[News] New Arena - Plan B - Victoria Park

[The Yen Man]

Lol, I had to read the poll question a couple of times to get what it was trying to ask. Put the opposite way, yes I feel public funds are worth using if it means the Flames are not moving.

Don't really think it's a realistic question though, as I can't see the Flames moving even if they don't get public funds.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Frequitude

It's not the city's job to counter a CalgaryNEXT with a Victoria Park based concept. It was the city's job to counter CalgaryNEXT with a study showing what it would actually cost. They did that.

It is CSEC's job to come up with a new concept and put it forward much like they did CalgaryNEXT. It will then be the City's job to counter/respond to that new concept.

The city doesn't go to Brookfield and say "hey I designed this building for you what do you think". Brookfield comes to them and says "hey I want to build this building what do you think". Why should it be any different here?

well the very nature of a facility for public use that helps the city with a creosote issue and provides a fieldhouse that they have stated they want creates a relationship that is different than say Brookfield wanting to just build a building

unless I'm not understanding what you're asking

plus I'm not saying they have to counter if the whole plan is a no go for fit etc, that's fine

but countering the funding model if you like the plan or large parts of it is an efficient way to do business.

[Frequitude]

Originally Posted by Darkknight

I thought one of the big sticking points for the Flames was that they didn't want to be on the stampede grounds anymore?

Yes, that's my ideal scenario ignoring any logistics like where do you host the Stampede for a couple years. It just makes the most sense to me:

• Shared existing parking space nearby
• More regular and dense use of the grandstand area now that the horses are gone
• Opens up 17th Ave into the park
• Leaves the whole Stampede extension to the north unaffected
• New arena is right on the red line (although an arena up closer to the Remington lands could be on both the red and green lines which is neat)

Originally Posted by Darkknight

I thought one of the big sticking points for the Flames was that they didn't want to be on the stampede grounds anymore?

Of course the Flames would like to be somewhere else so they can have the parking revenue. They'd also like a billion dollars of public money to be able to have that parking revenue and a fancy revenue generating building too. But I guarantee they'd take a cheaper Stampede solution and forego the parking revenue if they're not getting a billion dollars for a standalone fully controlled palace.

[Frequitude]

Originally Posted by Bingo

well the very nature of a facility for public use that helps the city with a creosote issue and provides a fieldhouse that they have stated they want creates a relationship that is different than say Brookfield wanting to just build a building

unless I'm not understanding what you're asking

plus I'm not saying they have to counter if the whole plan is a no go for fit etc, that's fine

but countering the funding model if you like the plan or large parts of it is an efficient way to do business.

Why is CalgaryNEXT the best possible thing to go on the creosote area? It wouldn't generate any property tax.

If the city's going to pay for the clean up one way or another (like they are with CalgaryNEXT), wouldn't it be better to do so that actual property tax generating development could go on top?

edit: And regarding a fieldhouse, CalgaryNEXT gave the city partial use of a fieldhouse for $200M. How is that any better than 100% of a standalone fieldhouse for $200M.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Frequitude

Why is CalgaryNEXT the best possible thing to go on the creosote area? It wouldn't generate any property tax.

If the city's going to pay for the clean up one way or another (like they are with CalgaryNEXT), wouldn't it be better to do so that actual property tax generating development could go on top?

edit: And regarding a fieldhouse, CalgaryNEXT gave the city partial use of a fieldhouse for $200M. How is that any better than 100% of a standalone fieldhouse for $200M.

Once again though that's fine.

If they don't think CalgaryNEXT is an efficient or desired anchor tenant for an area with a chemical issue than just say that.

Drop the 99.9999% of Calgarians, CalgaryNEXT is dead, but I want the Olympics BS that we are being fed weekly.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by northcrunk

Pretty pointless to even discuss this until after the next civic election. Nenshi seems dead against money going to anything local but he is more than willing to spend $25,000 on foreign aid. Might as well wait and see who is left standing after the next election because you might be starting over anyway.

Holy #### $25,,000???????? Is the City of Calgary's foreign aid limited to Nenshi sponsoring 68 African children?

[GreenLantern2814]

Maybe we should amend the poll to ask how much Public money we're okay with spending on this project.

Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal all privately financed their arenas. Ottawa got $26M and Winnipeg $40M (three levels of government contributed).

I am not unreasonable. I see the value of a new facility. I don't see the value of paying $250M to help these billionaires. I'd be happy to donate land or contribute something up to $50M or so.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by Barnes

But they already had a PowerPoint presentation Bunk! A POWERPOINT!

3 yrs before that.

[Canehdianman]

I don't particularly like Nenshi, but I'll help Ken King pack his bags to move to another city if it means that no tax dollars go to build a new arena for the billionaire owners of the Calgary Flames.

At least the $25k in foreign aid went to people that actually need the god-damn help. Why would be subsidize a bunch of rich people who want their already profitable business to become even more profitable??

[LanceUppercut]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

Maybe we should amend the poll to ask how much Public money we're okay with spending on this project.

Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal all privately financed their arenas. Ottawa got $26M and Winnipeg $40M (three levels of government contributed).

I am not unreasonable. I see the value of a new facility. I don't see the value of paying $250M to help these billionaires. I'd be happy to donate land or contribute something up to $50M or so.

I would be happy with the land and associated infrastructure upgrades around it. The Flames have enough cash for the arena themselves. McMahon can keep hosting 9 games a year for the CFL until the University wants to build a new stadium.

[Moneyhands23]

I dont think the other nhl owners would approve the move. The fan base and revenue stream here is way to stable/good. The team will be a top producer for the next decade in calgary. No market that the Flames would move to could offer the same revenue sharing contributions that Calgary can.

[Backlunds_socks]

Empty threat, but it's also the dog biting the hand that feeds it. Kk, let me know how I can help you move

[Art Vandelay]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

Maybe we should amend the poll to ask how much Public money we're okay with spending on this project.

Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal all privately financed their arenas. Ottawa got $26M and Winnipeg $40M (three levels of government contributed).

I am not unreasonable. I see the value of a new facility. I don't see the value of paying $250M to help these billionaires. I'd be happy to donate land or contribute something up to $50M or so.

I'm with you. I would be fine with land donation and some public money as long as it's not CalgaryNext

[N-E-B]

I don't care how they build the rink, I don't care where they build the rink, and I don't care how they pay for the rink. I just want a new rink.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by N-E-B

I don't care how they build the rink, I don't care where they build the rink, and I don't care how they pay for the rink. I just want a new rink.

Utter foolishness.

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by Frequitude

It's not the city's job to counter a CalgaryNEXT with a Victoria Park based concept. It was the city's job to counter CalgaryNEXT with a study showing what it would actually cost. They did that.

It is CSEC's job to come up with a new concept and put it forward much like they did CalgaryNEXT. It will then be the City's job to counter/respond to that new concept.

The city doesn't go to Brookfield and say "hey I designed this building for you what do you think". Brookfield comes to them and says "hey I want to build this building what do you think". Why should it be any different here?

Exactly this.

Taxpayers in Calgary are under ZERO obligation to counter the Flames proposal. The city is not in the business of building arenas for pro sports teams especially when one already exists.

If I'm any other business and i say, "hey Calgary taxpayers, build my factory for me" and the City says "no" my next move isn't to hold tight and complain that they haven't made a counter-proposal.

The sheet fact that the flames made a stupid proposal doesn't then require additional action on behalf of Calgary taxpayers to start negotiating. You negotiate when you have a reason to and right now Calgary taxpayers don't have one.

[KingMoo]

how much was spent on the ugly bridge that i will never use and don't want to see? How much on that giant eye sore of an 'O' ? I would prefer if not a single one of my dollars went towards those overpriced monstrosities...

Large cities all over north america help their local teams build stadiums. Why would it be any different here?

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by KingMoo

how much was spent on the ugly bridge that i will never use and don't want to see? How much on that giant eye sore of an 'O' ? I would prefer if not a single one of my dollars went towards those overpriced monstrosities...

Large cities all over north america help their local teams build stadiums. Why would it be any different here?

Oh look everyone, someone bitching about the Peace Bridge. I look forward to your next post full of Titanic jokes

[Frequitude]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

Maybe we should amend the poll to ask how much Public money we're okay with spending on this project.

Maybe we should amend the poll so it's not some confusing double negative. I don't even know what I voted for.

Or what you said. That's better.

[Finger Cookin]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal all privately financed their arenas. Ottawa got $26M and Winnipeg $40M (three levels of government contributed).

The Canucks were for sale a few years later because ownership overspent on the arena, and the new ownership has been very hands on and meddling.

The Leafs were carved up amongst the teacher's pension, corporations, and banks after Ballard died before the majority of it was purchased by the two largest media conglomerates in Canada.

The Canadiens have managed to have more or less the same contiguous ownership for over 40 years, though Molson did sell a big chunk of the team and arena to Gillett for 8 years before buying it back 8 years later at an almost 4x premium.

I think the Flames ownership has been a great group during its time in Calgary. The group certainly has the resources to privately fund an arena if it chooses to. I wonder what kind of uncertainty such a decision might introduce into the ownership picture down the road, and what kind of ripple effect that might have on hockey operations. There's no way to say for certain, of course.

Sorry for the rambling stream of consciousness entry.