Should Calgary Bid on the 2026 Olympics

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

The BidCo is responsible for putting out a "bid" that it did not have confirmed numbers for. You can say the BidCo had "agreements", but clearly those were tenuous at best, if they were even real. It should have waited until it did have confirmed numbers, no matter how long that took. Instead they rushed, and now they look disorganized and unprepared, which is devastating when you're pitching a huge public investment. That falls 100% on them, not the feds or province.

The plebiscite is a deadline they don't have control over.

[llwhiteoutll]

Has the funding situation been fully agreed to or is it still only a signed proposal, since that what was presented to stave off the vote last week. If BidCo is still saying the feds are covering overruns and the feds are saying they won’t, it doesn’t sound like there is any agreement on funding at all

[llwhiteoutll]

Originally Posted by Bunk

The plebiscite is a deadline they don't have control over.

Work has been going on for over two years. A few more weeks on the plebiscite timeline wasn’t going to help them.

Do you not find it the least bit concerning that with all the time and money spent so far, we still don't have a funding agreement in place, haven't reached out to the place we are counting on to host part of the events and don't have a solid estimate?

[Mazrim]

Originally Posted by transplant99

For those who want/need advanced voting opportunities, type your address in the search box on this link and you can go tomorrow or Wednesday.

https://thecityofcalgary.maps.arcgis...69b6bd1d839d9e

Thanks for the link. It's helpful!
As a side note, I didn't realize Ward 11 and Ward 8's boundaries were so weird. I won't say obviously gerrymandered, but it feels similar.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by Bunk

The plebiscite is a deadline they don't have control over.

And yet they only sought out to finalize the number once the bid was on the cusp of collapse. Doesn't sound to me like they were in much of a rush, or even worse, sounds like they assumed a lot of things rather than securing those things. Again, not exactly confidence inspiring.

[Otto-matic]

Originally Posted by llwhiteoutll

Has the funding situation been fully agreed to or is it still only a signed proposal, since that what was presented to stave off the vote last week. If BidCo is still saying the feds are covering overruns and the feds are saying they won’t, it doesn’t sound like there is any agreement on funding at all

And we should know who is paying and who covers the overages. And we do not know this. How are we supposed to feel confident in a bid like this.

This is almost Edmonton Oilers management bad on how they handled it.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by llwhiteoutll

How long has BidCo had to put together a budget and reach funding agreements?

That's my point. They asked for an agreement by June when the parties met in Korea. But you cannot force the federal government to make its commitment. It literally took Council Committee moving to cancel the entire endeavour until the Feds finally stopped just dipping their toe in the water and dove in the next day. The BidCo had their Hosting Plan compete by early September.

Zero people would disagree the process was as smooth as it should have been in negotiating that public funding component. Here we are - it's up to citizens to decide whether it's a good deal with mitigated risk, or a bad deal that's too risky.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by llwhiteoutll

Work has been going on for over two years. A few more weeks on the plebiscite timeline wasn’t going to help them.

Do you not find it the least bit concerning that with all the time and money spent so far, we still don't have a funding agreement in place, haven't reached out to the place we are counting on to host part of the events and don't have a solid estimate?

I agree, two week delay in plebiscite probably still would have worked. My point was that the plebiscite date had nothing to do with the BidCo. That is Council's responsibility. It was proposed to be moved and that move was rejected due the cost and logistics.

We should also remember that the plebiscite isn't awarding the bid. It is simply to decide whether to move forward with a bid. If a host city contract doesn't come together to every party's satisfaction, there is no bid.

[Travis Munroe]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

The world is so much different now from 2008, or 1998, let alone 1988 (or 1981 when the bid was accepted). The Olympic boost here is minimal at best because in order for the finances of the Olympics to work anymore, it's gotta be a poverty games. So the days of bid spending on big projects is over (unless you're living in a dictatorship), because it's political suicide to do so. It's funny cause I can buy into a high risk project if the reward is worth it. The rewards from hosting the Olympics are staggeringly overstated by it's proponents. Because, once again, if the rewards were so robust, why is the IOC staring at zero bids this time next Wednesday?

The Olympics are effectively a construction project, and like a lot of construction projects when it's done there might be a handful of permanent jobs created, but not all that many. There seems to be this utterly insane notion that somehow hosting the Olympics is going to bring new companies and industries to town, but I'm guessing even the proponents of such a take know that's a lie. If there's any economic recovery between now and 2026, the Olympics are likely to have little to nothing to do with it. More to the point, if that's what we're relying on to save us economically....we're already ####ed.

I am not voting yes because I want permanent jobs when everything is said and done. I am optimistic that Trans Mtn is rolling along at that point creating the much needed permanent jobs.

I also do not believe it is bringing new companies or industry to town.

I do believe that a bid will create a ton of temporary jobs and help lift the economy in the short term until the local O&G sector is carrying this province as it so often does. When things are moving full speed, that is when we look at bringing in other industry. Show them the fancy city with low vacancy, new infrastructure, etc and diversify for the next O&G downturn.

Again, without the olympics, what helps get this city out of the the ugliest years it has seen in decades?

While not to scale, I would rather pay $5 a day for the next 5 years to host the olympics than pay $1 a day this year, $2 a day next year, $4 a day the year after that, $8 a day the year after that, etc.

That is exactly what will happen to our taxes until "something" turns the economy around and with absolutely nothing else in the short term expected to help the economy, I have to roll the dice on the only opportunity presenting itself.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

And yet they only sought out to finalize the number once the bid was on the cusp of collapse. Doesn't sound to me like they were in much of a rush, or even worse, sounds like they assumed a lot of things rather than securing those things. Again, not exactly confidence inspiring.

I suspect you might vote no, then.

[Ozy_Flame]

In the most basic of terms, I want the Olympics to happen because at least we know that there is guaranteed money on the table to make civic investments in our facilities from the province and federal governments. One example brought up on QR770 today was that it is $320 million to build a decent Field House. We can either commit that money without any help, or we can commit the same money and be guaranteed to have multiple levels of funding for a package deal on a variety of infrastructure projects. And these are facilities I am likely to use, unlike the plethora of interchanges around the city that I'll never use.

This is not an economy-saving venture, nor can it be - that is far too ambitious, nor does it help with the core economic issues of the province. But I do truly believe it will position Calgary well on the international scene and with considerable attention, especially since Calgary is likely not to have any involvement with the FIFA 2026 World Cup (and any bragging rights for hosting goes all to Edmonton).

Leaving it all on the table does not guarantee that money comes to us anyways. No such commitment has been made by Alberta or Canada. This a vehicle for funding we need right now, and that's the way I am looking at it. And the two week party that will probably be executed fairly soundly is a nice bonus.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by Travis Munroe

I am not voting yes because I want permanent jobs when everything is said and done. I am optimistic that Trans Mtn is rolling along at that point creating the much needed permanent jobs.

I also do not believe it is bringing new companies or industry to town.

I do believe that a bid will create a ton of temporary jobs and help lift the economy in the short term until the local O&G sector is carrying this province as it so often does. When things are moving full speed, that is when we look at bringing in other industry. Show them the fancy city with low vacancy, new infrastructure, etc and diversify for the next O&G downturn.

Again, without the olympics, what helps get this city out of the the ugliest years it has seen in decades?

While not to scale, I would rather pay $5 a day for the next 5 years to host the olympics than pay $1 a day this year, $2 a day next year, $4 a day the year after that, $8 a day the year after that, etc.

That is exactly what will happen to our taxes until "something" turns the economy around and with absolutely nothing else in the short term expected to help the economy, I have to roll the dice on the only opportunity presenting itself.

Don't particularly agree, and most people don't, hence why this is heading to defeat. And really, if the Yes side had a real financial argument to make, they'd be out there making it non-stop. Instead it's Donovan Bailey and the women's hockey team and that dude Hugh Jackman portrayed having rallies,. And sending athletes to schools to talk to kids, because they can't vote...that should tell you all you need to know.

[Bunk]

^ Hosting the games is not purely a balance sheet consideration. People take into account all the various tangible and intangible benefits. It's also just not about the two weeks. Those that flippantly say this is just about "a two week party" willfully ignore that last 30 years of history, identity and legacy that exists in this city. Those things are not purely quantifiable.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by Bunk

^ Hosting the games is not purely a balance sheet consideration. People take into account all the various tangible and intangible benefits. It's also just not about the two weeks. Those that flippantly say this is just about "a two week party" willfully ignore that last 30 years of history, identity and legacy that exists in this city. Those things are not purely quantifiable.

In ideal times maybe. With huge property tax increases on the horizon, with no pipelines on the horizon, with huge federal and provincial debt at present and on the horizon, it's a financial decision for most voters. That's what I don't get about the Yes emotional manipulation blitz at the end here, I realize it's their only card to play, but you already have those voters you could sway with clips of 88 and 2010. You need to work on convincing other voters, and rallies aren't going to do it.

[Hockeyguy15]

I think hosting the Olympics would be nice, and yeah renovating old venus is great. I would like to support the bid, I really would but I literally have zero confidence in BidCo and the process so far.

Either BidCo is incompetent or they are blatantly lying, and I cannot support the bid with them at the helm. The risk of them having a poor budget or being negligent with the project is too great in my eyes.

[chemgear]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Interesting of Nenshi to admit the Yes side is losing right now.

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Don't particularly agree, and most people don't, hence why this is heading to defeat.

Same reason why sports teams do it, it's good to paint yourselves as the underdog and get support however you can.

And I am not convinced. I see all the people who are still committed to throw in with an organization that is either grossly incompetent, misinformed on vital topics, are lying to city council, threatening city council, literally contradicting multiple levels of Canadian government, or most assuredly some combination of the above.

Even when Bidco they cannot answer simple obvious questions, many people will still jump on solely on faith or hope; no matter the cost or rationale.

[Handsome B. Wonderful]

Originally Posted by Bunk

^ Hosting the games is not purely a balance sheet consideration. People take into account all the various tangible and intangible benefits. It's also just not about the two weeks. Those that flippantly say this is just about "a two week party" willfully ignore that last 30 years of history, identity and legacy that exists in this city. Those things are not purely quantifiable.

If you want me to vote yes on unquantifiables and intangibles, you can have my imaginary vote to go along with them.

My real vote is based on quantifiables and tangibles like money. That's a solid No.

[Travis Munroe]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Don't particularly agree, and most people don't, hence why this is heading to defeat. And really, if the Yes side had a real financial argument to make, they'd be out there making it non-stop. Instead it's Donovan Bailey and the women's hockey team and that dude Hugh Jackman portrayed having rallies,. And sending athletes to schools to talk to kids, because they can't vote...that should tell you all you need to know.

I can respect that you don't agree but saying most people don't is a made up statement that has no proof until after the plebiscite. It very well may end that you are right but you don't know that right now.

Just because the angle I am using isn't being used by the entire yes side doesn't mean it is invalid. You know just as well as I do that property taxes are going up with or without the olympics and then they will go up again. There is no more money to subsidize an empty downtown and someone has to pay for that.

If I used to work in O&G and was laid off a couple years ago, currently still unemployed and in extreme debt, given the opportunity:
1) Use the last bit of space on my cc and take a course which could help me get a job in a different industry until O&G picks up again
or
2) Sit on the couch and slowly burn that last bit of space on the CC until there are no other options.

Under option 1, I may not get that other job but I went out trying while option 2 has me throw my hands up and quit without a fight.

You also haven't really given the no sides view that surrounds my entire basis to vote yes. Do you have any other suggestion on what we can do to spark the economy over the next 5 or so years?

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by Travis Munroe

I can respect that you don't agree but saying most people don't is a made up statement that has no proof until after the plebiscite. It very well may end that you are right but you don't know that right now.

Just because the angle I am using isn't being used by the entire yes side doesn't mean it is invalid. You know just as well as I do that property taxes are going up with or without the olympics and then they will go up again. There is no more money to subsidize an empty downtown and someone has to pay for that.

If I used to work in O&G and was laid off a couple years ago, currently still unemployed and in extreme debt, given the opportunity:
1) Use the last bit of space on my cc and take a course which could help me get a job in a different industry until O&G picks up again
or
2) Sit on the couch and slowly burn that last bit of space on the CC until there are no other options.

Under option 1, I may not get that other job but I went out trying while option 2 has me throw my hands up and quit without a fight.

You also haven't really given the no sides view that surrounds my entire basis to vote yes. Do you have any other suggestion on what we can do to spark the economy over the next 5 or so years?

Care to elaborate on how winning the Olympics will 'spur the economy'?

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by Handsome B. Wonderful

If you want me to vote yes on unquantifiables and intangibles, you can have my imaginary vote to go along with them.

My real vote is based on quantifiables and tangibles like money. That's a solid No.

Tangibly and quantifiably, it's a good deal for Calgary.
We pay $390m in Cash (plus $150m CRL funds) locally for things we are going to build anyway, we leverage about $4.4b in funds as part of the cost from games hosting, IOC, Province and Feds. $1 billion in contingencies in a conservative budget.

Darn good deal.

What I was saying was a lot of people don't just vote on balance sheet. Some do. So good for you.