"I've never been as mad at anything and just so disappointed in the lack of vision of a {federal} government," Mayor Stephen Mandel said during an emotional news conference Monday afternoon.
Mandel mentioned something I remeber in his news conference yesterday. About a year a go, there was a 'big announcement' news conference called, with the federal and provincial industry ministers. The big announcment was 2 new bus stops and a duck pond for Edmonton. Imagine! A new Duck pond! WOW!
The same day, they announced $1Billion for LRT upgrades for Toronto.
This Mr. Harper should remember, is how the old Reform Party came into being. Because the Mulroney Tories got too comfortable with their favourable position with Western voters. We only take so many hockey arenas in Quebec before we revolt.
This will turn out to be a blessing in disguise for all of us; ROC. Edmonton city clowncil does not have a good fiscal decision- making history. You've got to know that mandel & co. quote the lowest possible price in order to get their Raa-Raa past the people. Then later; KA CHING! Note; the Edmonton Indy- he said that if the Indy was 'such a good deal' then private finance should step-up. Appears that will happen. I don't think that any Expo ever 'made money' for the host city! Priorities Stevie. Priorities! You don't put off paying the utilities in order to be able to 'afford' to go on holidays!
"Yogi" said This will turn out to be a blessing in disguise for all of us; ROC. Edmonton city clowncil does not have a good fiscal decision- making history. You've got to know that mandel & co. quote the lowest possible price in order to get their Raa-Raa past the people. Then later; KA CHING! Note; the Edmonton Indy- he said that if the Indy was 'such a good deal' then private finance should step-up. Appears that will happen. I don't think that any Expo ever 'made money' for the host city! Priorities Stevie. Priorities! You don't put off paying the utilities in order to be able to 'afford' to go on holidays!
Cities don't hold events like Expo or an Indy race to make money. They do it for the 'advertising' for future tourism, and legacy projects that enhance infrastructure. (If they ever get off their ass and make a permanent track for the Indy, like Circe Gilles Villeneuve, then they can start to see a profit. There will never be a profit with a temporary Indy track.)
Look at the '78 Commonwealth games. 32 years on, the Stadium is still heavily used, and the LRT has doubled in length and ridership. The Kinsmen sports centre is equally utilized. It had a lasting legacy on the city.
How much benefit came for the '86 Expo to Vancouver? Did they have any affect on getting the Olympics?
I guess the Feds think a Billion dollars for a long weekend of the G8/G20 summit for them to say "We'll have to think about these things and make up our minds later", is OK in Toronto, but legacy projects in the West are just fiscally irresponsible.
And I hope the Indy comes back, just to wipe Council's face in it.
I have no problem understanding the 'advertising for future tourism' aspect, but now is not the time. The focus be on immediate needs! Or else Edmontonians, and others, will be 'sitting in the dark & cold, eating balogna sandwhiches' while they 'ohh & ahh' over the photos of that 'long ago holiday'!
I have missed something, so perhaps someone would be kind enough to explain to me exactly how I have benefitted from 'Expo 86' in B.C.
"Yogi" said I have no problem understanding the 'advertising for future tourism' aspect, but now is not the time. The focus be on immediate needs! Or else Edmontonians, and others, will be 'sitting in the dark & cold, eating balogna sandwhiches' while they 'ohh & ahh' over the photos of that 'long ago holiday'!
I have missed something, so perhaps someone would be kind enough to explain to me exactly how I have benefitted from 'Expo 86' in B.C.
What 'immediate needs' though? Housing? Taxes? Food? And what about planning for the future? The money from the Feds would be used to improve infrastructure - like a new North-South bridge to replace the 100 year old Walterdale Bridge. And to expand the LRT.
We just got the first new LRT leg since the original line went operational for the 1978 Commonwealth games! Ridership was so heavy on the first day, they decided to add 5 more cars to the trains, and those filled up! The whole point being to get cars off the road, and reduce infrastructure costs in the long term. Thereby forgoing tax increases, making housing cheaper and putting food on tables.
I don't know what Expo '86s legacy was, that's why I asked. I know Calgary's 1988 Olympic legacy in buildings and training facilities is why we kicked ass at the Vancouver Olympics. So since it was the Feds that encouraged Edmonton to proceed with an Expo bid two years ago, you'd think they'd at least throw some bone our way.
"DrCaleb" said I have no problem understanding the 'advertising for future tourism' aspect, but now is not the time. The focus be on immediate needs! Or else Edmontonians, and others, will be 'sitting in the dark & cold, eating balogna sandwhiches' while they 'ohh & ahh' over the photos of that 'long ago holiday'!
I have missed something, so perhaps someone would be kind enough to explain to me exactly how I have benefitted from 'Expo 86' in B.C.
What 'immediate needs' though? Housing? Taxes? Food? And what about planning for the future? The money from the Feds would be used to improve infrastructure - like a new North-South bridge to replace the 100 year old Walterdale Bridge. And to expand the LRT.
We just got the first new LRT leg since the original line went operational for the 1978 Commonwealth games! Ridership was so heavy on the first day, they decided to add 5 more cars to the trains, and those filled up! The whole point being to get cars off the road, and reduce infrastructure costs in the long term. Thereby forgoing tax increases, making housing cheaper and putting food on tables.
I don't know what Expo '86s legacy was, that's why I asked. I know Calgary's 1988 Olympic legacy in buildings and training facilities is why we kicked ass at the Vancouver Olympics. So since it was the Feds that encouraged Edmonton to proceed with an Expo bid two years ago, you'd think they'd at least throw some bone our way.
And Proc - has Harper said 'no' to Q.C. yet?
Mandel & Co.s penchant for grandiosity aside, forget about their bid for expo (17 million chasing a dream. How much housing or tax breaks would that provide?) and they could come up with the necessary infrastructure funding if it is deemed 'necessary'. 'Necessary spending' being the key phrase. It's long overdue for 'someone' to have finally gien clowncil a good goddamn shaking, and tell them to " Never mind trying to catch a fucking dream. It's time to grab onto a piece of reality"!
"DrCaleb" said Cities don't hold events like Expo or an Indy race to make money. They do it for the 'advertising' for future tourism, and legacy projects that enhance infrastructure. (If they ever get off their ass and make a permanent track for the Indy, like Circe Gilles Villeneuve, then they can start to see a profit. There will never be a profit with a temporary Indy track.)
Look at the '78 Commonwealth games. 32 years on, the Stadium is still heavily used, and the LRT has doubled in length and ridership. The Kinsmen sports centre is equally utilized. It had a lasting legacy on the city.
How much benefit came for the '86 Expo to Vancouver? Did they have any affect on getting the Olympics?
I guess the Feds think a Billion dollars for a long weekend of the G8/G20 summit for them to say "We'll have to think about these things and make up our minds later", is OK in Toronto, but legacy projects in the West are just fiscally irresponsible.
And I hope the Indy comes back, just to wipe Council's face in it.
I was all for it, because like you, I see the long term benefit big events bring our cities, but Mandel/Krushell's blundering with the Indy gave this city a public black eye that will take a long time to recover. That kind of decision-making would have come back to haunt us even if the Feds had paid the $706 million.
"They do it for the 'advertising' for future tourism, and legacy projects that enhance infrastructure."
true, but this is not a tourism economy.
"I was all for it, because like you, I see the long term benefit big events bring our cities, but Mandel/Krushell's blundering with the Indy gave this city a public black eye that will take a long time to recover. That kind of decision-making would have come back to haunt us even if the Feds had paid the $706 million."
bullseye. shaky economics + bad reputation = no 700MM for you.
..i think you can count Ireland out for literally the same reasons..
"Proculation" said Harper could not say no to Quebec City and yes to Edmonton. So he decided to say no to both.
Sure he could, they're completely seperate issues. This is just another example of the Tories taking Alberta for granted. Just like Mulroney did. That worked out well for his party didn't it? Just like they decided to cancel the whole National Portrait Gallery thing when Edmonton was the only bidder that met the requirments. They just want to be responsible with taxpayer dollars, unless they think being irresponsible will benefit them in Quebec or Ontario.
Maybe we 'll go ahead with Expo 2017 and use it to celebrate Alberta's Independence!?!
"Yogi" said I have no problem understanding the 'advertising for future tourism' aspect, but now is not the time. The focus be on immediate needs! Or else Edmontonians, and others, will be 'sitting in the dark & cold, eating balogna sandwhiches' while they 'ohh & ahh' over the photos of that 'long ago holiday'!
I have missed something, so perhaps someone would be kind enough to explain to me exactly how I have benefitted from 'Expo 86' in B.C.
Unless you live in Vancouver, you wouldn't have benefited from Expo '86.
This wasn't about advertising the city for tourism purposes at all - although it wouldn't have hurt either.
Here's a major way Edmonton would have benefited from Expo 2017;
It would have acted as an accelerant on river valley commercial and residential development, while pushing ahead building plans at the University of Alberta by decades. About half of the budget, about $1.1 billion or $1.2 billion, was going to be used to build Expo facilities at the South Campus, which would later be turned into campus buildings, a massive legacy of the event, Franceschini says.
Tack on added infrastructure spending like roads, LRT, etc, and it would have been a boon to this city.
Do you know why Calgary has such an extensive LRT system compared to Edmonton? Because it was funded by massive amounts of fed/prov money before the '88 Olympics. After that, it was simply a matter of extending it once the basic system was in place. Edmonton - without the Olympics - had to fund the LRT largely on its own and that's why there's a huge difference.
It's also why I thought the Olympics were great for Vancouver - they got new subway stations, new arenas, a twinned highway to Whistler, etc. Those things will all help make Vancouver a better place in the coming decades.
Of course, the big problem here is that Edmonton blindly votes Conservative every election and Harper et al obviously thought that if they were going to spend money on a big event, they would prefer to do so in Ontario or Quebec, where they can maybe win some seats. That's probably a big reason they funded Toronto's 2015 Pan-AM Games bid but not Edmonton's Expo bid.
The thing that gets me is that Harper knows that it was taking the west for granted that led to the Reform party in the first place. This kind of thing is could easily lead to another iteration of the Reform. Only thing is, will the new party also learn from the past and realize that as long as we're tied to vote-rich central Canada we'll always be ignored?
The same day, they announced $1Billion for LRT upgrades for Toronto.
This Mr. Harper should remember, is how the old Reform Party came into being. Because the Mulroney Tories got too comfortable with their favourable position with Western voters. We only take so many hockey arenas in Quebec before we revolt.
Priorities Stevie. Priorities! You don't put off paying the utilities in order to be able to 'afford' to go on holidays!
This will turn out to be a blessing in disguise for all of us; ROC. Edmonton city clowncil does not have a good fiscal decision- making history. You've got to know that mandel & co. quote the lowest possible price in order to get their Raa-Raa past the people. Then later; KA CHING! Note; the Edmonton Indy- he said that if the Indy was 'such a good deal' then private finance should step-up. Appears that will happen. I don't think that any Expo ever 'made money' for the host city!
Priorities Stevie. Priorities! You don't put off paying the utilities in order to be able to 'afford' to go on holidays!
Cities don't hold events like Expo or an Indy race to make money. They do it for the 'advertising' for future tourism, and legacy projects that enhance infrastructure. (If they ever get off their ass and make a permanent track for the Indy, like Circe Gilles Villeneuve, then they can start to see a profit. There will never be a profit with a temporary Indy track.)
Look at the '78 Commonwealth games. 32 years on, the Stadium is still heavily used, and the LRT has doubled in length and ridership. The Kinsmen sports centre is equally utilized. It had a lasting legacy on the city.
How much benefit came for the '86 Expo to Vancouver? Did they have any affect on getting the Olympics?
I guess the Feds think a Billion dollars for a long weekend of the G8/G20 summit for them to say "We'll have to think about these things and make up our minds later", is OK in Toronto, but legacy projects in the West are just fiscally irresponsible.
And I hope the Indy comes back, just to wipe Council's face in it.
I have missed something, so perhaps someone would be kind enough to explain to me exactly how I have benefitted from 'Expo 86' in B.C.
I have no problem understanding the 'advertising for future tourism' aspect, but now is not the time. The focus be on immediate needs! Or else Edmontonians, and others, will be 'sitting in the dark & cold, eating balogna sandwhiches' while they 'ohh & ahh' over the photos of that 'long ago holiday'!
I have missed something, so perhaps someone would be kind enough to explain to me exactly how I have benefitted from 'Expo 86' in B.C.
What 'immediate needs' though? Housing? Taxes? Food? And what about planning for the future? The money from the Feds would be used to improve infrastructure - like a new North-South bridge to replace the 100 year old Walterdale Bridge. And to expand the LRT.
We just got the first new LRT leg since the original line went operational for the 1978 Commonwealth games! Ridership was so heavy on the first day, they decided to add 5 more cars to the trains, and those filled up! The whole point being to get cars off the road, and reduce infrastructure costs in the long term. Thereby forgoing tax increases, making housing cheaper and putting food on tables.
I don't know what Expo '86s legacy was, that's why I asked. I know Calgary's 1988 Olympic legacy in buildings and training facilities is why we kicked ass at the Vancouver Olympics. So since it was the Feds that encouraged Edmonton to proceed with an Expo bid two years ago, you'd think they'd at least throw some bone our way.
And Proc - has Harper said 'no' to Q.C. yet?
I have no problem understanding the 'advertising for future tourism' aspect, but now is not the time. The focus be on immediate needs! Or else Edmontonians, and others, will be 'sitting in the dark & cold, eating balogna sandwhiches' while they 'ohh & ahh' over the photos of that 'long ago holiday'!
I have missed something, so perhaps someone would be kind enough to explain to me exactly how I have benefitted from 'Expo 86' in B.C.
What 'immediate needs' though? Housing? Taxes? Food? And what about planning for the future? The money from the Feds would be used to improve infrastructure - like a new North-South bridge to replace the 100 year old Walterdale Bridge. And to expand the LRT.
We just got the first new LRT leg since the original line went operational for the 1978 Commonwealth games! Ridership was so heavy on the first day, they decided to add 5 more cars to the trains, and those filled up! The whole point being to get cars off the road, and reduce infrastructure costs in the long term. Thereby forgoing tax increases, making housing cheaper and putting food on tables.
I don't know what Expo '86s legacy was, that's why I asked. I know Calgary's 1988 Olympic legacy in buildings and training facilities is why we kicked ass at the Vancouver Olympics. So since it was the Feds that encouraged Edmonton to proceed with an Expo bid two years ago, you'd think they'd at least throw some bone our way.
And Proc - has Harper said 'no' to Q.C. yet?
Mandel & Co.s penchant for grandiosity aside, forget about their bid for expo (17 million chasing a dream. How much housing or tax breaks would that provide?) and they could come up with the necessary infrastructure funding if it is deemed 'necessary'. 'Necessary spending' being the key phrase. It's long overdue for 'someone' to have finally gien clowncil a good goddamn shaking, and tell them to " Never mind trying to catch a fucking dream. It's time to grab onto a piece of reality"!
Cities don't hold events like Expo or an Indy race to make money. They do it for the 'advertising' for future tourism, and legacy projects that enhance infrastructure. (If they ever get off their ass and make a permanent track for the Indy, like Circe Gilles Villeneuve, then they can start to see a profit. There will never be a profit with a temporary Indy track.)
Look at the '78 Commonwealth games. 32 years on, the Stadium is still heavily used, and the LRT has doubled in length and ridership. The Kinsmen sports centre is equally utilized. It had a lasting legacy on the city.
How much benefit came for the '86 Expo to Vancouver? Did they have any affect on getting the Olympics?
I guess the Feds think a Billion dollars for a long weekend of the G8/G20 summit for them to say "We'll have to think about these things and make up our minds later", is OK in Toronto, but legacy projects in the West are just fiscally irresponsible.
And I hope the Indy comes back, just to wipe Council's face in it.
I was all for it, because like you, I see the long term benefit big events bring our cities, but Mandel/Krushell's blundering with the Indy gave this city a public black eye that will take a long time to recover. That kind of decision-making would have come back to haunt us even if the Feds had paid the $706 million.
true, but this is not a tourism economy.
"I was all for it, because like you, I see the long term benefit big events bring our cities, but Mandel/Krushell's blundering with the Indy gave this city a public black eye that will take a long time to recover. That kind of decision-making would have come back to haunt us even if the Feds had paid the $706 million."
bullseye. shaky economics + bad reputation = no 700MM for you.
..i think you can count Ireland out for literally the same reasons..
Harper could not say no to Quebec City and yes to Edmonton. So he decided to say no to both.
Sure he could, they're completely seperate issues. This is just another example of the Tories taking Alberta for granted. Just like Mulroney did. That worked out well for his party didn't it? Just like they decided to cancel the whole National Portrait Gallery thing when Edmonton was the only bidder that met the requirments. They just want to be responsible with taxpayer dollars, unless they think being irresponsible will benefit them in Quebec or Ontario.
Maybe we 'll go ahead with Expo 2017 and use it to celebrate Alberta's Independence!?!
I have no problem understanding the 'advertising for future tourism' aspect, but now is not the time. The focus be on immediate needs! Or else Edmontonians, and others, will be 'sitting in the dark & cold, eating balogna sandwhiches' while they 'ohh & ahh' over the photos of that 'long ago holiday'!
I have missed something, so perhaps someone would be kind enough to explain to me exactly how I have benefitted from 'Expo 86' in B.C.
Unless you live in Vancouver, you wouldn't have benefited from Expo '86.
This wasn't about advertising the city for tourism purposes at all - although it wouldn't have hurt either.
Here's a major way Edmonton would have benefited from Expo 2017;
http://www.edmontonjournal.com/business ... story.html
That alone was worth the cost IMHO.
Tack on added infrastructure spending like roads, LRT, etc, and it would have been a boon to this city.
Do you know why Calgary has such an extensive LRT system compared to Edmonton? Because it was funded by massive amounts of fed/prov money before the '88 Olympics. After that, it was simply a matter of extending it once the basic system was in place. Edmonton - without the Olympics - had to fund the LRT largely on its own and that's why there's a huge difference.
It's also why I thought the Olympics were great for Vancouver - they got new subway stations, new arenas, a twinned highway to Whistler, etc. Those things will all help make Vancouver a better place in the coming decades.
Of course, the big problem here is that Edmonton blindly votes Conservative every election and Harper et al obviously thought that if they were going to spend money on a big event, they would prefer to do so in Ontario or Quebec, where they can maybe win some seats. That's probably a big reason they funded Toronto's 2015 Pan-AM Games bid but not Edmonton's Expo bid.