Evan Woolley's motion to reconsider Flames Arena funding fails 4-11

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by Bigtime

So who are votes that will be a "lock" to go against Woolley's motion? I'm thinking:

-Magliocca
-Sutherland
-Davison
-Demong
-Nenshi
-DCU

That right there ends it.

Gondek? She didn't seem too pleased with Farkas & Wooley's attempts to delay the first time around on this issue.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by nik-

Ok, but reduced traffic and emissions still exist, whether you want to feel impacted by it or not.

Ah, I get where you're coming from now. Yes, I see your point.

I stand by my thought that a statement like that is still silly.

[Bigtime]

Originally Posted by topfiverecords

Gondek? She didn't seem too pleased with Farkas & Wooley's attempts to delay the first time around on this issue.

True, but first time around we weren't dealing with the ramifications of the provincial budget. I could see her swinging around to support on this motion. It's the folks I listed that I can't see changing their minds. Sutherland was already ranting about it on twitter.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by morgin

If they admitted that the plans for an LRT are also a luxury right now and commit to doing this all as dedicated BRT until there is the economical stability to take on a project the scope of green line LRT, then hey I’d say this is probably the prudent decision in this climate.

BRT for SE only, and actually do the LRT north leg properly, sooner than later. Even if this means they don't connect for 40+ years. Better than a train from nowhere to nowhere in 2026 that won't build out for 40.

Originally Posted by CSharp

Go ride other transit systems - say in Vancouver, Toronto, all rail systems in Europe, China, and Japan and let me know if your views are going to change. Calgary transit has improved a bit over the past 20-years, but they're so far behind it's not even funny!

Try some <1.5M cities.

Originally Posted by The Boy Wonder

I would say the City's transit situation is fine.

I would say the same about the city's arena situation...the Saddledome is fine.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by nik-

Ok, but reduced traffic and emissions still exist, whether you want to feel impacted by it or not.

We'd also be reducing usage of public transit and traffic as people won't be commuting to 41 Flames games a year. So that's another gain! It would also remove any hope of a proper entertainment district, another gain as that would also reduce the need for parking downtown and would again cut down on traffic and transit congestion.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

Ah, I get where you're coming from now. Yes, I see your point.

I stand by my thought that a statement like that is still silly.

It's not silly though. Arguing for an interchange in your neighbourhood and against one in another neighbourhood is silly. These two projects exist in drastically different economic landscapes. They're not the same thing.

[Parallex]

Better idea... vote to delay funding the arena until the province delivers on it's funding commitment on the Greenline. See how fast Brett Wilson can become a loud advocate for public transit. Pretty sure if the monied interests that support the arena see that it's construction is intrinsically tied to the provincial government honoring it's commitment on the Greenline the UCP will have a change of heart PDQ.

[Wormius]

I am softening on support for the new arena, but if the CSEC really wants this, they need to do a lot better in filling the seats of the events that they do get. Half-filled Flames or Hitman games for 82 days a year doesn't really inspire a sense of urgency on this project. How often does the Dome completely sell out for non-sports events?

[Manhattanboy]

I don't care about what the province did. It's one thing for a new government to pull out an agreement negotiated by a previous government (particularly when they announce it as part of an election platform). But for THIS council to reverse the ratification of an agreement voted on two months ago by THE SAME council would be quite unbelievable. How could anyone deal with the City in good faith?

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by nik-

Ok, but reduced traffic and emissions still exist, whether you want to feel impacted by it or not.

The Green Line is going to take cars off the road the same way Stoney Trail took cars off Deerfoot Trail. Or the way the west line didn't.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

The Green Line is going to take cars off the road the same way Stoney Trail took cars off Deerfoot Trail. Or the way the west line didn't.

Population also continues to increase.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by nik-

It's not silly though. Arguing for an interchange in your neighbourhood and against one in another neighbourhood is silly. These two projects exist in drastically different economic landscapes. They're not the same thing.

..

Originally Posted by nik-

I predict this will be a well debated thread with several posters seeing the information and then changing their opinion on this matter.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

..

can't help it, I'm a zealot

[DiracSpike]

Wooley basically holding a referendum on whether the city should have an NHL team 2 years from now because if this passes and council tears up the agreement the owners are justifiably going to sell and the Flames will leave. Great work Evan, on top of everything else ####ty going on in the City right now you want to boot the most popular sports team out of town for a drop in the bucket sum of money for a mega project. Can't wait to vote against this clown next muni election.

[Torture]

Originally Posted by DiracSpike

Wooley basically holding a referendum on whether the city should have an NHL team 2 years from now because if this passes and council tears up the agreement the owners are justifiably going to sell and the Flames will leave. Great work Evan, on top of everything else ####ty going on in the City right now you want to boot the most popular sports team out of town for a drop in the bucket sum of money for a mega project. Can't wait to vote against this clown next muni election.

I'm not sure you understand what this means.

[stone hands]

since we are in fygm territory, i gave up my season tickets due to the arena debacle, have never been for it and live in mckenzie towne and commute via bus and train to the north east, so im in favor of this motion quite heavily

[The Hendog]

This won’t save the green line and puts the city at risk of losing both the arena and green line

Let the green line die and build the arena

[Torture]

Originally Posted by stone hands

since we are in fygm territory, i gave up my season tickets due to the arena debacle, have never been for it and live in mckenzie towne and commute via bus and train to the north east, so im in favor of this motion quite heavily

Sorry, I was told that the Green Line doesn't benefit the population.

[btimbit]

If it was a matter of one or the other I'd understand, but there's a very very likely chance that they kill the arena deal and still don't build the green line.

Too much potential for a lose-lose here

[DiracSpike]

Originally Posted by btimbit

If it was a matter of one or the other I'd understand, but there's a very very likely chance that they kill the arena deal and still don't build the green line.

Too much potential for a lose-lose here

Don't forget the hundreds of millions of dollars from CSEC. The city's already too busy flushing millions down the toilet for the SW BRT hardly anyone will use. Really glad they spent two years digging a tunnel under 90th Ave for absolutely no reason.