[News] New Arena - Plan B - Victoria Park

[Since1984]

Originally Posted by Rickbo

The only mayor in Calgary history to raise property taxes every year they are in office. Bye bye.

Mine went down the last two years... You Sir lie.

[Muta]

Originally Posted by Fire

The only way that would be happening would be if the value of your house has been dropping year after year. Bad neighbourhood?

Nope, bad economy. You may have heard about it.

[Ice_Weasel]

"And if we want to keep talking to get it exactly right, I am happy to do that"

This is the troubling part for me. Nothing is ever "exactly right", and if this is the goal, nothing will ever get done. Probably the same reason this country can't get pipeline built, flood mitigation completed, etc. etc. Somehow the pursuit of 100% consensus has got in the way of getting things done.

[RM14]

mine went down this year as well, about $60

[Fire]

Originally Posted by Muta

Nope, bad economy. You may have heard about it.

Your house would still have to drop more in value than the average in order to see no increase in taxes.

http://www.calgary.ca/PDA/Assessment...alculator.aspx

[Muta]

Originally Posted by Fire

Your house would still have to drop more in value than the average in order to see no increase in taxes.

http://www.calgary.ca/PDA/Assessment...alculator.aspx

LOL, you have too much time on your hands. I said about 5 bucks it went up still, but who gives a crap about that? My property is no different than other inner city condos during a recession. What's your beef?

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by flambers

This type of stuff is terrible, quite talking about it and get it done.

The city aren't the ones putting together an arena proposal. The people who need to 'get it done' are Calgary Sports and Entertainment. The timeline is completely under their control, and always has been. Every month, every year of delay is because of the owners' commitment to spending as little of their own money as possible.

[rage2]

You can't look at your individual property tax assessment and to determine if taxes went up or down, as others have mentioned, assessments compared to others in the city play a role in determining individual household contributions. What you need to look for is total property tax revenue to see the big picture. Nenshi's averaging 7% a year increase, which is exactly the same as Bronco's term. This coming from a Nenshi critic.

You want to complain about taxes, complain about provincial and federal. That's where it's hitting hard.

[Major Major]

Originally Posted by Ice_Weasel

"And if we want to keep talking to get it exactly right, I am happy to do that"

This is the troubling part for me. Nothing is ever "exactly right", and if this is the goal, nothing will ever get done. Probably the same reason this country can't get pipeline built, flood mitigation completed, etc. etc. Somehow the pursuit of 100% consensus has got in the way of getting things done.

No, it is about coming to a number that makes sense. If you go to HF oil right now, there is a thread titled "did Katz con the city of Edmonton?" They pretty much all agree he did, but that it's fine because they have a shiny thing with not enough bathrooms. If our mayor, whoever it is, gets his arm twisted into a bad deal and I as a flames fan feel the need to rationalize my team screwing over the city that supports it for the benefit of almost exclusively rich people, I will be pissed.

Don't be in a rush. I'm fine with the dome knowing that a new building is inevitable. If the flames are in a rush, present a reasonable financial framework and make some concessions.

[Ozy_Flame]

7% is high, but to be fair, rate of inflation (CPI) is at about 1.5% in recent years.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Major Major

No, it is about coming to a number that makes sense. If you go to HF oil right now, there is a thread titled "did Katz con the city of Edmonton?" They pretty much all agree he did, but that it's fine because they have a shiny thing with not enough bathrooms. If our mayor, whoever it is, gets his arm twisted into a bad deal and I as a flames fan feel the need to rationalize my team screwing over the city that supports it for the benefit of almost exclusively rich people, I will be pissed.

Don't be in a rush. I'm fine with the dome knowing that a new building is inevitable. If the flames are in a rush, present a reasonable financial framework and make some concessions.

Hopefully you wont be pissed at Roger's place, theres usually quite the line.

[D as in David]

What I'd really like to know is whether Mark Jankowski's property taxes went up or down. I'd like to find out right now, though, or it won't make sense.

[flambers]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

The city aren't the ones putting together an arena proposal.

The people who need to 'get it done' are Calgary Sports and Entertainment. The timeline is completely under their control, and always has been.

Every month, every year of delay is because of the owners' commitment to spending as little of their own money as possible.

Both sides need to anti up and get it done, City & the Flames.

However the Major's comments don't help anything.

[flambers]

As for the proposal and the City, I do believe the City are putting together the proposal for Plan B.

As for funding, that discussion is another topic all together.

[Ice_Weasel]

Originally Posted by Major Major

No, it is about coming to a number that makes sense.

But that is the problem....makes sense to who? Everyone? The majority? The few that will actually dig into the minutia of the deal and not just read headlines and media hyperbole? How will you ever satisfy the crowd that is adamantly opposed to any public funding? How will it ever make sense to them? Bottom line is that there is no number that makes sense to everyone - so here we are, stuck.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

7% is high, but to be fair, rate of inflation (CPI) is at about 1.5% in recent years.

Also, that's just the municipal portion, not blended with the provincial rate. Also crucially, recall that a bunch of that increase was earmarked just to capital spending - Green Line, Rec Centres, Central Library, Roads, etc, not contributing to any increase in the operating budget for ongoing program spending.

The operating budget grew slower than population and inflation (CPI, not even MPI) over the Mayor's tenure, which includes one outlier year, 2013, which incurred huge flood-related costs.

[Senator Clay Davis]

I seriously doubt this could ever fly up here, but an interesting new approach by the Warriors as they look to pay for their new San Francisco arena: Essentially a PSL that calls itself a "membership" where you have to commit to buy season tickets for 30 years, you cannot sell the license for a profit, and you get your "membership" money back at the end of the 30 years. Basically an interest free, tax free loan. I'm curious how some of our staunchest pro public dollars into the arena feel about this funding model, I mostly like it except for the inability to sell the license for a profit.

Officials with the defending NBA champions acknowledged Wednesday that to get season tickets at the team's new privately financed $1 billion Chase Center, which is slated to open in 2019, fans will have to pay a fee for the right to buy those tickets.

While pricing of the licenses has not been revealed, a team official confirmed to ESPN that the number of seats dedicated for season-ticket holders will decrease from the 14,500 currently at Oracle Arena in Oakland to roughly 12,000 at Chase Center in San Francisco. Half of the tickets will come with a per-seat cost of $15,000 or less. The other half would cost more than that.

The Warriors would return the money the fan paid for the right to buy tickets after 30 years. That essentially means the personal seat license, which will be called a "membership," is acting as an interest-free, tax-free loan to the team for three decades.

Fans can transfer or give back the license before the 30 years are up, so they aren't required to commit to the full term, but they won't get their money back until Year 30.

The Toronto Raptors are the only other NBA team with personal seat licenses, which are offered only for their best seats and also include rights for Toronto Maple Leafs tickets. A majority of NFL teams use licenses, however.

The membership will be transferable, but unlike in the NFL, the licenses will not be allowed to be resold for a value above the original price paid minus the years used.

If a fan sells the membership, the team is made aware of the price. If the price falls short of the full price paid less the payments already made, the Warriors will make up the difference at the end of the 30-year period to the original owner.

The Warriors will let fans pay for memberships in installments, though those plans haven't been formalized.

http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/2...nses-new-arena

[GordonBlue]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

I seriously doubt this could ever fly up here, but an interesting new approach by the Warriors as they look to pay for their new San Francisco arena: Essentially a PSL that calls itself a "membership" where you have to commit to buy season tickets for 30 years, you cannot sell the license for a profit, and you get your "membership" money back at the end of the 30 years. Basically an interest free, tax free loan. I'm curious how some of our staunchest pro public dollars into the arena feel about this funding model, I mostly like it except for the inability to sell the license for a profit.



http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/2...nses-new-arena

it would totally fly. I can't see many fans giving up their seats just because of a license. the people who can afford seasons tickets can likely also afford the licensing fee.

[Enoch Root]

It's not a question of whether it's affordable, it's a question of whether people would be willing to commit to 30 years of being a captive audience.

Let's say you buy your licence and then they raise ticket prices 7 or 8% for 5 years in a row. You're in for a $20,000 membership (or whatever it is), so how do you feel about cancelling your seats if you're unhappy with the product or the pricing?

I would be against it for that reason. As a STH, you're a customer of the product the team is offering. If you own the membership, you're no longer a customer, you're committed.

At a golf course, or other places where there is a membership, you have a voice in how things are managed. With a sports franchise, you would just be a captive cheque book.

[The Cobra]

A bad economy doesn't affect your property taxes.

The amount you have to pay is based on the value of your house vs. the value of other homes.

The gross amount the City collects goes up every year.

Just because your house decreases in value in a poor economy doesn't mean you pay less taxes, unless you house decreases more than the average house does.