2026 Olympics- Calgary votes no- 56%

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Obviously I wanted to see Camden Yards. At the time the district was also new and I had heard this dirty city of Baltimore built a nice harbour district so I checked it out. I don't if that's specific but I certainly would have skipped it if not for the district. I skipped Boston for this reason.

Camden Yards isn't anywhere near Station North. And by this you're basically saying you went for baseball.

Even then, Station North isn't near the water., or any harbour district

Your logic isn't really making sense here about going to Baltimore to see Station North as an entertainment district. Just say you wanted to see the Orioles or where they play, that's at least more honest.

[Muta]

Originally Posted by Slava

Well people are cheap. As soon as they are told that this is going to cost them money, they're primed to vote against it. I'm convinced that basically anything we have today that is great would be killed in a plebiscite. The new library, peace bridge or even iconic things like the Calgary Tower would never be built if you told people that it would cost them $20/month or whatever in taxes.

I'm convinced that any arena deal would fail if it were put to a plebiscite as well. It would face a campaign of "we could use that money for..." and "we should be prioritizing..." and there's no chance it would pass.

I'm pretty disappointed with this. I actually don't care much about the Olympics themselves, but that 7 year construction project and tourism boost would have been great.

Perfectly summed up. There's several very important industries in Calgary hurting today, and that sting will be felt for a long, long time.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Camden Yards isn't anywhere near Station North. And by this you're basically saying you went for baseball.

Even then, Station North isn't near the water., or any harbour district

Your logic isn't really making sense here about going to Baltimore to see Station North as an entertainment district. Just say you wanted to see the Orioles or where they play, that's at least more honest.

fine, you got me, it was a combination of things.

[llwhiteoutll]

Originally Posted by Slava

Well people are cheap. As soon as they are told that this is going to cost them money, they're primed to vote against it. I'm convinced that basically anything we have today that is great would be killed in a plebiscite. The new library, peace bridge or even iconic things like the Calgary Tower would never be built if you told people that it would cost them $20/month or whatever in taxes.

I'm convinced that any arena deal would fail if it were put to a plebiscite as well. It would face a campaign of "we could use that money for..." and "we should be prioritizing..." and there's no chance it would pass.

I'm pretty disappointed with this. I actually don't care much about the Olympics themselves, but that 7 year construction project and tourism boost would have been great.

The yes side could have easily swept this if BidCo, the city, the province and the feds all had their ducks in a row before the plebiscite. People didn't just vote no because they are cheap. You also have to remember that council itself lost confidence in the process and the chair of the committee came out as against continuing after they received details (presumably more than we saw due to the budget process that was going on at the same time). In addition, the maybe month long tourism surge in 2026 would do nothing to alleviate the issues facing Calgary today. Construction over the next 8 years would help, but it wouldn't be a silver bullet.

Putting this to a vote without a solid funding agreement in place, zero clarity on the responsibility for the cost overruns, lack of details in the estimate itself and some of BidCo's ambitious claims that they were forced to contradict all played a role in undermining any confidence that people might have had in the bid. If there was clarity and confidence, yes probably could have won even at a higher price tag.

[TheSutterDynasty]

I always find it so interesting how people can become so entrenched in their position over time.

If hosting was a guarantee benefit to our economy then this wouldn't even go to plebiscite and dozens (hundreds?) of cities would be bidding.

This thread seems to have turned to a bunch of people covering their ears screaming 'but I want more jobs for Calgarians!'.

We all do. 56% of the vote think the Olympics wouldn't do that. Or wouldn't be worth the cost.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Real fun comes tomorrow at noon when we get the riding by riding results. So are the latte sippers of the inner city to blame for the plebiscite failing? Or was it the Yop gobblers of the suburbs who brought it down?

[Dentoman]

Originally Posted by redforever

Pretty well all of the other cities that pulled out of the Olympics had plebiscites whereby citizens could express their opinion. Why should Calgary be any different, especially considering the size and scope that the Olympics has grown to and especially because of the growing public displeasure with the Olympics due to the corruption and doping associated with it?

Philosophically, I just don't feel that projects of this scope should be put to a plebiscite ... as Slava said, "People are cheap". There is a certain portion of the population that would vote against anything that would cost money.
The province knew this and insisted on a plebiscite tied to funding and then provided very tepid verbal support. The province knew exactly what it was doing. And as I stated before, having a different provincial government wouldn't have made any difference. The plebiscite card would have been played.

[Scrambler]

When I woke up this morning I had what felt like a hangover after having zero booze last night. Somewhat of a restless sleep thinking (too much) about the result. Never thought I was so emotionally invested in this till the idea was killed.

I could see reasons from No side which were justified and likewise for the Yes side. I voted yes. The economy is crummy right now but new interest in the city and some innovation stirred up by a successful bid could have maybe helped that. PLus, are we expecting that the economy is where it is now in 2026? I suppose maybe, hopefully not! The bid could have been a successful catalyst which went parallel with an improved more diverse economy leading into the 2020's and beyond. Now I just feel the city has no confidence in itself to accomplish anything and we're stuck.

I agree with how ridiculously haphazardly the yes side came together. Bickering governments at all levels, confusion on funding, 11th hour 'here you go' deal, behind closed doors discussions along with leaks, mistrust in the whole system. But all that said, I felt things would iron themselves out in the 8 years we have between now and then.

But to have called this a 'waste of billions of dollars for a 10 day party' irked me. It was a potential investment for much more than that.

I don't want to be a pessimist, I hope that several positives come out of this in the long run. At the moment just feels like a wasted opportunity.

[DiracSpike]

Originally Posted by Flamenspiel

Lol, good luck with that.

There's no reason they couldn't start working on it today. Take the extra 300 mil everyone here was so happy to toss in to the Olympic bottomless pit and build it.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by DiracSpike

There's no reason they couldn't start working on it today. Take the extra 300 mil everyone here was so happy to toss in to the Olympic bottomless pit and build it.

Let's have a plebiscite.

[Ice_Weasel]

Originally Posted by TheSutterDynasty

I always find it so interesting how people can become so entrenched in their position over time.

If hosting was a guarantee benefit to our economy then this wouldn't even go to plebiscite and dozens (hundreds?) of cities would be bidding.

This thread seems to have turned to a bunch of people covering their ears screaming 'but I want more jobs for Calgarians!'.

We all do. 56% of the vote think the Olympics wouldn't do that. Or wouldn't be worth the cost.

Well, nothing future based can be guaranteed. Its about taking risk, and clearly the "yes" side were ok proceeding with the level of risk inherent in the bid, and the no side wasn't. There are ways to mitigate project risk and improve/enhance the outcome...but that's pretty hard when you don't even have a project.

[CPK80]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Real fun comes tomorrow at noon when we get the riding by riding results. So are the latte sippers of the inner city to blame for the plebiscite failing? Or was it the Yop gobblers of the suburbs who brought it down?

I predict that the advanced vote/mail-ins plus Jeromy Farkas and Sean Chu's wards have the biggest differential between the Yes/No side with NO being higher in those wards... I also could see Druh Farrell's ward having a large NO vote, causing bizzaro world where everyone that hates her actually celebrating.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by RogerWilco

Highly unlikely, this City is unable to do much that is meaningful any more. At some point the majority of Calgary’s population became a colective group of people with limited vision. It’s a long cry from the City many of us were born in. It’s not just the the Olympic vote, it pretty much everything . This City is dying a slow death.

This isn't a Calgary thing - almost all Olympic plebiscites these days fail. Are Munich, Davos, Krakow, Oslo, Budapest, Innsbruck, Bern, and Boston all on their way to becoming Detroit?

Voters in mature democracies are increasingly distrustful and alienated from the elites who organize and participate in these events. For citizens anxious about the future of core government services like pensions and health care, spending billions for two weeks of watching affluent young adults doing snowboard tricks - or facilities for affluent young adults to practice getting better at doing snowboard tricks - seems like a frivolous way to spend limited government resources. Especially when the event is run by an organization with a toxic brand like the IOC (it's telling that even in the IOC's home of Davos, 60 per cent voted against hosting the games).

These sorts of prestige mega events no longer have broad public support. Here or elsewhere. In the future, hosts will almost exclusively be authoritarian states that don't have to worry about public budgets and popular support.

[kurwamac]

I find it absolutely comical that everyone believes the projected cost numbers.

[redforever]

Originally Posted by CPK80

I predict that the advanced vote/mail-ins plus Jeromy Farkas and Sean Chu's wards have the biggest differential between the Yes/No side with NO being higher in those wards... I also could see Druh Farrell's ward having a large NO vote, causing bizzaro world where everyone that hates her actually celebrating.

I think it was Evan Woolley. It spoke volumes when the chair of the committee changed his mind.

[kurwamac]

Originally Posted by tvp2003

This was posted earlier but I thought it was bang on:

https://twitter.com/jengerson/status...73306799316992



I might be in the minority as I'm pro "sports" but increasingly becoming anti "Olympics". Spending millions of tax dollars so that corrupt IOC officials can line their wallets and a bunch of amateur athletes that I've never heard of can participate in a competition every four years? No thanks.

Olympics won't fix 30% vacancy in the downtown core. Saving aging facilities like the Olympic Oval? A big meh from my perspective.

And as a pure economic stimulus/infrastructure play, 2026 had waaay too much risk despite Calgary's "entrepreneurial" spirit and "can do" attitude. If Calgary is so awesome, then lets build a field house without the Olympics. Same with a new arena. Something tells me both will happen, and that this "once in a lifetime opportunity" won't be "once in a lifetime" after all...

You should see some of the mansions and toys that contractors are able to buy off of government contracts.

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Real fun comes tomorrow at noon when we get the riding by riding results. So are the latte sippers of the inner city to blame for the plebiscite failing? Or was it the Yop gobblers of the suburbs who brought it down?

I'm going to guess it was the Boomers that did it in, purely based on not wanting to pay more taxes for their last decade or two on Earth.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by redforever

I think it was Evan Woolley. It spoke volumes when the chair of the committee changed his mind.

I suspect he's the front runner now to be next mayor.

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

fine, you got me, it was a combination of things.

Good thing you admitted it. Visiting Baltimore for anything is highly fishy, unless you were going there to pick up 10kgs of coke.

[Envitro]

Well, not going to lie, I was pretty bummed out about the result. I haven't really posted much in this thread or on this topic, but here are my general thoughts.

1) As previously mentioned, I think this is a huge missed opportunity for the city
2) The massive fail from the Yes side can probably be attributed to a bungling of this issue from the city, BidCo, and the province (and somewhat the feds). I think that the two other levels of government weren't really in it to win it, and were just going through the motions so that they couldn't be accused of not being supportive. Politically they didn't want to stick their necks out
3) The whole "binding plebiscite" thing was such a joke to begin with. A plebiscite is non-binding in the first place, so you shouldn't be able to attach funding conditions to it. Should have called it a referendum then...
4) Lack of leadership from Nenshi and Council is what got us here in the first place. I do believe that this was a referendum on them and not so much the Olympics being hosted in Calgary. A divided council is what got us here in the first place, and nobody wanted to take the political risk of backing this bid, so they took the easy way out of a plebiscite so as to not risk re-election
5) The people that voted no that I spoke to did so with hardly any real information and went off of feeling. One excuse was "I don't want more traffic or construction delays leading up to and during the Olympics" and "there's going to be too many people here", etc. What a small-minded way of thinking, but oh well I guess they got their way.
6) Some people are now saying "that money can now be spent on ...". Sorry, don't think so. You wanted a rail line to the airport? Wait about 10 years and see what happens. You wanted a field house or a new rink, fat chance that happens now
7) As for the new rink/fieldhouse/stadium combo a la Calgary Next, I think that the way that ended with the Flames was a contributing factor to these not being in the bid package. I think that they threw in the 5000 seat arena that was of no use as an earmark for this kind of project (that plus the reno fees for McMahon and Saddledome would have been enough for a Next-type of project as a PPP project).
8) People, rightly, didn't vote for this because there was no new shiny toy included. Renovations of existing facilities isn't sexy and people had no tangible new public space that was going to be part of this bid. They should have approached it as "check out all this stuff that you'll be getting for your money" and would have had a better result.
9) Pretty much every rally that I saw from the No side was people over 70 (for the most part). I guess they already got their Olympics and could care less if the young-ens get to experience it too. F you, I got mine, it what it felt like.
10) Lastly, there was too much nostalgia about '88. For ####s sake, nobody cares about Kurt Browning any more. Watching the Yes campaign's social media for the last few weeks was infuriating. None of the intended audience of social media like Intagram care about the '88 Olympics, and it was a major miss.

All in all, this City is symptomatic of the failure of this Country in recent years to get any meaningful large projects done. I don't have much hope for us going forward. With the economic climate getting worse seemingly by the day, I'm just not optimistic that we'll be able to get out of it all on our own without a major cash injection from the feds and the provice that a project like this would have brought with it. Good luck getting anything meaningful done in the next decade.