[News] Tentative Agreement Reached! New Arena!

[IrishSpring2013]

Originally Posted by jayswin

Can you explain to a laymen how a building that encloses 19000 people doesn't meet current fire code ratings but is allowed to enclose 19000 people over a hundred times a year?


How does that annoucment go? "Okay, so we finished our inspection and you don't pass....buuuut because it would be bad if three professional sports teams had nowhere to play, you can just not worry about not passing. Just make sure no fires!!!".

"attack..."

Originally Posted by Muta

Haha don't worry dude, I'm used to this stuff. There's always someone ready to attack me in this thread, even though my credentials were verified by the mods long ago. Difference is now, I just don't care anymore. I love arena discussion and all things development, but some people just love living in the past.

[TheScorpion]

When is the vote happening?

[getbak]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

When is the vote happening?

Tomorrow.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Roughneck

Of course Farkas would vote no to $275M being invested into his ward, when he was pushing for another private enterprise to get city subsidies, and is lamenting the operational budget cuts despite voting for more sprawl.

Oh dear, the YYC Off Topic Forum is leaking...

The people who Farkas truly represents don't live anywhere near Stampede Park.

[sureLoss]

The city manager has forwarded Woolley's request for more time for public consultation. CSEC will respond before 1pm tomorrow.

https://calgaryherald.com/news/local...-on-arena-deal

[442scotty]

I hope the Flames say enough is enough... Are you in or out. Extending the consultation period will do absolutely nothing and will only serve to amp up the negative nellies and stir the pot. OMG! We have to get more consultation!!! The Flames will screw us over if we don’t!!!

What a joke ! I hope this gets voted on tomorrow. Enough of the BS

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by 442scotty

I hope the Flames say enough is enough... Are you in or out. Extending the consultation period will do absolutely nothing and will only serve to amp up the negative nellies and stir the pot. OMG! We have to get more consultation!!! The Flames will screw us over if we don’t!!!

What a joke ! I hope this gets voted on tomorrow. Enough of the BS

That would be a really bad look for the Flames.

[Hockeyguy15]

Do we not elect council members to represent us on decisions like this? If you don't already know your wards positions on this then you aren't doing your job.

[Toonage]

Just so I'm clear, the council can take the opinions, say thank you very much and still go ahead with a vote tomorrow correct?

[Flamenspiel]

The deal is better then what we have seen before. Still, there is a false, sales type of urgency being built up.

[Hockeyguy15]

What is stupid is that this is the deal that members of council brought to the rest of council.

You can't tell me that they didn't have updates along the way, and if the people working on the deal for the city thought it was bad then they wouldn't have brought it to the table. Either this is an alright deal that the city is on board with or they shouldn't have brought it to council.

I would be a horrible politician.

[SilverGS]

So council votes no to the extension 9-4 but Woolley and Farkas just went behind their backs and asked City Manager to ask the Flames for an extension anyway? Then why bother having a vote if any one councillar can do this?

[Muta]

Farkas is such a grandstander, it's insufferable.

[Envitro]

It's not really a false sens of urgency, to be honest.
We've been talking about this for about 7 years now, in one way or another.

Also, the council goes away for August, so what consultations would happen through the month of August so that they're ready to vote in September? I'm sure all of them plan their summer vacations for that month since council isn't in chambers.

Regardless, delaying only serves one side, and having a vote quickly serves the other, simple as that.

[sureLoss]

Originally Posted by SilverGS

So council votes no to the extension 9-4 but Woolley and Farkas just went behind their backs and asked City Manager to ask the Flames for an extension anyway? Then why bother having a vote if any one councillar can do this?

These councillors were always going try and delay the vote again the next time it comes up in council (tomorrow).

The last time the extension was voted down it was unclear if the deal would be pulled off the table by CSEC if they voted to extend. Seems prudent to know exactly what would happen to the deal if council did decide to extend public engagement.

Also puts CSEC in a difficult position. Say no and the critics will say they are trying to force the deal through. Say yes and it gives time for those against the deal to turn more people against it.

[GioforPM]

More time sounds reasonable, but when the people requesting it are voting no anyway, it's just a time waster.

[mikephoen]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

These councillors were always going try and delay the vote again the next time it comes up in council (tomorrow).

The last time the extension was voted down it was unclear if the deal would be pulled off the table by CSEC if they voted to extend. Seems prudent to know exactly what would happen to the deal if council did decide to extend public engagement.

Also puts CSEC in a difficult position. Say no and the critics will say they are trying to force the deal through. Say yes and it gives time for those against the deal to turn more people against it.

CSEC should just have the 'Out of Office' autoreply engaged on their email for the next 2 days and not respond at all.

[The Yen Man]

As much as I'm personally against delaying it, I can at least make sense of it if the councillors' honest objective was to evaluate it further and then decide. The fact that they're just using this as a means to hopefully delay and eventually kill it, I say FU to guys like Farkas and Wooley, and hope the rest of the city councillors see through their stupid political games.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Also puts CSEC in a difficult position. Say no and the critics will say they are trying to force the deal through. Say yes and it gives time for those against the deal to turn more people against it.

I'd think the smartest answer would be to say "If the vote is delayed, this deal is off the table. We're happy to continue negotiating if the city needs more time, but do not feel this deal holds enough value for us to sit on it indefinitely and would prefer to negotiate something better for us if given more time."

It's CSEC, so they won't say anything that suggests they have tact, but a tactful "no" is their best option.

[Sec218]

Originally Posted by Muta

Farkas is such a grandstander, it's insufferable.

Last time around we had Nenshi and Ken King grandstanding. This time around it's Farkas and Woolley. I just wish everyone would just check their egos at the door!