Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community
Old 05-31-2022, 10:52 AM   #601
Slava
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Exp:
Default

This quote from the article is questionable to me. Let's say the city finds a way to spend this $87bn and take the actions they're putting forward here.
How do we even know that those actions taken by Calgary are going to save us from all of the issues they're looking to address here?

Quote:
We know that the cost of inaction is actually a lot of upfront costs and a lot of costs to Calgarians through climate change events, through major storms and forest fires. We also have to talk about the impact to the cost of living, said Penner. How do we invest to save, and not just to save money but to save lives and livelihoods?
Slava is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2022, 11:11 AM   #602
GGG
Franchise Player
 
GGG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bizaro86 View Post
Wow. That would require property taxes to ~double. Probably this is just to socialize the idea of spending huge amounts of money on this, and they'll end up compromising on only a 40% increase in taxes for this over a 12 year period or something like that.
If property taxes were to double, which is actually only a 50% increase in the total tax we pay would we see a coresponding drop in property value or a lack of property appreciation as the carrying cost of property would increase?

Or would % spent on housing / tax / utilities just go up.
GGG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2022, 11:57 AM   #603
bizaro86
Franchise Player
 
bizaro86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG View Post
If property taxes were to double, which is actually only a 50% increase in the total tax we pay would we see a coresponding drop in property value or a lack of property appreciation as the carrying cost of property would increase?

Or would % spent on housing / tax / utilities just go up.
Hard to say, and imo the answer is probably a mix of both.

But as an existing homeowner lower housing prices is pretty cold comfort as an offset to much higher property taxes.

Also, I'm extremely skeptical that the best way to fight climate change is at the municipal level. Realistically international action is required.
bizaro86 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to bizaro86 For This Useful Post:
Old 05-31-2022, 11:59 AM   #604
MoneyGuy
Franchise Player
 
MoneyGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bizaro86 View Post
Also, I'm extremely skeptical that the best way to fight climate change is at the municipal level. Realistically international action is required.
This
MoneyGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2022, 12:15 PM   #605
Mazrim
CP Gamemaster
 
Mazrim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Gary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bizaro86 View Post
Realistically international action is required.
You're right, but isn't that just saying "someone else needs to take the first step" and washing our hands of the issue? It's gotta start somewhere.
Mazrim is online now   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Mazrim For This Useful Post:
Old 05-31-2022, 01:05 PM   #606
puckedoff
First Line Centre
 
puckedoff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Exp:
Default

Would get a better bang for our buck of reducing climate disasters in Calgary by spending that $87 billion in China/India. If we can't sell that plan, then we should not be spending the money here.
puckedoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2022, 01:24 PM   #607
bizaro86
Franchise Player
 
bizaro86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazrim View Post
You're right, but isn't that just saying "someone else needs to take the first step" and washing our hands of the issue? It's gotta start somewhere.
No, it's saying the municipal level is the wrong place to be doing this. Canada has an escalating price on carbon - as a country we are taking the first step collectively. In the absense of international agreement (which Calgary city council has exactly zero influence on), making the correct decision on individual projects can use that pricing mechanism as an input.
bizaro86 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to bizaro86 For This Useful Post:
Old 05-31-2022, 02:25 PM   #608
TorqueDog
Franchise Player
 
TorqueDog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Calgary - Centre West
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bizaro86 View Post
No, it's saying the municipal level is the wrong place to be doing this. Canada has an escalating price on carbon - as a country we are taking the first step collectively. In the absense of international agreement (which Calgary city council has exactly zero influence on), making the correct decision on individual projects can use that pricing mechanism as an input.
Yeah, or more precisely it's the wrong place to be starting.
__________________
-James
GO
FLAMES GO.
TorqueDog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2022, 03:47 PM   #609
chemgear
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bizaro86 View Post
Wow. That would require property taxes to ~double. Probably this is just to socialize the idea of spending huge amounts of money on this, and they'll end up compromising on only a 40% increase in taxes for this over a 12 year period or something like that.
Well, if you drive everyone to leave the city it would be net-zero at that point.
chemgear is online now   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to chemgear For This Useful Post:
Old 06-01-2022, 02:16 PM   #610
para transit fellow
Scoring Winger
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Exp:
Default

for the folks who haven't read the actual Climate plan:

https://pub-calgary.escribemeetings....umentId=209457
para transit fellow is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2022, 02:27 PM   #611
Slava
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Exp:
Default

I'm quite curious on how they're getting to their net cost of ~$5bn-$27bn. In flipping through that document, they have the cost at the $88bn, but say that the models indicate that we could save some money, depending on the energy costs.
Slava is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2022, 02:46 PM   #612
para transit fellow
Scoring Winger
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Exp:
Default

I thinking some stuff we were going to do anyway -- but if we spend a little more upfront, we save more in the longer run.

i looked at the transit section (naturally). one thing i noticed is that there is a goal to have a mass-transit line BRT/LRT within 2000m - this is something we were going to build anyway (sooner or later)

the other thing i noticed is the part about electrification of livery vehicles: Calgary transit has a fleet of 1200 buses. Electric replacements run $900,000 to $1,600,000 but pay for themselves over the life of the vehicle.

electric garbage trucks the real cost saver. A sales rep told me an electric residential truck pays for it self in a few years by taking advantage of regenerative braking instead of many brake replacements

Last edited by para transit fellow; 06-01-2022 at 03:30 PM.
para transit fellow is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2022, 03:27 PM   #613
Fuzz
Franchise Player
 
Fuzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slava View Post
I'm quite curious on how they're getting to their net cost of ~$5bn-$27bn. In flipping through that document, they have the cost at the $88bn, but say that the models indicate that we could save some money, depending on the energy costs.
It's not clearly laid out, but it appears that the $88bn is not what the city plans on spending, it's what we will all spend(including upgrading our homes). So the number sounds big, but may not really be costing all that much additionally. It's so tough to say with these things. Are we scrapping working systems and replacing with green, or waiting until they are end of life, then just adding the additional cost of a greener replacement vs standard?
Fuzz is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2022, 11:00 PM   #614
chemgear
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Exp:
Default

Gondek in a rush.

https://calgary.ctvnews.ca/what-mess...tegy-1.5936921

Calgary councillors won't vote on the city's climate plan until next month, despite the mayor's insistence that the delay sends the wrong message.

"What message are we sending to the world, who is in our city, watching us to be leaders in energy transformation? Well, the message that some of my colleagues sent today is 'Meh, this can wait,'" said Mayor Jyoti Gondek.

Part of the reason for the delay in the vote is because some members of council were travelling to Toronto on Tuesday afternoon on city business. Another reason for the delay, say some councillors, is that messaging wasn't clear and more answers are needed before moving forward.

"Some people made the assumption, particularly on social media, that the $87 billion is city taxpayer money and that is not the case. That didn't come out very clearly in the committee meeting, that's something we need to discuss and debate," said Ward 7 Coun. Terry Wong.
chemgear is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2022, 11:47 PM   #615
81MC
#1 Goaltender
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Exp:
Default

FFS Jyoti, you win the election and like half of council is new. Can you tone it down a bit, trash talking your colleagues like that?
__________________
No, noIm not sloppy, or lazy. This is a sign of the boredom.
81MC is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to 81MC For This Useful Post:
Old 06-08-2022, 12:39 AM   #616
bizaro86
Franchise Player
 
bizaro86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 81MC View Post
FFS Jyoti, you win the election and like half of council is new. Can you tone it down a bit, trash talking your colleagues like that?
The plan is decades long, a month doesn't matter at all. And the amount of money involved is staggering, whether its tax dollars or money they are going to mandate other people spend. Taking time to consider and debate seems prudent.

Last edited by bizaro86; 06-08-2022 at 10:22 AM.
bizaro86 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to bizaro86 For This Useful Post:
Old 06-08-2022, 12:51 AM   #617
Mr.Coffee
damn onions
 
Mr.Coffee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Exp:
Default

Why take a month to decide to spend $87 Billion?

Really?

I am moving out of Calgary. Thank Christ. Has Gondek lost her god damn mind? She sounds looney tunes.
Mr.Coffee is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Mr.Coffee For This Useful Post:
Old 06-08-2022, 10:20 AM   #618
Delgar
Farm Team Player
 
Join Date: May 2022
Exp:
Default

Gondek is an extreme disappointment as Mayor. I didn't vote for her, but she won so was waiting to see how she'd perform. Now I miss the Nenshi days, and I soured on Nenshi over the years, really liking his politics at first.
Delgar is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Delgar For This Useful Post:
Old 06-08-2022, 01:08 PM   #619
TorqueDog
Franchise Player
 
TorqueDog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Calgary - Centre West
Exp:
Default

Nenshi was good at effectively arguing for what he thought was the right move and building a consensus. The one time he didn't was the Olympic bid, which he talked about in a podcast as his biggest strategic misstep; failing to position it the right way for the benefit it was meant to bring about.

Unfortunately, I don't see this kind of leadership or consensus-building in how Gondek behaves thus far (or some of the other councilors). I know, this is still a relatively green council and first-year mayor, but she's been on council previously, so at some point that excuse doesn't really hold any weight. I voted for Gondek, and right now it's a really hard sell for me to vote for her again if we get another 3.5 years of this.
__________________
-James
GO
FLAMES GO.
TorqueDog is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to TorqueDog For This Useful Post:
Old 06-08-2022, 01:30 PM   #620
bizaro86
Franchise Player
 
bizaro86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TorqueDog View Post
Nenshi was good at effectively arguing for what he thought was the right move and building a consensus. The one time he didn't was the Olympic bid, which he talked about in a podcast as his biggest strategic misstep; failing to position it the right way for the benefit it was meant to bring about.

Unfortunately, I don't see this kind of leadership or consensus-building in how Gondek behaves thus far (or some of the other councilors). I know, this is still a relatively green council and first-year mayor, but she's been on council previously, so at some point that excuse doesn't really hold any weight. I voted for Gondek, and right now it's a really hard sell for me to vote for her again if we get another 3.5 years of this.
At the current pace my "Anyone but Farkas" vote is quickly becoming an "anyone buy Gondek" vote next time around.
bizaro86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:56 AM.

Calgary Flames
2023-24




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2021