Arena negotiation discussion. UPD: Flames release their proposal

[jayswin]

I just wish some of the good local post media (Kristen Odland, Wes Gilbertson) would step up and actually speak to the negativity towards the Flames organization in this mess, so their news outlet doesn't look like they're supporting and helping the Flames.

It's way too obvious when the entire outlet "misses" or ignores this level of discontent towards the owners. It's so frustrating reading article after article of "Well, you know Calgary, we may actually lose this team, so I think you know who's in the wrong here!".

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

This would be the East Village that is a massive sink of tax dollars, but for the arbitrary decision to redraw the boundaries to include the Bow building and take its taxes out of general revenue to mask the deficit?

Oh, so how the Flames expect the city to fund the arena. By taking money out of the general revenue to mask the loan?


(CRLs only include new development, so The Bow was never paying into general revenue and wasn't expected to for 30 years when the drew the line, so no budgeting was done assuming it's property tax, it was always committed to the CMLC).

[Loyal and True]

Originally Posted by Joborule

You expect the East Village, a 20-30 year project, to be fully built out although it has only started 10 years ago? If at that? Especially in an area that everybody wanted to avoid beforehand? And what larger scale development has been done in a quicker fashion?

I'm not gonna get into a debate with you about this since I don't care either way, but I will say that I believe it makes most sense for CMLC to essentially manage development in that whole entire area, since they already are, and are going to release the master plan for the area surrounding the arena and Stampede Park within the next several weeks.

They have the experience of East Village which has been a big success up to this point, and complete transformed that area. No reason to believe they can't achieve the same here. Whereas CSEC has no experience whatsoever when it comes to real estate and community development. They could, and they could be successful in doing it, but I figure it would be better for them to partner up with CMLC on this, rather than try to do it solo.

I would agree that CSEC should not be managing the development of the area. CMLC should do that and all the benefit of such development should go to the City.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

This would be the East Village that is a massive sink of tax dollars, but for the arbitrary decision to redraw the boundaries to include the Bow building and take its taxes out of general revenue to mask the deficit? The East Village where the National Music Centre was supposed to be a big draw, and has turned out to be a white elephant? The East Village that is still unfinished after how many years, even while development on a far larger scale continues all over the rest of the city?

OK then.

So you disagree with me that EV was a success citing the waste of tax dollars in the area, lack of development relative to other areas, and a large sink in the middle of the whole thing?

Tell me again why you are so adamantly supportive of CSEC proposal??

[JerryUnderscore]

I realize that the Flames aren't going to move and Murray Edwards said the team isn't for sale but if the team were sold and moved how would that work? Would the new owner purchase all of CSEC assets? (Flames, Stamps, Hitmen, Roughnecks and Heat)

Furthermore, since CSEC has multiple owners, would they all have to agree to the sale price or simply a majority of owners?

Also, would the value of the Flames be discounted at all since the potential owner would need to also pay a relocation fee? I can't imagine a Fertitta would be interested in paying $650 for the Flames and then an addition $650 to relocate the team to Houston.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Cappy

So you disagree with me that EV was a success citing the waste of tax dollars in the area, lack of development relative to other areas, and a large sink in the middle of the whole thing?

Tell me again why you are so adamantly supportive of CSEC proposal??

I'm not supportive of the CSEC proposal at all. Disagreeing with you on one point does not logically imply that I disagree on every point. I merely don't think the CMLC is particularly good at what it's trying to do. If you want experts at this kind of redevelopment, you're going to have to bring them in from out of town, and neither set of egos in the room are willing to consider that.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Roughneck

(CRLs only include new development, so The Bow was never paying into general revenue and wasn't expected to for 30 years when the drew the line, so no budgeting was done assuming it's property tax, it was always committed to the CMLC).

The Bow had already been approved for construction on its own merits before the CRL came up. It was ‘new development’, all right, but it was only part of the CRL because City Hall deliberately gerrymandered the boundaries to include that parcel of land. There would not have been remotely enough tax money in the CRL to pay all the costs if the Bow had not been included.

[RM14]

Originally Posted by JerryUnderscore

Furthermore, since CSEC has multiple owners, would they all have to agree to the sale price or simply a majority of owners?

This is a good topic, everyone acts like Murray Edwards is the one who has the ability to move the team.. The fact the flames have multiple partners makes it less likely the team would move, and that's how it should be. I would imagine there are terms in their partnership agreement that protects the team from relocating.

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

The Bow had already been approved for construction on its own merits before the CRL came up. It was ‘new development’, all right, but it was only part of the CRL because City Hall deliberately gerrymandered the boundaries to include that parcel of land. There would not have been remotely enough tax money in the CRL to pay all the costs if the Bow had not been included.

Which is why they included The Bow, and weren't sneaky about it, and consistently mention it whenever somebody (i.e Ken King) use a CRL as a funding model.

It delayed the Bow's tax dollars from reaching the city's general revenue (and the province) as a bet that the capital projects funded with it will return a greater amount in the future than if the money hadn't been diverted, without taking away from the city's existing operating budget. They're on track to achieve that, making it a net benefit to the city in the long run from a pure financial perspective without taking into account the benefits of turning a blighted, undeveloped area and turning it into a good one.


None of this has been hidden away or avoided, it constantly gets brought up. So what are you continuously going on about? CMLC still has a budget to work with to facilitate development, and they're doing great with it.

[JerryUnderscore]

Originally Posted by RM14

This is. A good topic everyone acts like Murray Edwards is the one who has the ability to move the team.. The fact the flames have multiple partners makes it less likely the team would move, and that's how it should be. I would imagine there are terms in their partnership agreement that protects the team from relocating.

I know there are six owners but I don't know what the breakdown is. I'm assuming it's not an even 1/6 to each owner?

[RM14]

Originally Posted by JerryUnderscore

I know there are six owners but I don't know what the breakdown is. I'm assuming it's not an even 1/6 to each owner?

I don't know either. I am under the impression that Murray Edwards has the most shares, but I doubt he has more than 50% control, or enough to make decisions such as moving the team on his own authority.

[Tyler]

This right here should tell you everything you need to know about Eric Francis:

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by Roughneck

Which is why they included The Bow, and weren't sneaky about it, and consistently mention it whenever somebody (i.e Ken King) use a CRL as a funding model.

It delayed the Bow's tax dollars from reaching the city's general revenue (and the province) as a bet that the capital projects funded with it will return a greater amount in the future than if the money hadn't been diverted, without taking away from the city's existing operating budget. They're on track to achieve that, making it a net benefit to the city in the long run from a pure financial perspective without taking into account the benefits of turning a blighted, undeveloped area and turning it into a good one.


None of this has been hidden away or avoided, it constantly gets brought up. So what are you continuously going on about? CMLC still has a budget to work with to facilitate development, and they're doing great with it.

The only way the city could “lose” overall, is if the EV CRL “failed.”

Tying in the Bow merely ensured that the CRL would not fail.

Yes, it was convienient to include it, but let’s not forget that all the land in the CRL is continuous, and all was in need of redevelopment. It’s not like it has to be gerrymandered into the CRL. Had the Bow not already been under construction, the border would likely have been made in the same place.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by Tyler

This right here should tell you everything you need to know about Eric Francis:

To date he's the only person, as far as I know, that's blocked me on twitter. I have no idea why. I didn't even follow him, let alone engage or talk about him.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

I'm not supportive of the CSEC proposal at all. Disagreeing with you on one point does not logically imply that I disagree on every point. I merely don't think the CMLC is particularly good at what it's trying to do. If you want experts at this kind of redevelopment, you're going to have to bring them in from out of town, and neither set of egos in the room are willing to consider that.

What would an out of town land management company have done differently? Frankly the pace and quality of buildup in the EV has been great.

[kevman]

https://deadspin.com/deadspin-awards...cam-1820448100

What The NHL Is Doing In Calgary Is Pretty Gross

Let’s cut through the sports angle and put in plain terms exactly what’s happening here:

A massive, multinational company is inserting itself into Calgary’s mayoral election, attacking an incumbent whose policies are preventing said company from obtaining hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer handouts, and overtly threatening citizens that unless they vote the way the company wants, they’ll leave town.

[GordonBlue]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

It still comes at a cost to the city which I believe was the point that Parallex was trying to make.

true, but I think that the CSEC wants the city to cover the full cost of free transit.
I thought it would be an easy item for both sides to compromise on, that is actually a really good idea.
The city could give a bit on that as it's a benefit to the fans and the city more so than the flames.
it's of course kind of an insignificant issue, but baby steps to both sides working together on an agreement.

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by GordonBlue

true, but I think that the CSEC wants the city to cover the full cost of free transit.
I thought it would be an easy item for both sides to compromise on, that is actually a really good idea.
The city could give a bit on that as it's a benefit to the fans and the city more so than the flames.
it's of course kind of an insignificant issue, but baby steps to both sides working together on an agreement.

Not sure how it benefits the city as it would be about $1-1.5M in lost transit revenue a year.

[stamps]

Originally Posted by Roughneck

Not sure how it benefits the city as it would be about $1-1.5M in lost transit revenue a year.

So if the Flames leave it's about 30 to 45 million dollars lost to the city over 30 years ....

[transplant99]

What The NHL Is Doing In Calgary Is Pretty Gross

Let’s cut through the sports angle and put in plain terms exactly what’s happening here:

A massive, multinational company is inserting itself into Calgary’s mayoral election, attacking an incumbent whose policies are preventing said company from obtaining hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer handouts, and overtly threatening citizens that unless they vote the way the company wants, they’ll leave town.

The CSEC is a "massive multi-national company"?