Stadiums & Arenas of Canada, Part 3

[wave46]

Originally Posted by FFX-ME

A CRL simply wouldn't work if you are building a new arena at virtually the exact same location.

Apparently nobody told Detroit.

[Black Star]

Originally Posted by blueandgoldguy

Here is an article from a few weeks ago by the Globe and Mail that describes what the Flames ownership demanded from the city in the arena negotiations. Seems like a worse deal than Edmonton's.

https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/new...+Article+Links

The partnership that owns the Calgary Flames proposed a deal for a new arena that would give the private company a chance to transform into the real estate developer for a potentially lucrative new community, according to documents obtained by The Globe and Mail.

Calgary Sports and Entertainment Corp. (CSEC), which owns the Flames and other sports teams, made its first arena offer to the city in a letter and two-page list of terms Feb. 21. The documents provide a glimpse of the club's vision for a complex more extensive than just an arena.

As part of the proposal, the Flames' owners insisted on receiving an option to buy and develop land near the events complex, a slice of the Stampede Casino's revenue, all parking revenue from major events it would manage at the events complex and other goodies. The demands included the city of Calgary covering the cost of flood insurance, reimbursing the club for all provincial property taxes that may be imposed on the facilities, and requiring local ratepayers to pick up the bill for a public gathering place suitable for festivals next to the arena.

The documents underscore how the multimillion-dollar arena negotiations are – for both camps – about far more than a concrete structure in Victoria Park, an underdeveloped zone east of Calgary's downtown.

If Calgary acquiesced to the terms, for example, it would give some of Canada's wealthiest men business opportunities in part thanks to financial support from taxpayers. Further, some of the sticking points would affect the Calgary Stampede's balance sheet. The Stampede, which hosts the city's famous 10-day festival and other events, is a not-for-profit organization and parking and gambling revenue are important to its operation.

So they also appear to want some of the Stampede's revenue as well.

Except Edmonton's deal wasn't a bad deal.

[240glt]

I guess it depends on how wide open your eyes are I suppose

from the Globe:

Globe editorial: After overtime in Calgary, it’s Nenshi 1, Bettman 0

To invoke an image that the Calgary Flames and NHL commissioner Gary Bettman will understand, the clock is showing zeroes, the horn has sounded and one team is the unambiguous loser – theirs.

On Monday, Naheed Nenshi was re-elected as Calgary's mayor. The result stands as a rebuke to Mr. Bettman and his disgraceful attempts at meddling in the election campaign, which he did by essentially calling on voters to boot out the incumbent for being insufficiently generous in offering taxpayer funds to the Flames' proposed new arena.

Sadly, the defeat of the plutocrats is not how these games usually end. Bully tactics and relocation threats have been a boon to sports leagues for decades. And this game isn't over yet; it's safe to assume the Flames, who are owned by some of Canada's richest people and who are angling for a new $500-million barn, will not go meekly into the night.

...

The good news is that Canadian cities and provinces have generally been far less inclined to cave to billionaire sports owners than their American counterparts. Except Edmonton (my editorial addition) To take one absurd example of the prevalence of corporate sports welfare south of the border, Madison Square Garden in New York, one of the busiest arenas on the continent, situated on some of the priciest real estate on Earth, hasn't paid a cent in property tax in decades. That subsidy is worth close to $50-million (U.S.) a year.

All seven Canadian NHL teams return at least some money to their local municipality – although three pay little to no property tax – and most play in privately held buildings. That's how it should remain, Calgary included.

https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/opi...ticle36673100/

[esquire]

^ Back in the 90s the relocation threat had more weight because for a while it looked like the NHL could really take off in the US. Demand was really growing and there were a lot of shiny new arenas looking for tenants. These days we know that won't happen and the NHL will remain somewhere between MLS and the NBA as a bit of an afterthought on the US sports landscape. So a smart city like Calgary knows it doesn't have much to lose by telling the NHL to pound sand.

[speedog]

Originally Posted by esquire

^ Back in the 90s the relocation threat had more weight because for a while it looked like the NHL could really take off in the US. Demand was really growing and there were a lot of shiny new arenas looking for tenants. These days we know that won't happen and the NHL will remain somewhere between MLS and the NBA as a bit of an afterthought on the US sports landscape. So a smart city like Calgary knows it doesn't have much to lose by telling the NHL to pound sand.

Are you inferring that a certain NHL city about 300 or so kilometers north of Calgary wasn't a smart city?

[DAVEinEDMONTON]

Originally Posted by 240glt

I guess it depends on how wide open your eyes are I suppose

from the Globe:

Globe editorial: After overtime in Calgary, it’s Nenshi 1, Bettman 0

To invoke an image that the Calgary Flames and NHL commissioner Gary Bettman will understand, the clock is showing zeroes, the horn has sounded and one team is the unambiguous loser – theirs.

On Monday, Naheed Nenshi was re-elected as Calgary's mayor. The result stands as a rebuke to Mr. Bettman and his disgraceful attempts at meddling in the election campaign, which he did by essentially calling on voters to boot out the incumbent for being insufficiently generous in offering taxpayer funds to the Flames' proposed new arena.

Sadly, the defeat of the plutocrats is not how these games usually end. Bully tactics and relocation threats have been a boon to sports leagues for decades. And this game isn't over yet; it's safe to assume the Flames, who are owned by some of Canada's richest people and who are angling for a new $500-million barn, will not go meekly into the night.

...

The good news is that Canadian cities and provinces have generally been far less inclined to cave to billionaire sports owners than their American counterparts. Except Edmonton (my editorial addition) To take one absurd example of the prevalence of corporate sports welfare south of the border, Madison Square Garden in New York, one of the busiest arenas on the continent, situated on some of the priciest real estate on Earth, hasn't paid a cent in property tax in decades. That subsidy is worth close to $50-million (U.S.) a year.

All seven Canadian NHL teams return at least some money to their local municipality – although three pay little to no property tax – and most play in privately held buildings. That's how it should remain, Calgary included.

https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/opi...ticle36673100/

I am not sure how Calgary should remain as is because they certainly do not play in a privately held building at the moment...

This arena debate is interesting in so far as it is nothing new to any city that is in the same position.

There will always be those who say "No deal" . Let's not support those millionaire athletes and billionaire owners. "No" to using any tax dollars.

There will always be those who say let's go all the way because we will lose the team otherwise.

Then there is a myriad of possible compromise solutions somewhere in between.

Many have argued that Edmonton's deal is bad. That it could have been better and that it did not spur on development as much as people say. That may or may not be true. Time will tell if the citizens of Edmonton are winners or losers. There is no guarantee that some of the developments we now see would have been built. At least not in the current time frame. We can argue the merits of the arena past decisions made all day. But the fact of the matter is that the surrounding developments did happen and I am happy to look out of my office and see 8 to 9 new buildings where once multiple parking lots were for decades. I think most Edmontonians would agree that the deal, while not the best, has turned out very positive for downtown Edmonton. As least the optics suggest that.

As for Calgary, I think that they will reach a similar compromise deal. The extent of Calgary's civic financial involvement will most likely be less than Edmonton but will still be substantial. The sticky points such as who owns the arena, if property taxes should or should not be paid, who gets the various revenue streams, who pays for flood insurance, among others will all be worked out in time.

For now, the battle continues...

[kel]

The number 1 thing Edmonton needed in their arena deal was the revitalization of sections within the downtown core which Is finally happening in due part because of the arena. Calgary does not have the need for revitalization within its core so it would only make sense that the city should get a better deal on any new arena development.

[speedog]

Not splitting hairs but there is not room for an arena within Calgary's downtown core which is generally considered as being north of the CPR tracks. Both the Victoria Park and West Village locations are not actually in Calgary's downtown core but instead are areas abutting the downtown core.

What is more concerning is that there doesn't seem to be any discussion with respect to McMahon - the failure of the West Village proposal seems to have buried any more talk of McMahon's future. On a positive note there is the fabulous tail gating atmosphere but that is offset quite a bit by substandard seating, substandard concessions and substandard washroom facilities.

[craner]

Originally Posted by DAVEinEDMONTON

I am not sure how Calgary should remain as is because they certainly do not play in a privately held building at the moment...

This arena debate is interesting in so far as it is nothing new to any city that is in the same position.

There will always be those who say "No deal" . Let's not support those millionaire athletes and billionaire owners. "No" to using any tax dollars.

There will always be those who say let's go all the way because we will lose the team otherwise.

Then there is a myriad of possible compromise solutions somewhere in between.

Many have argued that Edmonton's deal is bad. That it could have been better and that it did not spur on development as much as people say. That may or may not be true. Time will tell if the citizens of Edmonton are winners or losers. There is no guarantee that some of the developments we now see would have been built. At least not in the current time frame. We can argue the merits of the arena past decisions made all day. But the fact of the matter is that the surrounding developments did happen and I am happy to look out of my office and see 8 to 9 new buildings where once multiple parking lots were for decades. I think most Edmontonians would agree that the deal, while not the best, has turned out very positive for downtown Edmonton. As least the optics suggest that.

As for Calgary, I think that they will reach a similar compromise deal. The extent of Calgary's civic financial involvement will most likely be less than Edmonton but will still be substantial. The sticky points such as who owns the arena, if property taxes should or should not be paid, who gets the various revenue streams, who pays for flood insurance, among others will all be worked out in time.

For now, the battle continues...

Very good synopsis Dave.
I hope we here in Calgary can get a reasonable arena deal done. Even better would be a new or fully renovated McMahon for speedog & I.

[wave46]

Originally Posted by craner

Very good synopsis Dave.
I hope we here in Calgary can get a reasonable arena deal done.

The way the Flames' management approached the situation was very tone-deaf.

Had they approached it in a more constructive manner, they might have made a deal that both taxpayers and the team could have agreed upon.

That embittered a lot of people.

[The Fisher Account]

Is there a development list of Canadian arenas and stadiums U/C now?

[osmo]

Flames ownership needs to sell. If their intention now is to just ride out Saddledome until its wheels fall off then they really have no strategic plan going forward into the future - they need to sell. There will be a group of rich people who can get an arena done on their terms and make money doing it, they will be more than happy to take the Flames of the current ownership group's hands.

[Jaws]

Originally Posted by The Fisher Account

Is there a development list of Canadian arenas and stadiums U/C now?

1 - Moncton
2 - ?

[Oilkountry]

The nerve of The Flames group trying to stiff arm the city like they have them by the balls is just unreal. They arent just asking for the city to pay pretty much 100% of the arena cost they are also asking them to pay the operating costs with no gain to the tax payers as well. It's ridiculous. This isn't Ottawa or buffalo where you might get away with this crap.

I wonder when the ottawa group will start asking the city for money? Thats gotta be coming up quick here

[wave46]

Originally Posted by Oilkountry

The nerve of The Flames group trying to stiff arm the city like they have them by the balls is just unreal. They arent just asking for the city to pay pretty much 100% of the arena cost they are also asking them to pay the operating costs with no gain to the tax payers as well. It's ridiculous. This isn't Ottawa or buffalo where you might get away with this crap.

I wonder when the ottawa group will start asking the city for money? Thats gotta be coming up quick here

The Canadian Tire Centre was mostly privately financed, IIRC.

I think Melnyk is playing it smart - building consensus with the NCC and City before asking for money.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Jaws

1 - Moncton
2 - ?

Gatineau will be starting construction on a new arena/events centre fairly shortly. It will be in the 4,000-5,000 seat range IIRC.

[FFX-ME]

Originally Posted by wave46

The Canadian Tire Centre was mostly privately financed, IIRC.

I think Melnyk is playing it smart - building consensus with the NCC and City before asking for money.

Melnyk has said multiple times that he doesn't want the senators to play in an arena he doesn't own. The CTC was built using private funds and the new one will also be built using private funds.

[wave46]

Originally Posted by FFX-ME

Melnyk has said multiple times that he doesn't want the senators to play in an arena he doesn't own. The CTC was built using private funds and the new one will also be built using private funds.

That's great, but the skeptic in me has doubts. I would love to be proved wrong though.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by FFX-ME

Melnyk has said multiple times that he doesn't want the senators to play in an arena he doesn't own. The CTC was built using private funds and the new one will also be built using private funds.

He wants the land for free though, doesn't he? That would be the public contribution to the project, I guess.

[FFX-ME]

Originally Posted by Acajack

He wants the land for free though, doesn't he? That would be the public contribution to the project, I guess.

And the city is tasked with decontaminating the land.