Arena negotiation discussion. UPD: Flames release their proposal

[Housley4Prez]

Let me first say that I do not want the city throwing down half a billion to pay for a new building for the Calgary Flames ownership group.

That said, I have to admit it's incredibly frustrating when the city does throw huge sums of money at things that don't come nearly as close to galvanizing the populace.

Take for instance the new central public library. It cost just under half that same cost at $245 million. Yes, I get it, on the surface a public library is supposed to have far more public use than an arena. But hear me out...

A new arena brings events, conventions, other forms of entertainment, and generates revenue. The NCL was done to look artsy, involved architects from Norway, and is located in the Downtown East Village.

Unlike a central entertainment complex, a centralized public gathering place for a library is completely unnecessary. Calgary already has a thriving public library system, with the ability to order and reserve books from any branch around the city, and which has several branches out in the residential communities where people live, work, and can have much easier access. It was an entirely unnecessary project, which didn't cause nearly a drop of the scorn and debate that a new arena has driven up.

You can't split up a hockey team's schedule, and have "branches" of an arena all over town. It has to be in one spot.

As well, the NHL, as well as travelling entertainers, and many other uses come for a centralized arena.

There are several other expenditures that the city shells out for that do not generate revenue or ongoing jobs, like a new arena would.

That said, again, I do NOT want the city to flip the bill on an arena. I just find it very strange that something like a new library for Nenshi's pet project of Downtown East Village gets greenlit for half the price, without so much as a peep of resistance... for a building we didn't need, already have infrastructure in place for, and which won't get used to the same degree as a centralized entertainment complex. It does hamper the argument a bit.

[stone hands]

Originally Posted by guzzy

Doc Seaman Calgary Foundation - $117MM contribution to the community. second largest donation in Canadian history
Mccaig tower - foothills hospital
N.Murray Edwards Charitable Foundation - also built NICU at Alberta Childrens hospital.

Some pretty big contributions right there.

I mean in regards to Calgary next/new arena

Charitable donations by individuals are there to help the community for the sake of helping the community, not to curry favor with the government to be given subsidies for your private enterprise

[Manhattanboy]

Originally Posted by stone hands

I mean in regards to Calgary next/new arena

Charitable donations by individuals are there to help the community for the sake of helping the community, not to curry favor with the government to be given subsidies for your private enterprise

So the incredible contributions to the local community by the owners of the Flames, in the hundreds of millions, is irrelevant to the discussion?

Wow.

[Toonage]

I think the charitable contributions aren't being held up as an example of what the owners deserve or can reap for their donations so much as a counterpoint to people suggesting the owners only want to bleed the city dry. Or am I off?

[stone hands]

Originally Posted by Manhattanboy

So the incredible contributions to the local community by the owners of the Flames, in the hundreds of millions, is irrelevant to the discussion?

Wow.

completely and utterly. they already get tax credits from charitable donations as a thank you from the government for their good deeds. i'm asking what the OP meant in regards to the flames subsidizing the city in the current deals that we have been presented for the new arena projects

[Manhattanboy]

Originally Posted by stone hands

completely and utterly. they already get tax credits from charitable donations as a thank you from the government for their good deeds. i'm asking what the OP meant in regards to the flames subsidizing the city in the current deals that we have been presented for the new arena projects

Well you and I can seriously disagree on the point.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Manhattanboy

Well you and I can seriously disagree on the point.

well that's a shock

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by guzzy

Doc Seaman Calgary Foundation - $117MM contribution to the community. second largest donation in Canadian history
Mccaig tower - foothills hospital
N.Murray Edwards Charitable Foundation - also built NICU at Alberta Childrens hospital.

Some pretty big contributions right there.

The Flames leaving doesn't change the fact that this money was donated by the individuals.

The Flames leaving doesn't mean the owners will ultimately leave the community.

Murray Edwards has already left the city, and the Flames are still here.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by stone hands

completely and utterly. they already get tax credits from charitable donations as a thank you from the government for their good deeds.

It's also basically a marketing expense.

[Infinit47]

Originally Posted by Cappy

The Flames leaving doesn't change the fact that this money was donated by the individuals.

The Flames leaving doesn't mean the owners will ultimately leave the community.

Murray Edwards has already left the city, and the Flames are still here.

Hard to see what their personal donations have to do with a new Flames arena deal. Edwards main business interest in the city is with his Oil and Gas holdings, not the Flames.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by Pellanor

- The owners feel insulted, but will likely be back at the table within a year.

Wait... what the eff do those people have to be "insulted" about? That the response to their demand that taxpayers dole out $250,000,000.00 in upfront subsidy followed by millions more annually wasn't positive?

[Diemenz]

Originally Posted by stone hands

completely and utterly. they already get tax credits from charitable donations as a thank you from the government for their good deeds. i'm asking what the OP meant in regards to the flames subsidizing the city in the current deals that we have been presented for the new arena projects

So if the owners don’t then who funds those projects? Because the way your making it sound there should be hundreds of millionaires lining up to pay for services and improvements in Calgary because of the awesome tax credits the government is giving out.

When the team goes those donations go as well. As does the charity work, children’s hospital visits, school programs and several other public services that they provide. But I’m sure in this striving oil and gas metropolis CEOs and CFOs will stop by schools and talk about fair play and bullying, or create programs to bring children who have lost parents to board meetings with popcorn and hot dogs. I mean that would be something they remember for the rest of their life right? Meeting their idol bob the senior accountant for shell.

[calf]

Originally Posted by Diemenz

So if the owners don’t then who funds those projects? Because the way your making it sound there should be hundreds of millionaires lining up to pay for services and improvements in Calgary because of the awesome tax credits the government is giving out.

When the team goes those donations go as well. As does the charity work, children’s hospital visits, school programs and several other public services that they provide. But I’m sure in this striving oil and gas metropolis CEOs and CFOs will stop by schools and talk about fair play and bullying, or create programs to bring children who have lost parents to board meetings with popcorn and hot dogs. I mean that would be something they remember for the rest of their life right? Meeting their idol bob the senior accountant for shell.

If the team goes, do the owners drop their ownership interest in the businesses that made them wealthy community supporters in the first place? I doubt it, or if they do, it's for different reasons. The personal donations are separate from the Flames - otherwise the Flames name would be on these initiatives and institutes. Besides, there is something fundamentally wrong with using charitable giving to hold the fans/city hostage. I don't think the Flames are doing that though. The void can be filled by the disposable income people/companies have by not having Flames seasons tickets to buy, or other organizations can be targeted. Or many other creative options.

The loss of school and hospital visits would suck for sure - but I'm not convinced that it's worth a $500 million hit to property taxes to keep that going. You could fly in Chris Pratt for $1 million to visit the hospital instead and get better bang for your taxpayer buck.

[stone hands]

Originally Posted by Diemenz

So if the owners don’t then who funds those projects? Because the way your making it sound there should be hundreds of millionaires lining up to pay for services and improvements in Calgary because of the awesome tax credits the government is giving out.

When the team goes those donations go as well. As does the charity work, children’s hospital visits, school programs and several other public services that they provide. But I’m sure in this striving oil and gas metropolis CEOs and CFOs will stop by schools and talk about fair play and bullying, or create programs to bring children who have lost parents to board meetings with popcorn and hot dogs. I mean that would be something they remember for the rest of their life right? Meeting their idol bob the senior accountant for shell.

as i said in my previous post, donating to charity is an act of selflessness and charity in and of itself - you dont donate to charity and then demand or expect to receive benefits - this is actual bribery.

you also dont make tons of charitable donations and threaten to pull the plug if the municipal government doesn't pony up a few hundred million dollars for your private enterprise

i dont know any of the owners or anyone involved in the flames foundation, but i'm sure they would be pretty insulted at your insinuation that they are making charitable donations for PR reasons

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Pellanor

This weekend I had an opportunity to chat with somebody who knows quite a few of the people involved on both sides of the negotiations. Here's the impression I got through our conversation.
- It was pretty much a done deal last summer. If it was anybody but Ken King AND Nenshi negotiating, it would be done.
- The owners feel insulted, but will likely be back at the table within a year.
- The owners make a lot of contributions to the city that aren't really talked about. If you take all of it into account, the team is effectively subsidizing the city with the proposed deal.
- As we all agree, the team has done a terrible job with their presentations / pr on the whole issue.
- The city has also responded poorly. Calgary Next had a lot of potential but was shot down without much debate.

I'm not sure how accurate all of this is, but it was interesting to get his perspective.

Interesting. I meet a lot of people and I heard something very, very similar.

[Diemenz]

Originally Posted by stone hands

as i said in my previous post, donating to charity is an act of selflessness and charity in and of itself - you dont donate to charity and then demand or expect to receive benefits - this is actual bribery.

you also dont make tons of charitable donations and threaten to pull the plug if the municipal government doesn't pony up a few hundred million dollars for your private enterprise

i dont know any of the owners or anyone involved in the flames foundation, but i'm sure they would be pretty insulted at your insinuation that they are making charitable donations for PR reasons

I did not even remotely say that.
I would explain it to you again but it’s really not worth you completely changing the context to suit your agenda.

[stone hands]

Originally Posted by Diemenz

I did not even remotely say that.
I would explain it to you again but it’s really not worth you completely changing the context to suit your agenda.

i said donating to charity doesnt grant you any favors in receiving government help for things

you made a post that refuted, presumably, that point, by facetiously mentioning that tax credits were the incentive to donate to charities(a strawman, i might add) - otherwise why quote me and mention what would we do without the help of all of these generous rich people

what else were you insinuating???

[Enoch Root]

First you insinuated they do it for tax credits. Then you moved the goalposts and said it shouldn't earn them favours.

The point wasn't that they have earned favours. The point was that these people are extremely generous and beneficial to the community, and calling them greedy billionaires is foolish.

[stone hands]

I didnt insinuate they do it for tax credits - I stated they should do it for the act of giving back to the community and they are already compensated with tax credits, not that it is the prime motivator for doing so

And it's great they're generous and beneficial to the community. Doesnt mean they can get funding to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars for their hobby

[cam_wmh]

Exactly. Philanthopy should have ZERO association with a business venture. Doing so, takes away the consideration for charitable work.

Sadly, MANY, corporations tie charitable donations to B2B agreements. The truly philanthropic, charitable do not put any caveats or conditions on their donations.

for ex; I'll sign this deal, but our corporate sports team is looking for $$$$, in sponsorship.

Frankly, it shouldn't be brought up. If it's evidenced, in the event the Flames move, that those local charitable dollars vanish? well, for shame. And if they continue? Well, as they should.