Exactly this.
Do oil or tech or whichever companies ask for public money when they erect their headquarters in Calgary?
I know that ofter they get some sort of tax incentive but seeing as both CSEC and say, Husky for example, are private corporations, why does one require millions in public money for the construction of their operating space and the other doesn't?
Have been beating this drum for a long time, and there are enough examples of other municipalities having their professional sports ownerships pay for their own private arenas. Why can't Calgary?
There's a bit of a difference when you're talking about the "public benefit" of an arena project with attached infrastructure and all sorts of other stores, restaurants, facilities that thrive on that public draw...compared to an oil company HQ office tower. The arena project and surrounding development create more vibrant activity, with people circulating in the area, patronizing businesses, putting money into the area and using population movement to create an uplifting effect on the "quality" of the area.
An oil company office tower adds minimal benefit from 9-5, and absolutely zero benefit after "quitting time". Where the tower empties out, everyone goes home...and you get absolutely nothing to add life and vibrancy to the area. Especially when there's a ton of empty office towers in downtown Calgary (and Edmonton) anyway.
I don't really like this use of public funds to support a semi-private sports enterprise project. But there's at least a reasonable case that an arena district project
can have some benefit to the city and public.
Could they not modernize the current arena. Surely that would be more environmentally friendly and less expensive ? They're doing that with the Glenbow Museum (pity as I'm visiting in July and August). Which is progressive and forward thinking trying to turn that into a destination museum.
How about spending taxpayers money on speeding up the C-Transit extensions, homelessness and other social issues ?
This sort of idea that the public fund privately owned teams would never fly in the UK. When Manchester City and West Ham acquired taxpayer funded arenas (given the fact they may turn into white elephants post Commonwealth and Olympic Games) there was still a huge storm of controversy.
50/50 I liked both but there's a serious shortage of trees in Calgary. Edmonton wins hands down on that.
While i kind of agree...a renovation of the Saddledome would've been nice...the way Vancouver updated GM Place/Rogers Arena around the Olympics...i'm not sure if the Glenbow is a compelling case for that sort of endeavour. Hasn't that project run into some pretty big issues and projected cost overruns? That's also a comparatively straightforward project, compared to what the Saddledome would require.
The timeline involved is probably the biggest obstacle though. Those kind of extensive renovations to the Saddledome would take a lot longer than the Flames offseason (while also leaving Calgary with no major downtown arena for other events through the summer). It's just a sort of unfortunate reality that developing a new arena next door to the existing one allows for better continuity of service.
I agree as a whole though. Spending this kind of public money on an arena vanity project is really throwing cash at the symptom, rather than the underlying problem there. I do think that this arena project could help get the Green Line LRT expansion on track. This new arena project is going to interface with that intended course. I'm curious to see if that sort of development spurs more action on that development in the same area, at the same time.
What's the specific on what the city gets for it's funding and what economic benefit the new event center would provide for the city? The city is supposed to spend tax dollars on projects that help the city. Whether or not it can be privately funded or not doesn't matter, and certainly doesn't matter whether some individual taxpayer will benefit from it or not.
I think the reality is, it's not about providing economic benefit for the city directly. It's about providing economic benefit for developers, which
in theory provides additional tax/revenue for the city in a roundabout way. Not just the developers involved in the arena project itself, but surrounding infrastructure development, as well as other nearby development projects.
I would be shocked if a big part of making this happen behind the scenes, wasn't related to that megaproject with three 40-60 story towers, and some sort of massive 9 story indoor mall slated for that area right at the crook of the Elbow just SW of this new arena project. That's an economic cash cow for the city and a new arena district project and infrastructure improvements a few blocks away has a clear influence on the viability of that sort of project.
Really cute that there's so many Albertans that seem to think this is the first recorded instance in history of public money benefitting private enterprise.
Like, have they just been living with their head in the sand for the last 50 years in this province or.. what exactly? Provincial, municipal and federal governments have given billions out to oil companies in the form of tax incentives, infrastructure, and major project funding.
But this is about a hockey arena, and people have strong feelings on that I guess.
Would I rather have had CSEC pay in full? Yeah sure, that would've been ideal. But they're a business trying to get the best possible deal, as all businesses do and is actually a fiduciary duty to their shareholders. The people who say this serves no benefit to the city are just plain wrong too, they're not bulldozing family homes and playgrounds. It's parking lots and crack houses in an area that could really benefit from revitalization.
I don't know that it's really compelling to say, "well the government has irresponsibly thrown tons of money at a bunch of other bad things". lol. But it's true. The extent of assistance, funding, tax breaks, etc. thrown at the oil and gas industry has been truly staggering over the years. Just looking at the masses of orphan wells that the government (over multiple regimes and parties) has thrown money at, letting these companies come in, pillage what they want, and disappear into the night without cleaning up their shit when they leave, is truly astounding. By comparison, an arena project with some public benefit at least vaguely conceivable looks alright.
This city spent 25 million on a giant blue ring and a chinese fingertrap pedestrian bridge. They spent 300 million on a pretty public library when you know, the internet exists. They funneled millions and millions of dollars into the East Village only to make the area next to worthless by reupping the Drop In center's lease.
And yet they continue to fail upwards and run a 200M surplus year after year. Is a sports arena a good investment? No. It was never going to be and that's assumed. But it has a whole lot more merit and does a lot more to raise the standard of living for its citizens than a lot of the other bs they've done.
Part of the reason that fingertrap bridge is so expensive, is that people keep breaking it. I don't think it was a mistake to create something unique and aspirational. I think it was a mistake to not address some of the other underlying problems in the city, before putting up a fancy art piece to get smashed up.
It seems like they're trying to follow the blueprint of Vancouver with Hastings-Sunrise. But haven't really invested properly in the social structures that can make a project like that successful. So they just have that really jarring dichotomy of rich and poor creating a really disjointed feeling around that area as a whole.
300 million on a library makes it more of an art project than a library, I appreciate the shared spaces it has but it probably has one book in it for every $15,000 spent
I don't think you're really grasping what a "library" is about in the year 2023. Yes, it's a repository for books. But it's more important functions are as a community center. It's not intended to be a "book warehouse". It's a place for people to gather and interact and build a sense of community. It's the sort of public social institution that actually
does help to uplift the area and community as a whole.
Personally, i think it's ugly as heck. But it is well crafted and serves a purpose as a magnet for community interaction. A place for new, marginalized, and niche communities to grow and integrate as part of the city and community as a whole. It's a place where kids can visit and experience a version of "downtown" that
isn't scary and bad. Giving a little glimmer of hope to the future.
I've gone to the library a few times. It's pretty cool. Some of it feels like it should be a wing of the science centre than being a library. But without kids, I'm not sure that most people would willingly go to the central library for no reason.
IF that area is revitalized, it'd be an ultra cool place to be for sure. For now, I can see why some people refuse to go to the area. It's not awful, but the area is kinda disjointed vs the East village area.
This comes back to the crux of the issue i guess. Is a new arena project going to fix the underlying problems that make that area so disjointed in the first place? What could you do with a billion dollars of social supports, transitional accommodations, etc.?
I think an arena project
can be a useful investment...but it has to be coupled with other investment to really comprehensively solve the issue. That's where it's frustrating that the private billionaire responsible for the sportsball team isn't ponying up more of the bill here. Which would allow more of that public money to be reallocated toward other supporting projects that depend on public money because there's no direct "profit" evident for private investment.
