[News] Calgary, Alberta, & CSEC agree in principle to $1.223bn Event Centre + infrastructure

[topfiverecords]

Lots of good information from John Bean on yesterday's Flames Talk. It's a good listen so go seek the podcast (skip the Smith part) but here's some points.

• Site increased from 7 acres to 10 acres thanks to Stampede land swap negotiations

• All parties wanted a community arena in previous iteration but couldn't fit it in the 7 acres

• Indoor gathering plaza will allow loading the building out of the elements

• Outdoor plaza will act as Red Lot

• "New" road and intersection on the SE of the Stampede grounds connecting to 25th

• Lane reversal systems

• Cost overruns on arena/community rink shared 50-50 with City & CSEC

• Starting with $850 million a more realistic number than previous deal

• Design will find opportunities to save on these numbers

• Formal agreements starting Friday

• Development manager to oversee entire construction needs to be hired

• Design team and construction management team hired after development manager

• 32-34 months of construction from break ground to building opening

• 36-40 months +/- from now [woah! nah that's too quick for hiring/design/permits/procuring]

• Some of the work already done should be able to transfer over

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by kermitology

I'm honestly shocked that there are people defending a pretty blatant electioneering financial deal that is pretty much explicitly set up as a vote for me or you lose the Flames.

I can't wrap my head around the people who blaming the NDP for the party that politicized this.

[AFireInside]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Again....this is the point where i ask why the city agreed to it. Every councillor agreed according to reports. No one was holding a gun to their collective heads.

As for the provincial part of this....is infrastructure money for cities not a legitimate expense/spending of funds?

If its being used to finally get this arena done...isn't that a win for everyone?

Building roads/access to Stampede/Victoria park is worse than some overpass or whatever on Deerfoot?

I really do understand why people are upset, it is not a great deal. Thing is, it was always going to be something along these lines or nothing at all. I think the city is better with it than not... knowing full well others disagree with that.

I think the city is better with it at as well. I'd rather the province not jump in and subsidize the Edwards which is how I see the deal. If it was 500 - 600 mil a piece by the city and the CSEC I don't think you'd see as much anger towards the deal. I still wouldn't like it, but I realize that how I think the deal should break down isn't going to happen.

Our provincial government just gave the CSEC half the money for the project they weren't involved in previously. Terrible terrible deal.

As for why the city agreed, I'm not sure. I guess from their perspective maybe it's because they are paying for less than half of the project now.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by kermitology

I'm honestly shocked that there are people defending a pretty blatant electioneering financial deal that is pretty much explicitly set up as a vote for me or you lose the Flames.

Why can't the province disclose what their details of the deal are? Like.. for a province that (frankly pretends) to be so fiscally responsible, with an election right on the doorstep, how can you NOT, as a voter, demand details of this to help you decide.

To base a voting decision on the chance that voting for one party over the other could lead to the Flames leaving is insane, and some of you are like: "#### YEAH! I couldn't possibly vote NDP if they won't blindly accept this deal! But the NDP will raise taxes!"

For the love of god can some of you think critically here? When the NDP is asking questions about the fiscal responsibility of capital investments, and they're being criticized by conservatives for it.. what bizarro land are we in?

Like, if the deal is specifically for investments for roads, the green line, CRL contribution etc.. then that's awesome, and the NDP should support it. But holding any of those details back is purely to hold the spectre of "what if" over the election. You all should be livid.

What details are there to share at this point without an actual development plan in place though. It is being reported that

The Government of Alberta committed to a maximum of $330 million.

Premier Danielle Smith said the province’s contributions will go towards roads, bridges, LRT and other infrastructure for the area in three annual tranches totalling $300 million. The remaining $30 million in provincial commitment will go towards paying for the remaining half of the community rink.

They don't know at this point how much can be attributed to an underpass, utility work, road work, etc. They have been clear that they are committing up to $330M as part of the development.

[Leeman4Gilmour]

Originally Posted by dobbles

I know you guys are pretty upset about this whole thing, but can we pause for a second to make fun of gramps over here trying to link to his hard drive in 2023?!?!?!?!?

LOL, my bad. I'll fix that later. Gotta go feed the pigeons.

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by AFireInside

I think the city is better with it at as well. I'd rather the province not jump in and subsidize the Edwards which is how I see the deal. If it was 500 - 600 mil a piece by the city and the CSEC I don't think you'd see as much anger towards the deal. I still wouldn't like it, but I realize that how I think the deal should break down isn't going to happen.

Our provincial government just gave the CSEC half the money for the project they weren't involved in previously. Terrible terrible deal.

As for why the city agreed, I'm not sure. I guess from their perspective maybe it's because they are paying for less than half of the project now.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1651209220929511424

Just ignore the numbers and looks toward the pretty (maybe) building

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Bonded

I can't wrap my head around the people who blaming the NDP for the party that politicized this.

Those are the "forever blue" voters, who would vote the same way even if a syphilitic chihuahua was running the party.

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Isn’t there literally an overpass linked to this deal?

No silly. It's an underpass...

[Edit: Had to work so a few pages behind. Sorry for piling on!]

[Manhattanboy]

I get the arguments against for sure in terms of the allocation of public dollars.

But this is a huge project for the City and downtown (and beyond) businesses.

To create and maintain a growing and vibrant City and community you (we - the public) have to make these kinds of investments.

Its not to understate the importance of health care, education etc.

There needs to be a balance - that's what government does.

Or do nothing along these lines and the City treads sideways, even downwards.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Leeman4Gilmour

Options can, but will they? It was stated quite a few times that the next step(s) will be definitive agreements. It's not unreasonable to believe the public will be able to see more detail when the definitive agreements are set. I just think, on this particular point, it's early to be outraged over "secret" deals when they're not secret and it's been stated many times, more details are coming. It was also stated the provincial side of the agreement will be voted on after the election. If the NDP are in, they'll know what's what. I'm not a Notley hater, but she ####ed up (IMO) making these "secrecy" claims.

I didn't see the outrage. I saw her ask for them. And when DS sets this up as an election issue, yeah, let's see everything.

If you think we as voters see definitive details in agreements between government and private companies made widely public, well, nope.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by Manhattanboy

I get the arguments against for sure in terms of the allocation of public dollars.

But this is a huge project for the City and downtown (and beyond) businesses.

To create and maintain a growing and vibrant City and community you (we - the public) have to make these kinds of investments.

Its not to understate the importance of health care, education etc.

There needs to be a balance - that's what government does.

Or do nothing along these lines and the City treads sideways, even downwards.

You can agree with all this (except for “this option or do nothing”) and still feel like it’s not a great deal for the city.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Bonded

City puts up 550M in cash. CSEC puts up 40M. Province puts up 300M. CSEC then pays an escalating rent as their contribution. So they are basically turning their cost of doing business into an arena and taking on very little risk.

This is bang on. And to further clarify, as it's easy to get confused:

City puts up 550M in cash.
Province puts up 330M.
CSEC puts up 40M.

The city also puts up another $316M on CSEC's behalf, which is the part that gets repaid through those $17M (+1%) rent payments.


Which is to say, the CSEC rent payments do not offset the other ~$880M above, at all.

[Manhattanboy]

Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers

You can agree with all this (except for “this option or do nothing”) and still feel like it’s not a great deal for the city.

This is a high profile project that involves high profile players (in fact the highest in town, the Stampede, the Flames etc.) so of course the public will (and should) focus on the details of the deal.

But its kind of comical when you think of everything else governments at every level do in terms of the spending of public funds without any review by the public. We only hear about those things because the media decide they are of sufficient importance to warrant public scrutiny.

EDIT: And without access to information laws we might never hear about them.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by Manhattanboy

This is a high profile project that involves high profile players (in fact the highest in town, the Stampede, the Flames etc.) so of course the public will (and should) focus on the details of the deal.

But its kind of comical when you think of everything else governments at every level do in terms of the spending of public funds without any review by the public. We only hear about those things because the media decide they are of sufficient importance to warrant public scrutiny.

Name some examples where the financial beneficiary of the public project is a billionaire who will obtain further revenue as a result.

[Manhattanboy]

Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers

Name some examples where the financial beneficiary of the public project is a billionaire who will obtain further revenue as a result.

Most P3 projects? Although the private ownership part is usually spread among several shareholders.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers

Name some examples where the financial beneficiary of the public project is a billionaire who will obtain further revenue as a result.

Rstar well reclamation.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by dustygoon

Given how miniscule the rent CSEC pays per year ($17mm growing 1% per year) is vs the value of the building/land ($17mm rent implies value of only $300mm which is obviously too low), we should be able to safely assume non-hockey event revenue does not go to CSEC.

If this is not the case, get a rope.

Maybe someone has answered this as I'm just catching up, but that is absolutely not a safe assumption. CSEC - the E is for Entertainment for a reason - will almost certainly have an 'arena management deal', where they handle all bookings, and therefore very likely take all/most of the revenue.

The thing that doesn't seem to have been mentioned yet is any version of a ticket tax, which could conceivably be a revenue source for the city - though in the last deal I believe it was framed as a CSEC contribution

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by Manhattanboy

Most P3 projects? Although the private ownership part is usually spread among several shareholders.

Like what? I didn’t try to imply that they don’t exist. You think it’s “comical” that people have interest in public money going into this over…. What? Hospitals/schools/and public services? Real head scratcher.

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by Manhattanboy

I get the arguments against for sure in terms of the allocation of public dollars.

But this is a huge project for the City and downtown (and beyond) businesses.

To create and maintain a growing and vibrant City and community you (we - the public) have to make these kinds of investments.

Its not to understate the importance of health care, education etc.

There needs to be a balance - that's what government does.

Or do nothing along these lines and the City treads sideways, even downwards.

I think the biggest gripe isn't that the city is putting money into it. It is how much more CSEC is taking advantage of the city and provincial governments against a backdrop where people are struggling and there is a legitimate housing crisis. CSEC goes from paying 50% of the constructions costs to almost nothing and doesn't look like they will recapture any revenue. It went from about as a fair of a deal as I expected to a complete capitulation to a private entity.

The benefits of an arena 'revitalizing' the area around the dome are also completely overstated in my opinion. I have travelled to a lot of places and never once was arena district a draw outside of going to game. The ICE district is still pretty dead outside Oilers games when I have visited. Even if the magical happens and it does become the go to spot then businesses in Inglewood, 17th, and Kensington will suffer. There is only so much entertainment spending to go around.

There should be balance in the deal and this is looking completely one sided.

[Zarley]

Originally Posted by topfiverecords

Lots of good information from John Bean on yesterday's Flames Talk. It's a good listen so go seek the podcast (skip the Smith part) but here's some points.

• Site increased from 7 acres to 10 acres thanks to Stampede land swap negotiations

• All parties wanted a community arena in previous iteration but couldn't fit it in the 7 acres

• Indoor gathering plaza will allow loading the building out of the elements

• Outdoor plaza will act as Red Lot

• "New" road and intersection on the SE of the Stampede grounds connecting to 25th

• Lane reversal systems

• Cost overruns on arena/community rink shared 50-50 with City & CSEC

• Starting with $850 million a more realistic number than previous deal

• Design will find opportunities to save on these numbers

• Formal agreements starting Friday

• Development manager to oversee entire construction needs to be hired

• Design team and construction management team hired after development manager

• 32-34 months of construction from break ground to building opening

• 36-40 months +/- from now [woah! nah that's too quick for hiring/design/permits/procuring]

• Some of the work already done should be able to transfer over

LOL 4-8 months to hire a development manager, bring on a design team, design the building, get a development permit, get a BP, tender the project is insane!

Otherwise, this is all good stuff. Thankfully we will see a new design.

The previous project suffered from being shoehorned onto a small site which caused an increase in costs for the structural design. This was essentially due to a path dependency on the 5th St SE underpass which probably makes more sense to be on 6th anyway.