[News] New Arena - Plan B - Victoria Park

[GioforPM]

Wow, Bingo has summed up my thoughts on this whole thing. I'm done posting.

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by Bingo

But the concert thing is real, fans aren't going to die from being the dome no, but they are falling behind and my civic pride finds that annoying. Seeing new CFL stadiums in cities half the size, and the fact that the dome is now the oldest building in hockey outside of the Manhattan rebuild is sad for me. There has to be a way to work together and do something here.

I'm also not for cutting blank checks for team owners and I thought the Edmonton deal spoke to a city's inferiority complex more than anything outside of the NFL.

I feel like these paragraph contradicts your claims that Nenshi/City is not cooperating.

The city received CSEC CNext proposal. They've studied it, reported their findings, and followed up with a alternative location report. Now they've indicated their interested in a proposal ASAP to decide the next step.

What has the city not done to indicate they're not cooperating? And if you don't want them to write a blank cheque, then isn't the city doing the appropriate steps to ensure that's not the case?

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Had to look that up!

But yeah I think you got me. I'm not an extremist on most issues, so the race to one poll or another will always get push back from me.

Understandable, but often both sides aren't equally wrong or right.

The Flames are asking for taxpayer money. That puts an increased burden on them IMO to explain their position, be flexible and offer solutions. Doesn't really matter that other teams have gotten such deals. In fact if not communicated properly comes across as entitled.

Maybe the mayor is snarky and some people don't like him. Who cares.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Understandable, but often both sides aren't equally wrong or right.

The Flames are asking for taxpayer money. That puts an increased burden on them IMO to explain their position, be flexible and offer solutions. Doesn't really matter that other teams have gotten such deals. In fact if not communicated properly comes across as entitled.

Maybe the mayor is snarky and some people don't like him. Who cares.

I'm not looking to solve the King vs Nenshi ###### race, don't care really. They're both hurting the process and this will settle in the middle. The sooner we move on to actual productive cooperative work the better.

Whenever I'm in a negotiation I'm a big fan of the non binding term sheet. Get it out there. Let the other side pick apart everything they don't like. The Flames offer wasn't going to fly but it was a huge start to that process that was never reciprocated.

If that's because they don't want a project in the West Village they should have just said that. They didn't ... it was pot shots, long waits for responses, moving targets on assigning infrastructure costs, a new plan B.

But I agree on the presentation and your entitled comment, pretty much said it above. They could have come in and said look ...

1. We want a new building for our hockey team.
2. We think the city could use a new building as well under the right funding model.
3. We bailed out the stamps, it doesn't make money, and nor will it really in a new building but maybe we can combine that with a field house that the city wants to find a Calgary solution.
4. We picked West Village as an idea because the city has a contamination issue, and the complex could be a good launch pad for a redevelopment of the west side.
5. We used the Edmonton funding model as a starting point and we we welcome your feedback.

That and less this is what the city needs to be world class would have been smart in my mind.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I'm not looking to solve the King vs Nenshi ###### race, don't care really. They're both hurting the process and this will settle in the middle. The sooner we move on to actual productive cooperative work the better.

Whenever I'm in a negotiation I'm a big fan of the non binding term sheet. Get it out there. Let the other side pick apart everything they don't like. The Flames offer wasn't going to fly but it was a huge start to that process that was never reciprocated.

If that's because they don't want a project in the West Village they should have just said that. They didn't ... it was pot shots, long waits for responses, moving targets on assigning infrastructure costs, a new plan B.

But I agree on the presentation and your entitled comment, pretty much said it above. They could have come in and said look ...

1. We want a new building for our hockey team.
2. We think the city could use a new building as well under the right funding model.
3. We bailed out the stamps, it doesn't make money, and nor will it really in a new building but maybe we can combine that with a field house that the city wants to find a Calgary solution.
4. We picked West Village as an idea because the city has a contamination issue, and the complex could be a good launch pad for a redevelopment of the west side.
5. We used the Edmonton funding model as a starting point and we we welcome your feedback.

That and less this is what the city needs to be world class would have been smart in my mind.

This is wrong. The City funded a study on the feasibility of the location and the provided an alternate option at another site. The Flames dug in their heels with "There is no Plan B"

You're doing it again.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Bingo

The Flames offer wasn't going to fly but it was a huge start to that process that was never reciprocated.

If that's because they don't want a project in the West Village they should have just said that. They didn't ... it was pot shots, long waits for responses, moving targets on assigning infrastructure costs, a new plan B.

I don't really know if the City should have responded differently to CalgaryNext. Maybe it felt like a huge delay in response and/or moving targets. But it seemed like a weak opening offer, lacking in substance and oversold, that didn't give the City much to pick apart or counter. Still the City commissioned an environmental stud and came up with an entirely new proposal.

Had the Flames opened as you suggested, they most certainly would be faring better in the PR department. Too bad they didn't.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Clearly others see he hasn't helped the situation with the games he likes to play.

Originally Posted by Bingo

-I think a mayor trying to land an olympics at the same time he thwarts a building project is odd

I have months of posts calling both sides out for their silly games, so yeah I think I'm in the middle in philosophy, but slightly more annoyed with Nenshi than King at this point.

Generally agree with the rest of your post, but I don't think this is really a fair characterization. Of course we are starting with different baseline perspectives of Nenshi, so it's not surprising we interpret things differently, but I don't see how 'ensuring the city makes a fair deal' is 'thwarting' the project?

I also think it's too early to counter-balance the point with the Olympics thing. We don't know what our possible bid will even look like, IF it even happens. I'm sure many of us fear a lavish, IOC-pleasing bid. But, I am hopeful that Nenshi/council will take the same approach to it as they are arena project (ie. a fair, sensible deal for the city). You can't accuse them of opening the city's pocket books wide open for the Olympics but not the building, when neither has come anywhere close to playing out.


I guess I'm still just not seeing it. I don't know what these 'games' you're accusing him of playing. It seems like pretty straightforward public negotiating to me (which inevitably feels like a bit of a game). I'll ask again what should Nenshi be DOING differently? Less snark/more diplomatic language? Withholding his opinion from the process (not sure he'd even be doing his job then)?

Maybe I'll phrase it a different way: what exactly could Nenshi have done through this process that would have satisfied you? Don't just tell me what he shouldn't have done, but what exactly should he have done/said instead?


I think people have pointed out specific alternatives for how King/CSEC could/should have handled nearly every step of this. I don't really think I've seen much of the same for Nenshi. It's telling to me that most of the arguments against him have involved Uber, math comments, bike lanes, and blue rings. I get it, I don't agree with everything that Nenshi/council have done, either. But I think you'd be hard pressed to find a citizen anywhere that has complete satisfaction with their government on every issue. Personally, I'm 100% satisfied with his handling of the arena issue so far (though I acknowledge every word he has spoken hasn't been perfect).

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by nik-

This is wrong. The City funded a study on the feasibility of the location and the provided an alternate option at another site. The Flames dug in their heels with "There is no Plan B"

You're doing it again.

No I'm not.

Taking months to then come out with a report that assigns all the infrastructure costs the building itself and then saying "see your numbers were wrong" isn't what I would call a good faith response.

An itemized response to their presentation would be fine.

Or if they didn't want a West Village plan at all then just say we have no interest in a project in that area.

You don't have to agree with me, I'm really good with that, but maybe a little less on the patronizing would be appreciated.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

Generally agree with the rest of your post, but I don't think this is really a fair characterization. Of course we are starting with different baseline perspectives of Nenshi, so it's not surprising we interpret things differently, but I don't see how 'ensuring the city makes a fair deal' is 'thwarting' the project?

I also think it's too early to counter-balance the point with the Olympics thing. We don't know what our possible bid will even look like, IF it even happens. I'm sure many of us fear a lavish, IOC-pleasing bid. But, I am hopeful that Nenshi/council will take the same approach to it as they are arena project (ie. a fair, sensible deal for the city). You can't accuse them of opening the city's pocket books wide open for the Olympics but not the building, when neither has come anywhere close to playing out.


I guess I'm still just not seeing it. I don't know what these 'games' you're accusing him of playing. It seems like pretty straightforward public negotiating to me (which inevitably feels like a bit of a game). I'll ask again what should Nenshi be DOING differently? Less snark/more diplomatic language? Withholding his opinion from the process (not sure he'd even be doing his job then)?

Maybe I'll phrase it a different way: what exactly could Nenshi have done through this process that would have satisfied you? Don't just tell me what he shouldn't have done, but what exactly should he have done/said instead?


I think people have pointed out specific alternatives for how King/CSEC could/should have handled nearly every step of this. I don't really think I've seen much of the same for Nenshi. It's telling to me that most of the arguments against him have involved Uber, math comments, bike lanes, and blue rings. I get it, I don't agree with everything that Nenshi/council have done, either. But I think you'd be hard pressed to find a citizen anywhere that has complete satisfaction with their government on every issue. Personally, I'm 100% satisfied with his handling of the arena issue so far (though I acknowledge every word he has spoken hasn't been perfect).

Think I answered that below, either way I appreciate your approach. Much more reflective than the "I know what you're thinking even if you don't" crowd.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Bingo

No I'm not.

Taking months to then come out with a report that assigns all the infrastructure costs the building itself and then saying "see your numbers were wrong" isn't what I would call a good faith response.

An itemized response to their presentation would be fine.

Or if they didn't want a West Village plan at all then just say we have no interest in a project in that area.

You don't have to agree with me, I'm really good with that, but maybe a little less on the patronizing would be appreciated.

Well I'm sorry, you're coming across as really disingenuous in how you're portraying the city's response. They've done a lot more work on this than the Flames have and you're pretty much ignoring it when it comes time to assigning blame for how this process has been handled.

You'll say you're not ignoring it, and that you're equally disappointed in both sides, and then you'll come out with another statement that clearly shows which side you land on here.

Studies take time. If they would have released it in a week and it said the same thing, people would be railing on about how little time the city invested in it.

Why do you want them to rush?

The Flames have been "working" on this for 10 years now and dog ####ed the entire time apparently. The City has already done a lot more than they should have.

[CliffFletcher]

Weird to blame the dragging out of this project on the City. The Flames have had years to come up with proposals. They've been making public noises about it for something like 9 years. What have they been doing all this time?

Maybe they wanted to see how Edmonton would play out about before submitting a proposal. Okay. That's a tactic, I guess. But it was their choice to wait. They didn't have to. To wait and defer and dither for 8 or 9 years, and then get all impatient and make threats once they finally have something to show to the city casts the Flames in a bad light, not the city. It's the Flames who have been screwing the pooch on this for the better part of a decade, not the city.

[Bingo]

^The Flames took forever, don't disagree at all.

And sorry, the time they took to get back was fine, but the fact that they took that time just to mix the math up and basically reject the whole thing was what bugged me.

As I've said numerous times "we don't want a project in the East Village" is a perfectly justifiable response to me.

Taking months just to assign all the costs to the building and say "they were wrong on their numbers" was the thing that irked me.

[nik-]

I don't see a problem with assigning the costs to a project that is forcing you to incur those costs possibly decades before you intended.

Is it not more annoying to be presented with a project "that will cost you this" and the actual costs are threefold? Lets be fair about dishonest accounting.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by nik-

I don't see a problem with assigning the costs to a project that is forcing you to incur those costs possibly decades before you intended.

Is it not more annoying to be presented with a project "that will cost you this" and the actual costs are threefold? Lets be fair about dishonest accounting.

Well I won't tell you how you should see it but in my mind ...

If the West Village needs to be developed which the city seems to want as they have their own project plan that you can find online, and citizens in surrounding areas are begging for it do to contamination then I think you can assume it won't be "decades"

If it's 10 years then fine, say we don't want to do this right now, something I've said about 5 times today; I don't have a problem with that.

If it's less than decades, and less than ten years, then no you can't give all the costs to 1/3 of the space because that's not a fair way to assess that addition to the area.

So I think it's fair as hell. I'm sure the Flames group were under on some estimates, and I'd expect the city to come back over, which is where these things go.

Nobody can force the city into doing something they don't want to do. So say you don't want to do it and move on.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Weird to blame the dragging out of this project on the City. The Flames have had years to come up with proposals. They've been making public noises about it for something like 9 years. What have they been doing all this time?

Maybe they wanted to see how Edmonton would play out about before submitting a proposal. Okay. That's a tactic, I guess. But it was their choice to wait. They didn't have to. To wait and defer and dither for 8 or 9 years, and then get all impatient and make threats once they finally have something to show to the city casts the Flames in a bad light, not the city. It's the Flames who have been screwing the pooch on this for the better part of a decade, not the city.

And the fact of the matter is that with the dithering they could have submitted a proposal to a City that was rocking and rolling at ~$100/barrel or, they could sit on their hands and wait and then try submitting a proposal to a City thats tightening the belts at ~$40-$50/barrel and suffering some massive private sector layoffs just prior to an election.

Stupid move. What was King waiting for?

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Locke

Stupid move. What was King waiting for?

An even better deal.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

An even better deal.

Well, thats the coin you toss I guess.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Locke

And the fact of the matter is that with the dithering they could have submitted a proposal to a City that was rocking and rolling at ~$100/barrel or, they could sit on their hands and wait and then try submitting a proposal to a City thats tightening the belts at ~$40-$50/barrel and suffering some massive private sector layoffs just prior to an election.

Stupid move. What was King waiting for?

They could have submitted a proposal at a time when there was a critical shortage of labour, during a building boom which drove up the price of materials, or they could wait and try submitting a proposal to a city where the construction industry is hurting, needs the jobs, and the work can be done more cheaply.

Right. Stupid move.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

They could have submitted a proposal at a time when there was a critical shortage of labour, during a building boom which drove up the price of materials, or they could wait and try submitting a proposal to a city where the construction industry is hurting, needs the jobs, and the work can be done more cheaply.

Right. Stupid move.

haha yeah, that's the reason.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Well I won't tell you how you should see it but in my mind ...

If the West Village needs to be developed which the city seems to want as they have their own project plan that you can find online, and citizens in surrounding areas are begging for it do to contamination then I think you can assume it won't be "decades"

If it's 10 years then fine, say we don't want to do this right now, something I've said about 5 times today; I don't have a problem with that.

If it's less than decades, and less than ten years, then no you can't give all the costs to 1/3 of the space because that's not a fair way to assess that addition to the area.

So I think it's fair as hell. I'm sure the Flames group were under on some estimates, and I'd expect the city to come back over, which is where these things go.

Nobody can force the city into doing something they don't want to do. So say you don't want to do it and move on.

The City has been pretty consistent that they want EV to build out before they do the WV. Considering the downturn, and it not looking like it is going away, decades is probably a lot more likely than even between 10 and 15 years.

The City did a study, and then said no and that it wasn't feasible. That seems like moving on. It seems it's King who can't move on. Even when another solution is worked up for him.