Regina | New Mosaic Stadium

[VANRIDERFAN]

Originally Posted by Bdog

Funny you should say that now! When I stated before that the deadline would likely be extended, you scoffed at the suggestion:

(Your words, from the part 1 thread)

So now all of a sudden, the decision doesn't need to be made by the end of february?



When did they state this several times? To you personally? I certainly haven't seen this in the media "several times".



Ah, so you have priveledged insider information on most aspects of the project, just not aspects which are now touted as a main purpose of this project, inner-city housing. Gotcha.

Since the project's aims, scope and costs have all changed significantly since the project was first proposed, I wonder if they will poll residents anew...

You do know that the soonest shovels can start digging is late this fall because CP has to get their new yard set up west of the city and they will not rip up a rail until they can move directly to the new site.

[Migs]

Originally Posted by VANRIDERFAN

You do know that the soonest shovels can start digging is late this fall because CP has to get their new yard set up west of the city and they will not rip up a rail until they can move directly to the new site.

Actually its spring '12 at the earliest, but your point is valid.

[Bdog]

Originally Posted by VANRIDERFAN

You do know that the soonest shovels can start digging is late this fall because CP has to get their new yard set up west of the city and they will not rip up a rail until they can move directly to the new site.

Exactly my point: Why base your feasibility study on a start date of Oct 2010 when you know that construction can't start until 18 months after that at the earliest? How can the promoters of this project continue to sell this project as what it was in 09 (when the actual report was mostly written, even though it came out early 2010), rather than what it will be if, and when construction starts in 2012?

Construction costs in 2012 will most likely be way higher than October 2010 (based on current inflation in construction costs in Sask). Adding an large affordable housing component is also extremely costly (don't expect the private sector to provide this). Continuing to sell it as $430 M is disingenuous at best. As Riders fans, I know you'll disagree. But, if this wasn't a project something else, would you feel differently, and be asking the same questions I am? And you Migs, as a conservative, would you be more skeptical about this project if it was for something else, and being touted by Calvert instead of the beloved Wall?

[drumuser]

it was announced on Thursday that Quebec City will begin work on a new NHL-style hockey arena with or without federal government or private sector involvement — the province and the city would each pay half.

Fiacco said Regina might soon start looking at options that include the private sector, but not the federal government, as he doesn't want to give up on the project.

"Anything is possible," he said.

Read more: http://www.leaderpost.com/Mayor+Fiac...#ixzz1DbmIKtDZ

[CCF]

I appreciate a good debate and it's one of the reasons I come to this site. I am happy to see that so many Winnipegers are interested in the happenings of Regina, but ladies and gents, lets calm down. Take a deep breath. There's no need to grill individuals for answers considering that none of us are involved in this project.

Whatever happens will happen. Clamouring on this site that this project is too expensive for Regina impacts the decision in 0 ways. Stop guessing and let it play out.

[Migs]

Originally Posted by Bdog

Exactly my point: Why base your feasibility study on a start date of Oct 2010 when you know that construction can't start until 18 months after that at the earliest? How can the promoters of this project continue to sell this project as what it was in 09 (when the actual report was mostly written, even though it came out early 2010), rather than what it will be if, and when construction starts in 2012?

Construction costs in 2012 will most likely be way higher than October 2010 (based on current inflation in construction costs in Sask). Adding an large affordable housing component is also extremely costly (don't expect the private sector to provide this). Continuing to sell it as $430 M is disingenuous at best. As Riders fans, I know you'll disagree. But, if this wasn't a project something else, would you feel differently, and be asking the same questions I am? And you Migs, as a conservative, would you be more skeptical about this project if it was for something else, and being touted by Calvert instead of the beloved Wall?

...sorry, not going to get baited this time. I knew it was a mistake taking you off my ignore list, back you go.

[Bdog]

Originally Posted by drumuser

it was announced on Thursday that Quebec City will begin work on a new NHL-style hockey arena with or without federal government or private sector involvement — the province and the city would each pay half.

Fiacco said Regina might soon start looking at options that include the private sector, but not the federal government, as he doesn't want to give up on the project.

"Anything is possible," he said.

Read more: http://www.leaderpost.com/Mayor+Fiac...#ixzz1DbmIKtDZ

"There are some people pushing this stadium that think that everyone in Saskatchewan wants it, but I hear from a lot of constituents that don't want their tax dollars to go to this."

Scheer said such a project could negatively affect property tax rates and existing facilities in Regina. He also said the feds are trying to "get back to balanced budgets."

Very interesting comments, especially coming from a Regina MP...

[Rottie]

Originally Posted by drumuser

it was announced on Thursday that Quebec City will begin work on a new NHL-style hockey arena with or without federal government or private sector involvement — the province and the city would each pay half.

Fiacco said Regina might soon start looking at options that include the private sector, but not the federal government, as he doesn't want to give up on the project.

"Anything is possible," he said.

Read more: http://www.leaderpost.com/Mayor+Fiac...#ixzz1DbmIKtDZ

It seems to me that the federal gov't is stalling, knowing damn well that Saskatchewan will get tired of waiting for a commitment from them and then a news release similar to today's in Quebec will happen in Regina.

If the feds refuse to take part in these types of projects then they should not be able to collect taxes on construction of them either.

[skthunder77]

Originally Posted by drumuser

it was announced on Thursday that Quebec City will begin work on a new NHL-style hockey arena with or without federal government or private sector involvement — the province and the city would each pay half.

Fiacco said Regina might soon start looking at options that include the private sector, but not the federal government, as he doesn't want to give up on the project.

"Anything is possible," he said.

Read more: http://www.leaderpost.com/Mayor+Fiac...#ixzz1DbmIKtDZ

Funny that's the most I've heard from Andrew Scheer if months...and he really didn't say anything...other than take shots at the Mayor and give reasons to not help out...I guess that's how he helps out.

ABC.

[UPP]

Originally Posted by Bdog

Very interesting comments, especially coming from a Regina MP...

Very interesting indeed. Of course, he's towing the party line, unlike his colleagues in Quebec, because he wants to advance himself in the party, not actually bring forward concerns of his constituants.

If he was truly interested in local property taxes, he would want as much federal involvement as possible to alleviate the share that would be paid by his own constituants. His logic makes no sense.

Fact is, this stadium will be built in some form or another. The current stadium has outlived its usefulness. The question to Mr. Scheer is, how much will the government contribute? If the answer is nothing, then he has effectively told his own constituants that he doesn't care about their property tax burden, he's more concerned about his political ambitions.

[Bdog]

Originally Posted by UPP

Fact is, this stadium will be built in some form or another. The current stadium has outlived its usefulness.

I agree with you 100%. Regina definitely needs a new stadium. Now it remains to be seen what type of scale and magnitude the stadium will be.

http://saskatoon.ctv.ca/servlet/an/l...?hub=Saskatoon

"We are still using the feasibility study that we have from a year ago, but there may have to be some cost adjustments," said Ken Cheveldayoff, the provincial cabinet minister in charge of the proposed $430-million stadium project.

Good to see that the minister is finally admitting that cost overruns are likely...

[Migs]

Another great column by Mandryk, wow I have no problem admitting I was wrong, he's done a complete 180. Good on him!!!

http://www.leaderpost.com/business/M...290/story.html

MANDRYK: Regina stadium — time to go for the end zone

If there is still any doubt about how little federal government support there is for Saskatchewan, consider the latest developments in the stadium funding saga.

But rather than just bemoan the ceaseless federal Conservative waffling, game-playing and Quebec favouritism, maybe it's time for Saskatchewan to steal one from Quebec's playbook.

Rather than just gripe about Ottawa for not coming through on its share of the $431-million stadium project, Premier Brad Wall's Saskatchewan Party government should instead be putting the squeeze on the federal government.

Wall needs to follow Quebec Premier Jean Charest's lead Thursday and announce the Saskatchewan government is backing Regina's stadium/inner-city redevelopment plan and fully expects federal government support for both phases of this project.
......

[Bdog]

Originally Posted by Migs

...sorry, not going to get baited this time. I knew it was a mistake taking you off my ignore list, back you go.

???????????

[thefourthtower]

[QUOTE=CCF;5160319]I appreciate a good debate and it's one of the reasons I come to this site. I am happy to see that so many Winnipegers are interested in the happenings of Regina, but ladies and gents, lets calm down. Take a deep breath. There's no need to grill individuals for answers considering that none of us are involved in this project.

Whatever happens will happen. Clamouring on this site that this project is too expensive for Regina impacts the decision in 0 ways. Stop guessing and let it play out.[ some great advice

[Bdog]

Intesting views from a Saskatoon MLA:

But Cam Broten, the NDP MLA for Saskatoon Massey Place, isn't quite sure who Cheveldayoff is talking to.

While not a top-of-mind issue, he said that when Saskatoon residents do talk to him about the Regina dome it's with skepticism.

"Through door-knocking in my constituency and then out and about around town, I've never had a person come up to me and say that a dome should be built with public dollars in Regina," said Broten.

Read more: http://www.leaderpost.com/news/Cheveldayoff+proponent+dome/4270046/story.html#ixzz1DmZzE2WF

[trueviking]

Originally Posted by Bdog

Construction costs in 2012 will most likely be way higher than October 2010 (based on current inflation in construction costs in Sask).

current construction inflation in saskatchewan is more than half a percent per month.....that would work out to be roughly $25m per year at a minimum.

it is odd that the feasibility study didn't recognize the earliest start date in its budget, but it should be remembered that this budget was an order of magnitude estimate based on nothing but a feasibility study....when the stadium is actually designed the numbers will change....my experience is that they never go down.

it will take at least a year to design the building so they should look to proceed shortly to meet their 2012 construction start date.....i believe that migs said the announcement would be coming in 2 weeks so that should work pretty well as timelines go.

[Migs]

Originally Posted by Bdog

Intesting views from a Saskatoon MLA:



Read more: http://www.leaderpost.com/news/Cheveldayoff+proponent+dome/4270046/story.html#ixzz1DmZzE2WF

Thought I'd give you another chance and keep you off my ignore list, funny that you feel the need to to post a link to one MLA (who's in the opposition party of a rival city) who has a negative view but fail to 'quote' the minister in charge (from same city) who states the opposite. Oh and I think the main portion of that quote is "While not a top-of-mind issue"

That said, lets flip this quote around for context purposes, I wonder how many Regina MLA's could say "I've never had a person come up to me and say that another bridge should be built with public dollars in Saskatoon" I'd bet pretty much all of them

[Migs]

Originally Posted by trueviking

current construction inflation in saskatchewan is more than half a percent per month.....that would work out to be roughly $25m per year at a minimum.

it is odd that the feasibility study didn't recognize the earliest start date in its budget, but it should be remembered that this budget was an order of magnitude estimate based on nothing but a feasibility study....when the stadium is actually designed the numbers will change....my experience is that they never go down.

it will take at least a year to design the building so they should look to proceed shortly to meet their 2012 construction start date.....i believe that migs said the announcement would be coming in 2 weeks so that should work pretty well as timelines go.

Quick, you better let them know.

[youngregina]

I have an article in the MINUS 20 section of the paper on Monday. Some of you will think it looks familiar as it is based on one my posts. It's not so much about the economics of it, just straightening out the basis of the plan for the area and the former stadium area as well. Not too exciting I suppose. But I'm sure you will think it is worth a look. Or at least I hope so.

[Bdog]

Originally Posted by Migs

Thought I'd give you another chance and keep you off my ignore list

I hope you don't take my posts towards you as "baiting" or "trolling" - it's nothing personal Migs, and I hope you see that. I'm just asking what I feel are legitimate questions regarding financing, scope, and other details of the project, while expressing my views. As I understand it, the point of the thread is to discuss and debate the issues around the project, both pros and cons (rather than silencing debate and opposing viewpoints). As for you taking me off your "ignore list", thou art a merciful opponent

funny that you feel the need to to post a link to one MLA (who's in the opposition party of a rival city) who has a negative view but fail to 'quote' the minister in charge (from same city) who states the opposite. Oh and I think the main portion of that quote is "While not a top-of-mind issue"

That said, lets flip this quote around for context purposes, I wonder how many Regina MLA's could say "I've never had a person come up to me and say that another bridge should be built with public dollars in Saskatoon" I'd bet pretty much all of them

Migs, I think it's fair to say that you have the bases covered when it comes to posting articles and quotes that support this project and your views. Therefore, I merely offer an alternative persepective - I post the arguments that you ommit, and choose quotes that show that there is debate out there as to the support for this project. The fact that the MLA I quoted is from Saskatoon is irrelevant (Cheveldayoff is from Saskatoon too, and he is for the project); as is his political party, considering you've mentioned numerous times that all opposition parties favour this project...

Anyway, it's only two weeks until the supposed deadline, so more interesting news and details should be revealed in the near future...