Stadiums and Arenas of Canada

[jmt18325]

Originally Posted by isaidso

Is Sasktachewan forbidden from building other casinos if they give up Casino Regina? Saskatchewan should insist on the facility being non-smoking though. I believe First Nations aren't subject to non-smoking regulations, but they should be asked to make an exception here.

If it's off reserve, it is subject to normal provincial laws...and giving up — revenue would be rather foolish.

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by jmt18325

If it's off reserve, it is subject to normal provincial laws...and giving up — revenue would be rather foolish.

Even for a $1.2 billion stadium/hotel/casino complex? I understand the revenue implications with getting out of —, but the government should never have been there in the first place. This is a good exit strategy.

Government run casinos are no more ethical than government run cigarette and alcohol factories. The government is now addicted to — revenue. How ironic is that?

[Dalreg]

Originally Posted by isaidso

Even for a $1.2 billion stadium/hotel/casino complex? I understand the revenue implications with getting out of —, but the government should never have been there in the first place. This is a good exit strategy.

Government run casinos are no more ethical than government run cigarette and alcohol factories. The government is now addicted to — revenue. How ironic is that?

So instead we should hand over the revenue to a native reserve? Now there is a group of people addicted to — revenue if I ever saw one!

The only casino I have been to in Saskatchewan is the Regina one. I would rather lose my money to the government.

[Dalreg]

Originally Posted by mike474

How is not wanting a roof in lieu of a more productive alternative (skyscrapers, condos, art galleries, city beautification, R & D investment at the U of R, I could go on) indicative of a small town attitude? Adding a roof practically doubles the cost (even more if you want it retractable), but does it double the utility of the structure? I've yet to see a sound economic analysis answering this question and proving that marginal returns don't diminish significantly after you've got a functioning 35,000 seat expandable base. If you'd read my arguments you'd see that I'm well in favour of a new stadium at the proposed site, but that the value of a roof doesn't justify the huge increase in cost. If someone proposed building a 50 story office tower when the market would satiate at 25 storeys would you call out the developer for having a small town mentality if they decided to downsize? (Maybe you would, but most would call him/her crazy for attempting something that wouldn't benefit the market aside from the intrinsic value of having a bigger building)

As for your petty Saskatoon comment, I'm reluctant to even address it. Maybe more Saskatonians would be in favour; but in response to your veiled passive aggressiveness I'll just say I'm a big Rider fan, they belong in Regina, and I don't think it'd be wise for Saskatoon to attempt building any stadium at the moment. Check your ad hominem — at the door next time if you want to have an actual debate.

Passive aggressiveness, hmm someone learning a new term?

So you would rather build a stadium with no roof to sit empty for half the year, instead of actually trying to make a facility that could be used year round?

Maybe we should just renovate Taylor Field for $50million or so and forget about trying to do anything that might actually pull Saskatchewan out of the 70's.

[jmt18325]

Originally Posted by isaidso

Even for a $1.2 billion stadium/hotel/casino complex? I understand the revenue implications with getting out of —, but the government should never have been there in the first place. This is a good exit strategy.

That's an ideological agreement, and certainly one I don't agree with. If you're going to lose your money anyway, you might as well lose it for the good of others.

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by jmt18325

That's an ideological agreement, and certainly one I don't agree with. If you're going to lose your money anyway, you might as well lose it for the good of others.

I'm not sure what 'ideological agreement' means, but I'm assuming you mean ideological viewpoint?

I not 100% opposed to your idea. What I am opposed to is hypocrisy. If we're going to go down this road, let's do it properly and milk every addiction out there to bolster government coffers. Let's get into cigarette and booze manufacturing too. Might as well set up a few meth labs while we're at it. The margins are great and we can use the money to better fund our universities and hospitals. — is lucrative as well. They can work for the state instead of pimps.

You think I'm taking the piss, but I think you're actually on to something!

[mike474]

Originally Posted by isaidso

What do you think of the $1.2 billion First Nations proposal? It's gorgeous, but would require relinquishing control of some Casino assets. I consider that a fair trade off. Government gets out of the — business (which we shouldn't be involved with in the first place), and Saskatchewan gets an absolutely stunning facility with no public funds directed towards it.

Is Sasktachewan forbidden from building other casinos if they give up Casino Regina? Saskatchewan should insist on the facility being non-smoking though. I believe First Nations aren't subject to non-smoking regulations, but they should be asked to make an exception here.

I have no idea how the whole casino deal would work out economically, but I think it's a pipe dream considering there hasn't been much talk recently; also the feasiblity studies don't mention it at all as far as I know (I could be wrong).

I'm sure the government of Sask could build all the casinos it wanted but there's only so much market share. As for the smoking regulation, that's a bit out of right field, but I think all casinos in Saskatchewan are non-smoking (maybe they have smoking rooms that would not be allowed elsewhere, I'm not much of a gambler). I think public distaste of smoking determines this more so than any policy.

[jmt18325]

Originally Posted by isaidso

I'm not sure what 'ideological agreement' means, but I'm assuming you mean ideological viewpoint?

It was late...it was supposed to say argument.

I not 100% opposed to your idea. What I am opposed to is hypocrisy. If we're going to go down this road, let's do it properly and milk every addiction out there to bolster government coffers. Let's get into cigarette and booze manufacturing too.[/QUOTE]

We just tax the hell out of those...that works fine too.

[mike474]

Originally Posted by Dalreg

Passive aggressiveness, hmm someone learning a new term?

I don't know what you mean by that. Your passive aggressiveness was your stated logical fallacy which asserted that my views were impacted by the fact that I live in Saskatoon. It was passive aggressive because it was not an explicit assertion, but nevertheless undoubtedly leveled against me because the topic of Saskatonians' preferences hadn't been brought up, so it stands to reason that had my location been anywhere else you wouldn't have made such a dumb statement, perhaps a dumber one, but not the same one. How does that equate to me learning a new term?

Originally Posted by Dalreg

So you would rather build a stadium with no roof to sit empty for half the year, instead of actually trying to make a facility that could be used year round?

Yes. If that roof costs more than the benefit it provides. A dome over downtown Regina would provide a lot of benefits, but it'd be more costly than the beneficial and the investment is best spend elsewhere. I've not seen any proof that social welfare is optimized at such a high level of investment in the proposed structure, especially when much of what would be used in the stadium could be hosted elsewhere. The majority of ROI from a stadium will be from the stadium itself, not the roof which costs almost as much, so the GDP impact statements need to be compared to an open-air alternative to have any validity. I don't question that a closed roof stadium is feasible, it's just not the best choice.

Originally Posted by Dalreg

Maybe we should just renovate Taylor Field for $50million or so and forget about trying to do anything that might actually pull Saskatchewan out of the 70's.

Taylor field is nearing obsolescence; facilities are lacking and per year maintenance costs will continue to rise. Plus if the rail yards are available, there will be a lot of positive externalities from relocation, there's a cost to not developing that land. As for pulling Saskatchewan out of the seventies, how does a roof equate to progress versus a biotech research lab or a new provincial museum? To justify a roof you have to be able to confirm that a 100-150 million dollar investment will maximize social welfare more so than any other alternative. I don't see that being the case.

[jchamoun79]

Originally Posted by Jay in Cowtown

There's no need to tear the old girl down... look what they done with Soldier Field in Chicago, just reno it!

Not a great example. Soldier Field wasn't really "renovated"; the stadium was completely rebuilt (with much controversy, the loss of its Historic Landmark designation, and at a cost of $630 million).

[thurmas]

the thing that is — me off is that halifax the major city of atlantic canada since 1984 has either bungled or just not tried to build a cfl stadium while now even moncton is beating them to the punch. Maybe that is what they will need is the humiliation of losing out to moncton to get them to start building a stadium already. Also Quebec city would be a great cfl venue instead of spending $400 million on an nhl rink spend $130 mil for a cfl stadium. Imagine the battle of quebec cfl rivalry with montreal it would be awesome!

[fenwick16]

Majority shows support for outdoor sports stadium

ALEX BOUTILIER
FOR METRO HALIFAX
May 14, 2010 12:28 a.m.

Most Haligonians think the city could use a large outdoor sports stadium.

The CityThink 2010 survey found 60 per cent of HRM residents mostly or completely agree the city needs a new, larger outdoor sports stadium. Another 36 per cent mostly or completely disagree.

“It’s hard to read into exactly what people are thinking, but I think they view it as if this could get done, we’d love it,” said Fred Morley, executive vice-president of the Greater Halifax Partnership.

“If it can be done in a reasonably cost-efficient way ... it is something people have flagged.”

Craig Wight, senior vice-president at Bristol Omnifacts Research, which conducted the survey, said he views the response as a starting point for more debate on the subject.

“I think it shows (that) yes, there’s interest. (But) if it was my money, I would not be going to develop (a stadium) just based on that,” Wight said. “I would take that as, OK, here’s a starting point.

“Yes, there seems to be interest, (but) how much attendance am I going to get, are they really willing to pay for it themselves — because it is kind of a no-money obligation type of question.”

Morley said with the municipality facing a hefty deficit this year, it will take a big event — as well as federal and provincial involvement — to make a stadium a reality. He pointed to the new arena in Clayton Park under construction for the 2011 Canada Games as an example.

“This isn’t a blank cheque to go out and borrow and spend money all on our own,” said Morley. “What it is is (that) we’ve reached the stage where this is something we should consider as a community.”

A recent survey in the Halifax area showed that 60% of residents support a large outdoor stadium versus 36% consider it to be unnecessary. One thing that has changed in the Halifax area since 1983 (when the Atlantic Schooners conditional franchise was awarded) is amalgamation. They now have a larger tax base compared to 1983 when Halifax and Dartmouth were competing with each other with limited tax bases. Now Halifax, Dartmouth, Sackville, Bedford are all one amalgamated municipality.

The biggest problem in the Halifax area will be to convince politicians not to wait for a large event to come along to pay for a stadium. They were planning to spend close to a $1 billion on the Commonwealth Games whereas most people would have been happy with a $50 - $70 million outdoor stadium (instead they got neither). They could start with a 16,000 seat outdoor stadium for about $30 million and then expand it to 30,000 if a CFL team comes to town.

Right now I think that the priorities in the Halifax area are:
1) a new convention centre
2) a new central library
3) an outdoor stadium - maybe this is wishful thinking on my part but I hope this will come about once numbers 1 and 2 are underway (numbers 1 and 2 are currently in the design phase).

Halifax has over the past few years completed a $350 million dollar waste water treatment system to clean up the harbour so maybe they can find $30 million for the first stage of a stadium in the near future. Seeing Moncton selling out a 20,000 seat stadium for a CFL game in 32 hours might spur them to action, especially when a few thousand of those people are probably driving 2 hours from the Halifax area.

[thurmas]

isn't there another commonwealth games they can bid for. I know their last bid failled because of huge cost overuns but if they scalled it down to atleast give halifax a stadium and maybe a swimming pool it could be done for maybe $500 million if done on a conservative budget in hosting a games. The last commonwealth canada hosted was 16 years ago in victoria so we should be due soon!

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by thurmas

isn't there another commonwealth games they can bid for. I know their last bid failled because of huge cost overuns but if they scalled it down to atleast give halifax a stadium and maybe a swimming pool it could be done for maybe $500 million if done on a conservative budget in hosting a games. The last commonwealth canada hosted was 16 years ago in victoria so we should be due soon!

Halifax would have to win the Canadian bid and the only way that they would ever win would be if no other Canadian city bid for it. They now have a record as being unable to pull it off. I think they should concentrate on smaller single sports events that they have a record of being successful at (example IIHF championships, World Junior championships, although not sporting events - 1995 World G7 summit, etc.).

However, the quickest way would be for them to simply start with a small stadium that can be expanded. If they wait for a sports event then they could be waiting for another 25 years.

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by mike474

I have no idea how the whole casino deal would work out economically, but I think it's a pipe dream considering there hasn't been much talk recently; also the feasiblity studies don't mention it at all as far as I know (I could be wrong).

I'm sure the government of Sask could build all the casinos it wanted but there's only so much market share. As for the smoking regulation, that's a bit out of right field, but I think all casinos in Saskatchewan are non-smoking (maybe they have smoking rooms that would not be allowed elsewhere, I'm not much of a gambler). I think public distaste of smoking determines this more so than any policy.

The proposal does seem to be off the radar which suggests that there are substantial problems surrounding it. Either the government won't consider exiting the — business, or financing for the proposal isn't secured. Possibly it's a combination of the two.

If it's simply government addiction to — revenues, I consider this a potential missed opportunity. Ideologically, I'm opposed to state involvement. Economically, giving up casinos in exchange for a $1.2 billion investment seems like fair compensation.

Regarding smoking, I believe it's no longer a matter of public opinion, but one of law. Smoking in public places was deemed illegal due to a person's right to clean air. If 80% wanted smoking in public places, the law would still be upheld on constitutional grounds. It's a health issue rather than one based on public opinion.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by thurmas

isn't there another commonwealth games they can bid for. I know their last bid failled because of huge cost overuns but if they scalled it down to atleast give halifax a stadium and maybe a swimming pool it could be done for maybe $500 million if done on a conservative budget in hosting a games. The last commonwealth canada hosted was 16 years ago in victoria so we should be due soon!

Given the debacle the last time Halifax bid for the Commonwealth Games, I think it would be a frosty day in hell before they would be given the chance to do so again.

Don't get me wrong, I'm in favour of Halifax getting a decent stadium and getting a CFL team too (provided Moncton gets one first ). It's just that they will have to look at a different route to secure the funding, rather than the Commonwealth Games.

Moncton got it's stadium by hosting the 2010 IAAF World Junior Championships in Athletics. There are other avenues for Halifax to explore rather than the Commonwealth Games..........

[Dalreg]

Originally Posted by isaidso

The proposal does seem to be off the radar which suggests that there are substantial problems surrounding it. Either the government won't consider exiting the — business, or financing for the proposal isn't secured. Possibly it's a combination of the two.

If it's simply government addiction to — revenues, I consider this a potential missed opportunity. Ideologically, I'm opposed to state involvement. Economically, giving up casinos in exchange for a $1.2 billion investment seems like fair compensation.

Regarding smoking, I believe it's no longer a matter of public opinion, but one of law. Smoking in public places was deemed illegal due to a person's right to clean air. If 80% wanted smoking in public places, the law would still be upheld on constitutional grounds. It's a health issue rather than one based on public opinion.

Obviously you haven't been to any of the Native Casinos in Saskatchewan recently. Especially the ones on urban reserves. Smoking laws don't seem to apply.

The native proposal was all smoke and mirrors, and if anything was a grab to get their hands on the government casinos. thankfully it while not officially dead, is as close as can be.

There was an article yesterday in the paper which I can't be bothered to hunt down, about the stadium proposal, so it is still alive and well, at least the government proposal.

[SKYSTHELIMIT]

Originally Posted by Dalreg

Obviously you haven't been to any of the Native Casinos in Saskatchewan recently. Especially the ones on urban reserves. Smoking laws don't seem to apply.

The native proposal was all smoke and mirrors, and if anything was a grab to get their hands on the government casinos. thankfully it while not officially dead, is as close as can be.

There was an article yesterday in the paper which I can't be bothered to hunt down, about the stadium proposal, so it is still alive and well, at least the government proposal.

The laws for smoking and displying of tobacco and tobacco products falls under federal jurisdiction on native lands that being said there are no display bans or smoking bans, that being said they would have to apply to get the land status changed to reserve status then it would be up to them if they want smoking or not.

[jmt18325]

Originally Posted by Dalreg

Obviously you haven't been to any of the Native Casinos in Saskatchewan recently. Especially the ones on urban reserves. Smoking laws don't seem to apply.

The laws don't apply on reserve because reserves are not subject to provincial jurisdiction.

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Given the debacle the last time Halifax bid for the Commonwealth Games, I think it would be a frosty day in hell before they would be given the chance to do so again.

Don't get me wrong, I'm in favour of Halifax getting a decent stadium and getting a CFL team too (provided Moncton gets one first ). It's just that they will have to look at a different route to secure the funding, rather than the Commonwealth Games.

Moncton got it's stadium by hosting the 2010 IAAF World Junior Championships in Athletics. There are other avenues for Halifax to explore rather than the Commonwealth Games..........

I agree. Unfortunately, there aren't very many events Halifax could bid for that would necessitate a stadium. The Halifax Commonwealth Games debacle will greatly reduce the chances that Halifax will be supported in any other sporting venture of this kind.

Halifax could go the same route as Ottawa. Assemble a strong management team and seek admission to the CFL conditional on a stadium. Failing that, Halifax replacing Huskies Stadium gets more pressing each passing season. I'd prefer a stadium that could be shared by both Dal and SMU, but any locations half way between each school would receive strong opposition from area residents.