[News] Tentative Agreement Reached! New Arena!

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

This does not receive enough emphasis.

At the bare minimum, you have to give credit to Davison for knowing his audience.

#### Edmonton.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Eh, I think the consulting period was ridiculously short, but by that I mean it should have gone on until next Friday, not the end of September.

Yeah that is way too long...honestly just get it done

Its a fair deal, saying no to this is basically saying you no longer want an NHL team. People will complain but people complain about everything.

[Hangman]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

I'm sure that's true, and I suppose that's part of what I'm asking. What could they possibly be sneaking by?

The timing of this is awful. The city is $60 million short in the operating budget but a lot of people don't understand the difference between operating budgets and capital budgets.

The public is also upset at how council has functioned or not functioned over the last while. They just see $60 million in the hole and they want to build what...for who?

To be honest I don't think they're trying sneak anything by. Trouble is people feel they are or council is being stampeded into a decision and that's pretty well a sure fire recipe to get a no vote.

If this is such a good deal it should be able to withstand full scrutiny. Why does the decision have to be made within such a short timeframe.

I also think CSEC understandably wants as little public input as possible. They know full well a fairly large percentage of the populace does not want to see public money spent on an arena for a bunch of millionaires, especially in trying times such as the city is currently in.

[MoneyGuy]

Originally Posted by Hangman

I also think CSEC understandably wants as little public input as possible. They know full well a fairly large percentage of the populace does not want to see public money spent on an arena for a bunch of millionaires, especially in trying times such as the city is currently in.

Good point but it’s not understandable at all. Council should want extensive public input. If they don’t then that may indicate a decision is made or one is preferred and they don’t want to be swayed by public opinion. That’s a bad thing when you’re elected to represent the public will.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

I get that people want to get as much information as possible, but so much of this is conceptual. As (I think) Bean mentioned on the radio, this is really just getting to the starting line. As much as we might want to see details on IRR and the like, it really is a great deal of guess work as I don't believe they even have a design yet.

City Council needs the basic framework, with the location, general split of revenues and expenses. I think they have that. The location, scope, cost estimates and financial considerations are all there. Basically everything that CalgaryNext was not.

It seems to me the process was so much better, with CLMC involved from the start. There needs to be some trust of that process. If the attitude is not a dime to private interests, then I suppose vote no. Almost anything else should be a yes.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Hangman

The timing of this is awful. The city is $60 million short in the operating budget but a lot of people don't understand the difference between operating budgets and capital budgets.

The public is also upset at how council has functioned or not functioned over the last while. They just see $60 million in the hole and they want to build what...for who?

To be honest I don't think they're trying sneak anything by. Trouble is people feel they are or council is being stampeded into a decision and that's pretty well a sure fire recipe to get a no vote.

If this is such a good deal it should be able to withstand full scrutiny. Why does the decision have to be made within such a short timeframe.

I also think CSEC understandably wants as little public input as possible. They know full well a fairly large percentage of the populace does not want to see public money spent on an arena for a bunch of millionaires, especially in trying times such as the city is currently in.

$60 Million in the hole, and despite repeated clarifications with information available to everyone that the operating budget =/= the capital budget and why, people still don't get it. I'd wager people don't even know where the $60M deficit is coming from.

So what's the value of more information that people are simply not going to understand or ignore outright? If you're for this, you're for it. If you're against it, you're against it. Delays are almost solely beneficial to the "no" side, which is why the no side is pushing for them.

And really, why would you want public input on things like this? If we had endless public input, things certainly wouldn't get done. Even things that get done are endlessly complained about by people that can't let it go. The new library, the peace bridge, bike lanes. Some people who are against them will always be against them, even long after the thing has been built.

If not for a new arena, then what do you want to see the capital budget go to? What makes sense? What else can/should the city build to create those jobs and generate that income?

[Enoch Root]

There is a poll on the Herald website (maybe someone can post a link).

51.3% in favour (currently)
37.1% opposed

only 9.8% think more time is needed.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

At the bare minimum, you have to give credit to Davison for knowing his audience.

#### Edmonton.

He's a marketer by trade. I used to work with him.
He's very good at applying those skills to his new job.
Which I don't mean as an insult or a compliment - just interesting to see him apply those skills in a political setting.

[N-E-B]

I have sent an email to my counsellor. I won’t post the details because frankly it’s not overly interesting or groundbreaking. I am 100% for the proposal.

[Hangman]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

If not for a new arena, then what do you want to see the capital budget go to? What makes sense? What else can/should the city build to create those jobs and generate that income?

I don't totally disagree with you. However I don't believe the arena is something that in and of itself is going to generate jobs, and if it does they are going to be the same jobs currently at the Saddledome.
What we have to hope for is that businesses believe enough in the project that they are willing to want to operate in the same general vicinity. Otherwise it's going to be just as dead around the new arena as it is around the Saddledome now when there is nothing going on in the venue.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Woolley has asked the city manager to ask CSEC for an extension of the public engagement period and have the final vote on September 30.

https://livewirecalgary.com/2019/07/...ry-arena-vote/

Ahh yes, nothing but grandstanding by Wooley. He already tried to delay the vote, and his motion lost 9-4. He's behaving like a Brexiter here. "No vote is final until I get my way."

[ynwa03]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Ahh yes, nothing but grandstanding by Wooley. He already tried to delay the vote, and his motion lost 9-4. He's behaving like a Brexiter here. "No vote is final until I get my way."

Seriously?

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by ynwa03

Seriously?

Yes, seriously. Resolute's post is accurate. His motion to delay was already voted down. And as I posted above, there is a poll being run by the Herald that specifically lists more time as an option, and less than 10% of people have chosen that option.

There is no massive ground-swelling of desire to delay for more info.

[Joborule]

Wooley is clearly playing the political card for a possible mayor election run.

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by Toonage

Davison said this morning on 960 that it would be split 50/50

(trying to find it, but may have the source media incorrect, if anyone recalls where this was said please chime in but I know it was said)

My read of the deal is 50-50 split of costs, with the city contributing up to $275MM, which to me means if its final cost is $540MM, city puts in $270MM, as does CSEC; whereas if final cost is $600MM, city puts in $275MM and CSEC puts in $325MM.

[sureLoss]

Davison did say overruns would be split 50-50

https://twitter.com/user/status/1154172640590008320

[OldDutch]

Originally Posted by Beatle17

I really don't think you want to use her in any project discussion. 16th Avenue went from $20 M project to $89M project as she continually adjusted what she wanted to see, plus doesn't account for the people who went out of business (17th Ave S anyone?). She also is the councilwoman that wanted to build the Greenline with street level cars like Seattle, without accounting for the fact we have 6 months of winter. Dot the I's and cross the T's to make sure she can find the loopholes to do something stupid in her neighbourhood (Close Memorial Drive on Sundays so residents can walk around).

I do actually. She is an ideologue complete with a crew of zealots. She lost all touch with balance long ago. Farkas is the exact same. They are two sides of a coin, that execute in eerily similar ways.

The stupidity you describe above sounds like Farkas. Only he would kill good projects not over spend them.

Either way she never was for this project no matter what. I debated her on social media years ago prior to Calgary Next. She was admit no public dollars at all toward pro sports.

Those are the people you have to play the game with, because that is what they do. Play games.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Woolley has asked the city manager to ask CSEC for an extension of the public engagement period and have the final vote on September 30.

https://livewirecalgary.com/2019/07/...ry-arena-vote/

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by Joborule

Wooley is clearly playing the political card for a possible mayor election run.

He's doing a bang up job of making sure I'll never support any part of his political career going forward.

[sureLoss]

Scott Dippel @CBCScott
The board of the Calgary Stampede today approved its share of the terms of the arena proposal in VicPark. #yyccc will discuss the matter on Tuesday.