2026 Olympics- Calgary votes no- 56%

[RM14]

Originally Posted by GGG

So instead of putting it in the bid and getting matching dollars they keep it out of the bid and don’t but they are for sure going to build it anyway?

Yes

[Bunk]

I ask Moran about the arena in the podcast - if you’re interested...

[Manhattanboy]

This is a pretty tough one to predict.

Those strongly in favour and strongly opposed make a point to get out and vote. Those marginally in favour or opposed or indifferent stay home?

[Manhattanboy]

Where to vote:

https://thecityofcalgary.maps.arcgis...0313aba77a984d

[GGG]

Originally Posted by RM14

Yes

Why?

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Bunk

I ask Moran about the arena in the podcast - if you’re interested...

It’s on my list to listen to before I vote. The whole podcast is fantastic so keep up the good work.

[Hackey]

What infrastructure are we suppose to gain potentially?

- a new 5000 person hockey rink?
- renovation to the oval?
- renovation to McMahon?
- a field house?

That doesn't exactly get me excited.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Hackey

What infrastructure are we suppose to gain potentially?

- a new 5000 person hockey rink?
- renovation to the oval?
- renovation to McMahon?
- a field house?

That doesn't exactly get me excited.

"Upgrades" to the big 4 and saddledome.

Just a stupid (imo) waste of money

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by GGG

Why?

Because each project is already very, very complicated and involves many stakeholders with diverging interests? It's hard enough to reach agreeable deals for each project on their own; intertwining them only makes it harder.

It's simply not putting all of your eggs into one flimsy basket...either project could fall apart, which would essentially reset the board to zero for the other.

Also, if the arena deal can only become viable due to the Olympics, then maybe it isn't worth the $$$? This whole process has been about deadlines and pressure points - it's been hard enough to get the rest of the bid presented to the public by now...if the arena had been intertwined in all of this, I think it's a lot less likely that the whole thing didn't get killed by council 10ish days ago (reset the board to zero for the arena).

Lastly, from an optics standpoint, the feds and provincial gov's don't want it to appear that their money is going to an NHL arena (for obvious reasons). My conspiracy theory is that Murray gets given a 'free' new lift, runs cut, and other upgrades at Nakiska, and ponies up more on the arena side. I'll be interested to see if we're able to follow the money for anything at Nakiska.

[Nacre]

Originally Posted by marsplasticeraser

The fed money will be spent whether we take it or not. To base your argument that this money will be saved is erroneous. It will just be reallocated, most likely to a sporting event out east.

This ignores the issue of opportunity cost. Money spent by a national government could be used on other stuff which could benefit both Canada and Calgary more than another winter Olympics. Calgary could do something else with that money.

I have no opinion either way on another Calgarian Olympics. (I don't even live in Canada at the moment.) But to me it is sad that neither side is looking at the long term interest of the Calgary and of Alberta and is instead seeing it as either a get rich quick scheme to grab federal money or a loss of their own tax money they would rather spend on vacations. Neither side seems to be talking much about stuff like the arts and recreational opportunities of Calgary: what will be gained by the games improvements or what will have to be cut to pay for them.

[GGG]

The federal money is allocated under Sport Canada which has budget to host two major international events per decade. So the opportunity cost for this federal money is a pan am games or commonwealth games elsewhere in Canada.

[CPK80]

I am voting yes

- Though not permanent 6+ years of construction jobs
- An influx of smaller events and training opportunities, and tourism all leading and trailing the Olympics would help out the service industry.
- A boost to spirt, something I believe Calgary needs right about now.

- Just like how I renovate my house, I am glad they are looking to renovate the existing facilities, all that will continue to be used for many years to come.
- Though not sexy the new facilities would be a huge benefit... I still have 11 pm ice times and indoor soccer games, if the two new facilities can help with that, excellent.

And on the cost... As much as the NO side talks about cost overruns and guarantees.. Without the Olympics, we have fewer guarantees that the many of these upgrades and new facilities (Most of them needed anyways) will be funded from the provincial and federal governments so actually costing us more in the long run.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Well looks like we get one last poll before tomorrow. Not looking good for Yes, but tomorrow is all that matters.



https://www.mainstreetresearch.ca/uc...ind-his-party/

[Fuzz]

Oh good, Mainstreet is still running polls. Fantastic.

[getbak]

Mainstreet Research you say? Well, guess I'll see you all at McMahon Stadium in February 2026.

[Bunk]

Mayor Smith is NOT going to be happy.

[getbak]

Not really surprising since it has been rumoured for a while...

https://twitter.com/user/status/1062008499377446918

Don Fehr confirms that the PA is likely to ask for a guarantee of Olympic participation to be added to the CBA.

If this happens, it would likely be in place to guarantee NHL participation in 2022 and would definitely be in place to guarantee it for 2026.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Nacre

This ignores the issue of opportunity cost. Money spent by a national government could be used on other stuff which could benefit both Canada and Calgary more than another winter Olympics. Calgary could do something else with that money.

In a perfect world, you are absolutely correct. In reality, it is nearly impossible to get those funds without a catalyst. Whether the Olympics are the best catalyst is very much open to debate, but these catalysts are few and far between. Amazon HQ2 (always a pipe dream), CalgaryNext, and TransMountain pipeline are the only other big money catalysts that come to mind immediately, though I'm sure there are a few others. Each project is very different, but should be assessed on their tangible and intangible costs and benefits (with special attention to who bears the costs and who receives the benefits). All are imperfect, and everyone's rankings/opinions will differ.

Personally, what I like about the Olympics is that the benefits are more widely accessible to more people (though admittedly, mostly intangible benefits) . A bit like comparing a library vs. a new arena - any Calgarian who wishes will have many opportunities to be involved in tons of Olympic activities for free (obviously not talking about attending ticketed events). Building a pipeline will make a few filthy rich people a lot richer, some wealthy people a fair bit wealthier, a lot of people a little bit better off, and a ton of people will get see minor benefits as things trickle out (though also worth noting that there are negatives involved any time an economy is booming too fast).

I'm not saying I think the Olympics is a better investment in dollars and cents (and of course, there will be a similar inverse trend-line starting with biggest benefits to fewest people), but I think the returns it delivers are more evenly distributed, and less easily replicated (ie. you can't necessarily throw a dump-truck of money at something and create the same kind of 'spirit', (for lack of a better word, and I don't mean to sum up Olympic benefits so flighty)...whereas you could throw a dump-truck of money at a lot of other industries and achieve similar returns as building a pipeline (albeit slower and lower returns than a pipeline based on our existing situation).

Neither side seems to be talking much about stuff like the arts and recreational opportunities of Calgary: what will be gained by the games improvements or what will have to be cut to pay for them.

A plethora of arts and recreational stuff is exactly what will come from hosting...of course specifics can't be pinned down yet, probably won't really be for another 5+ years. Will these opportunities be universally adored and executed in the most cost-efficient manner? Almost certainly not (the former being subjective, the latter being inevitable).

Another random benefit that deserves a bit more exposure is improvements to accessibility. The Paralympics are an afterthought, but could result in big improvements for those living with disabilities.

[getbak]

It looks like there won't be any sitting around watching the numbers come in tomorrow, just one total released after all the votes are counted.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1062025062889467905

[pgsieve]

Curious why non-property owners are allowed to vote in this?