New Downtown Calgary Arena

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by BFHeadstone

I don't have the link to the article but Dianne Colley-Urkhart (sp?) is on the record stating that if it were not for Nenshi there would probably be a deal already. I believe that it was also her that suggested they enlist Dave Bronconnier to do the negotiations.

While I personally support a new arena and was in favor of the Calgary Next proposal, I can see things from both sides.
Who are we kidding, both are fudging the books and trying to push their positions. KK is correct in a way that the Flames eventually come out paying 3/3, and it is highly possible that repayment could be recouped in far fewer than the 35 years being thrown out there, especially if it and the city become a major draw for events in the future. Do the property taxes go down then? Do ticket prices? Probably no to both.
On the other hand if the new arena district become what Nenshi envisions then what of the ancillary revenues the city recoups? Do the Flames share in that??
While there really is no fool proof formula for this I can see why the city's plan really won't work but understand that what the Flames are rumored to be offering will not either.
One thing to consider with the talk bringing up taxpayers "investment" in something like the library, sure up front there are no user fees but you do have to get a card to take out a book (and no I don't know the cost of that because I use the internet not the library). But what other revenues will the library make? Does it bring in other businesses? Hell no. But we all still have to pay for it. And who is paying the property taxes for the next 35 year for it??? US

While I am no financial planner or negotiator there are others out there that can work out better numbers than the two sides that have been.

How about rather than kicking each other on here for their position why not see if there is a solution the general consensus here could live with?

my 2 cents

So what if they pay the full price of their building, plus property taxes, and the city gets the benefit of the tax increases from surrounding property? This is the same as literally any other business other than sports corporations.

Suncor, Encana, TransCanada, CPR etc all likely provide far more to the public purse in Calgary but you don't hear them begging the city to pay for their headquarters.

[BFHeadstone]

Not where I was going but...

What kind of back stage incentives are given to some of those companies to lure them here..

I was just trying to give a balanced view. Not whether it's right or wrong

[Design-mind]

I could not have put it better myself Socguy.

If they want the taxpayer to pay then they need to be transparent to the revenues they are bringing in. Why should I invest in their building if I can't see what my investment is making. Unfortunately they won't divulge because it is lining KK's pocket.

Anyway where would they move. A lot of the new expansion teams are having trouble filling the arenas they built. Pheonix is a great example. If it were not for snowbirds from Canada going down there I doubt they would even have a team (usually only 1/2 to 2/3 full).

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by BFHeadstone

Not where I was going but...

What kind of back stage incentives are given to some of those companies to lure them here..

I was just trying to give a balanced view. Not whether it's right or wrong

Being 'balanced' is putting the interests of 1.3 million people over the interests of a handful of billionaires. We don't have to see it from the Flame's side, there is no reason to care about them, only us.

[DoubleK]

Originally Posted by Design-mind

Pheonix is a great example. If it were not for snowbirds from Canada going down there I doubt they would even have a team (usually only 1/2 to 2/3 full).

Phoenix is an example of terrible siting. If they had built that rink in Scottsdale/Tempe/Mesa that franchise would be in much better shape.

There are zero parallels between Phoenix and Calgary on this issue.

[jawagord]

Originally Posted by milomilo

Being 'balanced' is putting the interests of 1.3 million people over the interests of a handful of billionaires. We don't have to see it from the Flame's side, there is no reason to care about them, only us.

The Billionaires aren't making their billions on the Flames hockey team or Stampeders. They might make a little money on the Flames but owning the Stamps can only be seen as civic philanthropy. There's a handful of Franchises that make big money, and clearly the Flames are not in that rarefied group of sports teams ala the Maple Leafs, New York Yankees, Dallas Cowboys. Your us and them reasoning is completely wrong, their is a long history of community ownership of sports teams on the prairies, the Flames ownership group isn't far off that concept and we wouldn't have a team without them. Clearly Nenshi is a problem getting a deal done and if as I expect he gets reelected the new arena will be put on the back burner until we get a new mayor or some Olympic money.

[patm]

Always funny when conservatives support something so non-conservative like gifting hundreds of millions of dollars to a private corporation whose only contributions to the city are all intangible, just because of the specific politician that is against it.

[jeffwhit]

Originally Posted by jawagord

Clearly Nenshi is a problem getting a deal done and if as I expect he gets reelected the new arena will be put on the back burner until we get a new mayor or some Olympic money.

In what way is that clear?

[CrossedTheTracks]

Originally Posted by jawagord

Clearly Nenshi is a problem getting a deal done and if as I expect he gets reelected the new arena will be put on the back burner until we get a new mayor or some Olympic money.

How so?
a) A more diplomatic mayor would somehow convince CSEC to take the same deal that is currently offered?
b) A more... generous... mayor would given CSEC what they wanted (or somehow closer to it)?

"Olympic money"... well the current Olympics analysis just assumes that the 2nd arena would already exist. Leads to this awesome circular reasoning of, "the Olympics aren't too expensive, look at all this infrastructure we [will] have!", followed by, "we should really build a new arena, we'll need it for the Olympics!"

[suburbia]

Originally Posted by patm

Always funny when conservatives support something so non-conservative like gifting hundreds of millions of dollars to a private corporation whose only contributions to the city are all intangible, just because of the specific politician that is against it.

Yes - that hits the nail. There is this perceived overlap between pro-business and political conservatives, but reality is that pro-business folks will always fully support increasing taxes to subsidize their big business. In that scenario (IE the Flames scenario) pro-business look in reality more like the Russian Oligarchs, or big business in South America and Africa that sometimes try to control politicians. If the big business players don't get what they want they try to get rid of the politicians. The un-corruptable always have a difficult time.

Roman Abramovich, Vladimir Makhlai, Eugene Shvidler, Yelena Baturina, Andrey Andreev and Andrey Borodin are among the many Russian Oligarchs who, like Murray Edwards, have also moved to London, UK. It really is amazing that there are some that even choose to entertain the handout request from someone who doesn't pay taxes in this country.

[Calgarian]

Nenshi isn't bending over for CSEC, and that is a problem? I think the city's proposal is more than reasonable, clearly the Flames Ownership is the problem

[O-tacular]

Though Ken King is an idiot I think people are giving him too much of the blame for this. He wouldn't be making these ridiculous statements and demands if it wasn't for the truly greedy ownership group of Murray Edwards and friends. Ken King is basically just the Sean Spicer in all of this.

[O-tacular]

I can't think of a more perfect stock photo for corporate fat cats.

[s211]

Originally Posted by O-tacular

I can't think of a more perfect stock photo for corporate fat cats.

That's size-ist. For shame! Micro-aggression!

[craner]

Any word on when the Flames are going to release their proposed deal for the Vic Park location (in response to City releasing theirs last week) ?

[H.E.Pennypacker]

[speedog]

I'd really like to see the unimbelished versions of what the CoC and CSEC have released because what they have released most likely isn't telling the whole story in both cases. Such bullshit but to be expected.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by Flames Propaganda

In a "small market" city, even one with an NHL team, a privately funded arena is not economically viable. The City's proposal is just not workable (or even for that matter, "fair", based on other arena deals in comparable cities).

Lol, if they can't make an arena work with a $185m+ subsidy and a captive market they must be pretty poor businessmen. The main thing I get from this is how badly Edmonton and other cities got screwed by these teams, I'm extremely proud of our city to not give in to this BS.

[outoftheice]

I'm not sure the Flames realize that CRL money is already being spent in Victoria Park via the CMLC to fund the $150 million in additional infrastructure upgrades that they were so dismissive of when it was included in the City of Calgary's proposal.

My proposed compromise solution. A hybrid of the two:

From the City of Calgary's Proposal:

- City of Calgary contributes $185 million towards the arena. The Flames maintain ownership of the arena however must pay property tax on the arena. This allows the City of Calgary to recoup it's $185 million investment.

- The Flames Ownership contributes $185 million towards the arena.

Change form the City of Calgary's Proposal:

- The 33% of the arena cost that is covered by the 'users' through ticket surcharge is eliminated. Instead this amount is split evenly between the Flames and the City of Calgary. The Flames argue that a ticket surcharge is coming out of their potential revenues anyways so why mince words. They can pay their half out of pocket and charge what they feel the market will bear.

- The City of Calgary's half of the 33% user portion will be made through an investment from the CMLC (City of Calgary arms length corporation that is in charge of the East Village revitalization) of $92.5 million. In exchange for this investment, the CMLC will become a partner on the arena's design and have a mandate to ensure that the arena includes multiple street-oriented restaurants and bar venues that will form the base for the proposed Stampede Trail entertainment street along Olympic Way SE. The $92.5 million will come from extending the existing CRL by an additional ten years (which will also free up more cash for investments in things like Olympic Plaza and Arts Common) and the justification will be that the investment in the arena will be the catalyst for the Stampede Trail entertainment district which will help spur more residential and commercial development in Victoria Park.

So in summary:

- City of Calgary contributes $185 million upfront investment (paid back through property tax from the arena).
- City of Calgary contributes $92.5 million via the CMLC and the existing CRL (not to be paid back but in exchange for the CMLC getting design input into the arena)
- Flames Ownership contributes $277.5 million (which is essentially the same amount as in their proposal), keeps ownership of the arena but has to pay property taxes.

I think that's a fair compromise. Curious what others think?

[O-tacular]

The link on the Flames' site isn't working now. From what H.E.Pennypacker posted though it looks like it's anything but realistic. I'd like to see how they calculated those figures for the annual stimulus to the economy. I also like that they ignore the city's existing CRL. Any charts with a big X in them immediately come across as emotional and completely biased.