Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon Dalton
So do it, fix it. It's not even half the cost of building a smaller arena. Plus it's better for the environment. I don't understand why people would think that we can find find money for a brand new building if we can't find money to fix and maintain what we have.
|
The City may want out of managing the arena business entirely. Nobody is going to buy FOC off them given its age and state of repair.
They currently subsidize operations at the arena to the tune of $1M a year. This doesn't even include capital rehab. The "fixing" it cost still leaves you with an outdated, non energy efficient building with high utility cost. Fixing it at $50M cost is strictly maintenance, not improvements.
A new arena agreement at a new arena would mean the City no longer provides a $1M annual operating subsidy nor does it have to pay for capital maintenance. The end result is City funding going to services and facilities at a more grass roots level like Community Centres, Pools, Municipal Arena, Housing etc.
I posted this type of funding scenario in another thread which compares costs of new build vs reno. The below doesn't even include the current operations subsidy which should be eliminated as part of a new venue agreement.
For example
New build
City Contribution = $85M up front
Land Sale proceeds of current arena= ($10M)
Net cost to City= $75M
Maintenance cost covered by the operator of the arena
Existing Arena
City Contribution = $50M for deferred maintenance within 5 years
City Contribution = $2M a year for annual maintenance over the next 25 years(based on current maintenance)
Total City Contribution = $100M
Difference between two scenarios = $25M