn't under the impression they are.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Travis Munroe

I have been echoing the same statement on what plan do we have to get us out of this funk should we not shoot for the Olympics. Property taxes are going up regardless and will continue to do so each successive year we are in this rut.

We can sit on our hands, wait and pray that something happens to pick up the economy until the hopeful trans mtn goes ahead which results in increased taxes each year
OR
Take a chance on something that could give a burst to the economy until the hopeful trans mtn goes ahead and inject billions into the economy.

Had Nenshis plan of attracting outside business to fill downtown space had some indication it was working, I might lean more towards the no side but his plan doesn't seem to be working.

Taxes are going up regardless and one option gives us a chance to fast track the recovery while the other is hoping time fixes everything.

There are very good reasons to bid on the games, but kickstarting the economy is not a valid one.

Let’s start with the economy. The head of Calgary’s Sport Tourism Authority, Doug Mitchell, said the 2026 Winter Games “is the kind of injection into our economy that we need.” He’s not alone. Proponents often point to economic impact studies suggesting billions of dollars and thousands of jobs will result. In 2002, for example, a report commissioned by the B.C. government projected a $10.7 billion economic boost and 244,000 new jobs from Vancouver’s Games.

Unfortunately, such rosy pictures are often the product of frighteningly misused economic models. Input-Output models, as they are called, presume a limitless supply of workers and other resources. Though sometimes useful, they aren’t well suited to mega-projects.

If a bid is successful, the Olympics have costs that vastly outstrip revenues. In today’s dollars, Vancouver generated just over $1.6 billion in revenues from broadcast rights, ticket sales, sponsors, and so on, while costs exceeded $7.5 billion. That’s a considerable difference. For a provincial and federal government facing persistent deficits, such increased spending certainly looks unwise.

Olympics are not only expensive, but also risky. According to recent work from researchers at the University of Oxford, every single Olympic Games since 1968 experienced substantial cost overruns. Every. Single. One.

On average, Olympics end up costing nearly triple their original estimate. To be sure, Winter Games aren’t as bad as Summer Games, but even they typically cost just over double their original estimate. According to these same researchers, Vancouver’s 2010 Games was the best performer — at 17 per cent over budget — while Calgary’s 1988 Games were 59 per cent over.

https://business.financialpost.com/o...an-you-feel-it

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by Calgary14

I thought it was clear the City of Calgary (and therefore tax payers) are responsible for all cost overruns - has Bidco acknowledged that yet?

I think this was the basis for the insurance (in addition to the high contingency). There still seems to be confusion about security costs vs capital overruns.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

If the Olympics were the fast track to economic success, once again, cities would be tripping over themselves to bid instead of fleeing en masse as they currently are. The Olympics are a gamble that history tells us is far more likely to have no impact or negative impact than being some kind of financial windfall. I get the argument "Well if not this, then what is the plan", but perhaps the better question is "Why is this, as its proponents claim, the only plan that will work?".

Would you say on balance Calgary 88 and Vancouver 2010 were negative impacts?