Municipal Politics

[sammyd]

Originally Posted by milomilo

And then... I assume the ultimate decision is now in Kenney's hands? Kenney is equally a populist, a miser and an idiot. My money would be on him prioritising a dozen rural landowners and saving a little cash in the short term over a million and a half Calgarians and the risk of more money spent in the future. I hope my cynicism is proved wrong.

Probably, as your opinion is laughable.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by sammyd

Probably, as your opinion is laughable.

What do you think will happen?

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by milomilo

What do you think will happen?

Probably a lot more than what happened under Rachel.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

Probably a lot more than what happened under Rachel.

Kenney has numerous MLA's serving him who don't like the dam, and he is going to have to cut spending to fund the carbon tax and corporate tax cut. Even though flood mitigation is good policy, the 2013 flood is now ancient history, all but forgotten in the minds of the voters so he has nothing to gain by building it.

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by milomilo

Kenney has numerous MLA's serving him who don't like the dam, and he is going to have to cut spending to fund the carbon tax and corporate tax cut. Even though flood mitigation is good policy, the 2013 flood is now ancient history, all but forgotten in the minds of the voters so he has nothing to gain by building it.

Are there not two dams under consideration?

The corporate tax cut is a red herring. Raising the tax resulted in lower revenue not more. Lowering the tax will very likely result in more revenue in about 3 to 4 years time.

No way is the flood forgotten. Calgary gets big floods quite often so we know more needs to be done. It's just a question of what is best. We should let the experts decide but I don't think they're in agreement either. Doing nothing is just asking for trouble.

[MalcolmTucker]

One dam is under consideration, after 3 iirc independent studies deemed it better value for money than the upstream alternative. The project is now under a federal environmental assessment. Besides a small delay when they were first elected, there is nothing any provincial government could have done to get it done faster.

Heck, the feds, who are committed to 90% funding for natural disasters have a much more direct incentive to get it done faster. But as in everything, must properly follow proper protocols lest a single lawsuit cause your entire project to be set back far more than doing it right the first time would.

[Doug]

Originally Posted by milomilo

And then... I assume the ultimate decision is now in Kenney's hands? Kenney is equally a populist, a miser and an idiot. My money would be on him prioritising a dozen rural landowners and saving a little cash in the short term over a million and a half Calgarians and the risk of more money spent in the future. I hope my cynicism is proved wrong.

Rural landowners and cost are but two issues. The McLean Creek alternative would also protect Bragg Creek and Redwood Meadows. It could also potentially provide more storage. If you hike or mountain bike around Little Elbow, there is plenty of evidence that the flood started at the top of the watershed: lots of blown out creeks.

Minimal progress has been made on upstream storage on the Bow. Lowering the outlet on Ghost Dam will help, but more storage will likely be required. That almost certainly will impact First Nations land.

[suburbia]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

For the arena it would be ideal to get the feds to pay for the area infrastructure upgrades which will probably end up being quite costly.

The Feds may not be interested, because the biggest gain will be for a British citizen who doesn't even pay taxes here!

[suburbia]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

Probably a lot more than what happened under Rachel.

Not sure why Kenney's UCP is being touted in this municipal section, especially since the election outcome is in question given the RCMP voter fraud investigation.

[suburbia]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

The corporate tax cut is a red herring. Raising the tax resulted in lower revenue not more. Lowering the tax will very likely result in more revenue in about 3 to 4 years time.

That's ridiculous logic. The modest rise in corporate taxes did not reduce revenues. Low oil prices did.

The connection between giving rich corporations a 1/3rd tax cut on the backs of common Albertans will not mean some rich guy somewhere will hire more Albertans. It should be noted that a massive proportion of that tax cut will actually not even be increasing profits for Canadian companies, as many big players are international, generally owned out of the USA.

[suburbia]

Originally Posted by Doug

Rural landowners and cost are but two issues. The McLean Creek alternative would also protect Bragg Creek and Redwood Meadows. It could also potentially provide more storage. If you hike or mountain bike around Little Elbow, there is plenty of evidence that the flood started at the top of the watershed: lots of blown out creeks.

Minimal progress has been made on upstream storage on the Bow. Lowering the outlet on Ghost Dam will help, but more storage will likely be required. That almost certainly will impact First Nations land.

That's a bunch of BS.

[MalcolmTucker]

Bragg Creek and Redwood Meadows are better protected by cheaper community mitigation. The Springbank site will hold more.

If you want to see a project not built before the next provincial, switch sites. the Environmental Assessment will start all over again, and if you think the opposition in Spring bank is significant, wait until you are taking away people's hiking routes, biking routes, camp grounds, and flooding permanently a wildlife zone.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

Bragg Creek and Redwood Meadows are better protected by cheaper community mitigation. The Springbank site will hold more.

If you want to see a project not built before the next provincial, switch sites. the Environmental Assessment will start all over again, and if you think the opposition in Spring bank is significant, wait until you are taking away people's hiking routes, biking routes, camp grounds, and flooding permanently a wildlife zone.

Yep that. Even if the McClean Creek option was better (and I'll believe the government over the don't dam Springbank people on that), if we change the plan now the whole last 5 years was a waste. We might as well not bother at that point.

[Corndogger]

Councillor calls creation of reserve fund for major projects 'financially reckless'

Meghan Potkins, Calgary Herald
Updated: April 30, 2019

Calgary city council voted to formalize a new reserve for financing major capital projects Monday, despite a councillor calling it “financially reckless.”

The reserve, currently totalling nearly $400 million, is part of a larger financial strategy to fund the BMO Centre expansion, a new NHL arena, the first phase of Arts Commons and a multi-sport field house.

Council first approved the creation of a major projects reserve during a closed session of council on March 4, but Monday’s meeting was the first time elected officials were able to publicly discuss and formalize the fund’s terms and conditions.

Council voted 10-3 to approve the major projects reserve. Councillors Peter Demong, Druh Farrell and Jeromy Farkas voted against. Mayor Naheed Nenshi and Coun. Evan Woolley were absent.

Farrell said she opposed council’s decision to reduce the fiscal stability reserve, sometimes called the rainy day fund, to the minimum balance allowed under city policy — an amount equivalent to approximately five per cent of the city’s operating expenses.

“We’re playing fast and loose with this really important reserve and it’s there for some very specific reasons. It’s a massive transfer of money and it puts us much lower than our optimum amount, which is at about 12 to 15 per cent,” Farrell said Monday afternoon. “It’s there to buffer the peaks and valleys of the economy or urgent issues, crisis, disasters and we’re using it to fund capital projects that we couldn’t otherwise pay for.”

In chambers Monday evening, Farrell called the move “financially reckless.”

Councillors Jeff Davison and Jyoti Gondek took exception to Farrell’s comments, briefly calling on her to resign as chair for the Arts Commons advisory committee for opposing the fund, though the suggestion was eventually dropped.

Coun. Ward Sutherland said it was “insulting” to his business acumen to suggest that approving the fund was reckless. Sutherland said the major project reserve will be responsibly stewarded by council and that funds will only be spent based on key criteria, including whether matching funds are available from other governments or private partners.

Sutherland also accused opponents of the major projects fund of overstating the risks involved in transferring funds from the fiscal stability reserve.

“We still have five per cent minimum guard in our reserve,” Sutherland said. “To say it is armageddon is irresponsible.”

Source: https://calgaryherald.com/news/local-new...r-projects-fund-following-caustic-debate

[suburbia]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

Council voted 10-3 to approve the major projects reserve. Councillors Peter Demong, Druh Farrell and Jeromy Farkas voted against. Mayor Naheed Nenshi and Coun. Evan Woolley were absent.

This is very interesting, because it pits Mags and Chu (the incumbent UCP puppets) against Farkas (the new anti-transit kid on the block), and puts Farkas (the car industry lobbyist) and Farrell (the stalwart of anti-car cults everywhere) on the same side. At the end of the day, the vote is the vote, and they'll need to move forward assessing each project as marching funding presents itself (I believe in place already for the BMO event centre expansion) so there is a lot of maneuvering yet to come.

[milomilo]

To be fair, this can legitimately be called a 'rainy day'. As long as they fix the structural issues with property tax, I don't have a huge issue with this.

[suburbia]

Originally Posted by milomilo

To be fair, this can legitimately be called a 'rainy day'. As long as they fix the structural issues with property tax, I don't have a huge issue with this.

I'd agree with that. Infrastructure projects that will arguably diversify Calgary's economic potential are long-term wins, and to implement them in the near term infuses work and dollars into a strapped economy (except for the arena, which lines the pockets of the Flames billionaire owners).

[Corndogger]

Committee endorses $19 million in 'startup funding' for multi-sport field house

Sammy Hudes
Updated: May 10, 2019



A City of Calgary committee endorsed a $19-million funding request on Friday to proceed with the design phase of a new field house in Foothills Athletic Park, moving the long-discussed project forward.

The decision sets the stage for a council decision on the request, which would be funded through “off-site levies” — charges that developers pay to the city to help with the cost of off-site infrastructure.

The proposed facility, located close to the University of Calgary, includes a 400-metre track, with seating for up to 10,000 spectators for national and international meets. It would also have a FIFA regulation-size soccer field, as well as a 50-metre pool and twin ice surfaces.

It is estimated to cost upwards of $235 million and would take 4½ years to build, according to city administration.

Along with the BMO Centre expansion, a new NHL arena and the first phase of an Arts Commons expansion, the city has identified the field house as an infrastructure priority. Council voted in April to formalize a new reserve, totalling nearly $400 million, to finance those capital projects.

Of the $19 million in “startup funding” requested, the majority of that money would go toward designing the preliminary concept of the field house.

It would also be used to “leverage new funding opportunities” and determine if a partnership between the city and the U of C is feasible, the Foothills Athletic Park redevelopment advisory committee heard Friday.

Ward 5 Coun. George Chahal said the decision is a “big step in the right direction.” Gavin Young / Postmedia

Coun. George Chahal, committee chair, said even if councillors approve the request, the city won’t be committed to the project just yet. That decision would come around October 2020, when a detailed design of the concept is expected.

Chahal called the committee’s decision a “big step in the right direction,” noting the startup funding “is a lot of money.”

“It’s an amazing opportunity for our city to make sure we do this right and that’s our intent,” he said. “This field house is the No. 1 unfunded recreation priority for the City of Calgary today and it’s been on the books and being discussed since 1967.

“We’re the only major Canadian city that doesn’t have a field house, so as a world-class city, that’s something we need to think about,” Chahal said. “How do we compete, how do we give opportunities for our youth and our seniors to be able to be active and live healthy lifestyles?”

Sport Calgary CEO Murray Sigler said momentum for the project is “starting to build.”

“We believe that the grassroots community in Calgary … really want their kids to have the opportunity to have a multi-sport field house,” Sigler said.

“It’s something that Calgary lacks whereas so many other communities have it in Canada. Ours will be the last one built. We hope when it’s built, it will be a source of pride for the community and yet it’ll also be commercially viable so that people can afford to use it.”

But Coun. Jeromy Farkas called the initial funding “a big ask.”

Full story at: https://calgaryherald.com/news/local-new...t-up-funding-for-multi-sport-field-house

[Corndogger]

Concerning the field house $235 million doesn't seem like it will get as a very good facility. If the plan is to cheap out then why bother? Also, why would it take 4.5 years to build?

[suburbia]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

Also, why would it take 4.5 years to build?

Because it is not made of lego, and you also need to design it fully before you start laying out the bricks.