[News] Tentative Agreement Reached! New Arena!

[Manhattanboy]

Originally Posted by Muta

Farkas is such a grandstander, it's insufferable.

I’ve heard he’s hated by other councillors.

[FireFly]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Some poll figures:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...ium%3Dsharebar

on the deal as it sits now:
47% of Calgarians approve
6% unsure
47% disapprove

60% polled say 1 week is not enough time to engage citizens

I'd like to know the "why" behind the disapproval. If it's because of the 60 million in budget cuts (which I strongly believe it is,) it's ridiculous and those votes shouldn't count.
The problem with consulting the public is that they just don't understand the dollars and cents behind it.

I hope they just ram it through.

[TheAlpineOracle]

Originally Posted by FireFly

I'd like to know the "why" behind the disapproval. If it's because of the 60 million in budget cuts (which I strongly believe it is,) it's ridiculous and those votes shouldn't count.
The problem with consulting the public is that they just don't understand the dollars and cents behind it.

I hope they just ram it through.

Same as the Olympics. A bunch of old people or people who have accomplished nothing in their life holding back progress. Unfortunately these people are the most vocal because they have more time on their hands and no means of being heard in their day to day activities. I would bet there is a large majority that want this project but are too busy with work, kids, etc. to sit there and debate it.

I’ve really been souring on democracy the best few years and this is another example of it. The free market has come to an agreement which benefits both sides, but we need more time to consult with John Q. Trailer Thrash who doesn’t want any public money going to an event Center solely because they can’t afford some of the ticket prices without even a consideration to the benefits to the City as a whole from a new events Center. If the city was just building a new event Center themselves and an NHL team wasn’t in the picture half of the naysayers would be saying how great it was just like the library.

[btimbit]

The problem with public engagement on things like this are that the public are mostly total idiots.

Thoughts on this deal aside, it seems most people would love Calgary to be nothing more than a bigger Saskatoon.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

Same as the Olympics. A bunch of old people or people who have accomplished nothing in their life holding back progress. Unfortunately these people are the most vocal because they have more time on their hands and no means of being heard in their day to day activities. I would bet there is a large majority that want this project want are too busy with work, kids, etc. to sit there and debate it.

Look at this bull#### right here. You can only disapprove of this if you have nothing going on in your life?

What an absolutely ridiculous post.

[TheAlpineOracle]

Originally Posted by nik-

Look at this bull#### right here. You can only disapprove of this if you have nothing going on in your life?

What an absolutely ridiculous post.

I didn’t say everyone, but I’d wager a large majority are. Can’t see the forest for the trees. All I see on the local newspaper comments is whining about funding a billionaire completely ignoring the fact that the City will own the building that they will need to replace anyways picking up 100% of the tab if sports doesn’t help.

[Rando]

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

I didn’t say everyone, but I’d wager a large majority are. Can’t see the forest for the trees. All I see on the local newspaper comments is whining about funding a billionaire completely ignoring the fact that the City will own the building that they will need to replace anyways picking up 100% of the tab if sports doesn’t help.

The city owning the building is a win for the Flames, not the city.

[TheAlpineOracle]

Originally Posted by btimbit

The problem with public engagement on things like this are that the public are mostly total idiots.

Thoughts on this deal aside, it seems most people would love Calgary to be nothing more than a bigger Saskatoon.

It’s not most people. It’s a vocal minority.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

I didn’t say everyone, but I’d wager a large majority are. Can’t see the forest for the trees. All I see on the local newspaper comments is whining about funding a billionaire completely ignoring the fact that the City will own the building that they will need to replace anyways picking up 100% of the tab if sports doesn’t help.

I mean your post was what it was, completely vitriolic. And then basically insinuating people who don't support this are trailer trash when there are a long line of these bad deals to give people the inclination to say "maybe this is a bad idea". You even went back in and said this was a free market decision. You legitimately tried to use "free market" as being on the side of a taxpayer fund paying for 50% of this.

I mean it has to be satire right?

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

It’s not most people. It’s a vocal minority.

Also this

[442scotty]

Originally Posted by Flamenspiel

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

I don’t know if there’s a false sense of urgency at all. If I was an owner I would be sick and tired of the years of talk! The negotiators agreed on the consultation period. At what point is enough, enough!

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by nik-

Look at this bull#### right here. You can only disapprove of this if you have nothing going on in your life?

What an absolutely ridiculous post.

I would say that the post is a large exaggeration and probably inaccurate as to the type of people opposed. However, I do think that people opposed will generally be louder and more active than those who support. There will also be those who keep talking about getting a better deal when what they want is no deal at all.

[TheAlpineOracle]

Originally Posted by nik-

I mean your post was what it was, completely vitriolic. And then basically insinuating people who don't support this are trailer trash when there are a long line of these bad deals to give people the inclination to say "maybe this is a bad idea". You even went back in and said this was a free market decision. You legitimately tried to use "free market" as being on the side of a taxpayer fund paying for 50% of this.

I mean it has to be satire right?

Not satire at all. I haven’t heard a single, reasonably thought out opinion on why this deal shouldn’t go through at all. I’d be willing to listen to those opinions. What I do hear is “Why are building a billionaire a rink when we just got the city budget cut” or “Why are we paying for an NHL deal to get a new rink. I never go to games anyways and won’t use it”.

I couldn’t give a rats ass about those opinions, and like it or not, those opinions are mostly from a vocal group of people that largely come from an uneducated background. Not another minute should be spent debating this unless there is a valid argument which none have been presented yet.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

Not satire at all. I haven’t heard a single, reasonably thought out opinion on why this deal shouldn’t go through at all. I’d be willing to listen to those opinions. What I do hear is “Why are building a billionaire when we just got the city budget” or “Why are we paying for an NHL deal to get a new rink. I never go to games anyways and won’t use it”.

I couldn’t give a rats ass about those opinions, and like it or not, those opinions are mostly from a vocal group of people that largely come from an uneducated background. Not another minute should be spent debating this unless there is a valid argument which none have been presented yet.

I mean there's been tons of economic reasons in the multiple arena threads, and this arena deal being a win is all based on "estimated numbers" which is what every arena deal ever has been, and they mostly end up losers. IF this and if this and if this, then we come out just ahead, well that fills me with confidence that this deal with be different than all those other places!

No one is going to go back and re-hash those reasons for you, because if you missed it in all those threads, you're clearly just not reading them so what's the point. You "don't give a rats ass" about those opinions anyway.

You're set on this, no one will change your mind, but don't essentially say people who disagree with you are garbage because they don't buy this deal. It's a moronic response.

[Matty81]

Hope this gets rammed through tomorrow... if the Nimbys get ahold of the mic and bog this down it is going to get extremely painful and ugly. I'm not even arguing right or wrong here, I just want to selfishly see the Flames stay and I'm hoping it passes.

Also no doubt it was a stereotype but I don't think it's too far off base that a lot of the people who have the energy to get outraged about stuff like this and spend their time going to public forums and letter writing to govt employees are a little bit of a different breed and tend to drown out a lot of others with their pitch and "enthusiasm". Vocal minority is a good way of putting it. Valid perspectives but for me I don't find that public consultations are a very balanced or democratic process. For me folks got elected to govern and they are accountable through elections if they stay within their mandate and the law - they should vote and move on.

[Rando]

Originally Posted by Matty81

Hope this gets rammed through tomorrow... if the Nimbys get ahold

NIMBY = Not in my backyard.

About the three egregious use of nimby round here lately.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Matty81

Hope this gets rammed through tomorrow... if the Nimbys get ahold of the mic and bog this down it is going to get extremely painful and ugly. I'm not even arguing right or wrong here, I just want to selfishly see the Flames stay and I'm hoping it passes.

Also no doubt it was a stereotype but I don't think it's too far off base that a lot of the people who have the energy to get outraged about stuff like this and spend their time going to public forums and letter writing to govt employees are a little bit of a different breed and tend to drown out a lot of others with their pitch and "enthusiasm". Vocal minority is a good way of putting it. Valid perspectives but for me I don't find that public consultations are a very balanced or democratic process. For me folks got elected to govern and they are accountable through elections if they stay within their mandate and the law - they should vote and move on.

You don't think that reading a bunch of other posters on a Flames forum might constitute a vocal minority?

The myopia is astounding.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by 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.

Yes, but it seems rare to me that unprecedented large scale projects like this go from public info available to full green light in a single week. Obviously, this project is a bit of a unicorn for a lot of reasons, but my recollection of other complex and contentious issues is that council normally has lots of questions and seeks clarification/revision on a few points before proceeding to a vote.

I'm not sure how long last Monday's in camera meeting was, but I have to imagine most of it was presentation of details, not discussion. It seems to me that if this were following a more typical city council course:

1. there would be a lot of discussion around things like the non-guaranteed community arena, and the est. 48.7M/year revenue increase for CSEC.
2. a councillor would introduce a motion seeking a revision to better guarantee the community arena, and to seek further clarification on the 48.7M benefit to CSEC.
3. Tired negotiators would get back to the table and find a way to make a certain chunk of city investment be tied directly to the community arena. The Flames provide a tiny bit of info that let's them re-jigger that 48.7M calculation and it more/less gets swept under the rug.
4. It comes back in Sept. and passes, everyone feels a lot better about the deal.

There should probably be more than those two little points to revise/clarify, but you get my point.


But, if the Flames would rather start the multi-year process of gaining the opportunity to pay a ~$190M fee to move to another city with a building that's already 15 years old...then I for one would remember this council very fondly as the one's who "lost" the Flames.

[TheAlpineOracle]

Originally Posted by nik-

I mean there's been tons of economic reasons in the multiple arena threads, and this arena deal being a win is all based on "estimated numbers" which is what every arena deal ever has been, and they mostly end up losers. No one is going to go back and re-hash them, because if you missed it in all those threads, you're clearly just not reading them.

You're set on this, no one will change your mind, but don't be a prick and #### on people who disagree with you as basically subhuman, it's ridiculous.

I’m not saying they are subhuman, I’m saying we have elected representatives to deal with this stuff and a decision has been made. Extending this process to placate people who largely have no understanding of economics and who’s main goal is to kill every project that doesn’t benefit them directly (though it does, they just can’t see it) is a waste and I’m tried of these “consultations”.


By this point you are either for it or against it. There’s no new info that will come out that will change this. Let the council do their job.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

I’m not saying they are subhuman, I’m saying we have elected representatives to deal with this stuff and a decision has been made.

Maybe reread the garbage you type.

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

A bunch of old people or people who have accomplished nothing in their life holding back progress

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

but we need more time to consult with John Q. Trailer Thrash who doesn’t want any public money going to an event Center solely because they can’t afford some of the ticket prices

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

those opinions are mostly from a vocal group of people that largely come from an uneducated background.

I mean it's pretty clear what your opinion of anyone who disagrees with this is. The funny thing is it says way more about you than the people you're trying to denigrate.

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

By this point you are either for it or against it. There’s no new info that will come out that will change this. Let the council do their job.

Exactly, so don't try the "show me the evidence" crap when it's clearly a dishonest request for information you won't even consider anyway.