Arena Powerpoint


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Arena Powerpoint

  1. 1. Candy Mountain: Edmonton’s Proposed Downtown Arena
  2. 2.
  3. 3. “ Attracting teams and building bigger or newer facilities was not associated with economic growth, or changes in the levels of any of these economic indicators. Professional sports are not, and have never been, engines of economic growth in North American cities. They are effective at moving consumer’s entertainment from one part of the city to another, and raising employment and wages in one specific sector of the local economy, the Recreation and Amusements sector, which contains professional sports teams.” -Professor Brad Humphreys
  4. 4. Background <ul><li>Oilers joined NHL in 1979, have won 5 Stanley Cups </li></ul><ul><li>Plebiscite to build downtown “Omniplex” failed in 1970 municipal by-election </li></ul><ul><li>Northlands Coliseum opened in 1974, now Rexall Place </li></ul><ul><li>Oilers lease agreement with Northlands ends in 2014 </li></ul><ul><li>Estimated cost of building new arena (and surrounding facilities) have ranged from $250 million to $1 billion dollars </li></ul><ul><li>Estimated worth of Daryl Katz is $1.5 billion (2009) </li></ul>
  5. 5. Proponents <ul><li>Arena is old (4th oldest active arena in NHL) </li></ul><ul><li>Arena is outdated (bathrooms, seating, throughways all too crowded, dressing rooms too small, media facility needs upgrading) </li></ul><ul><li>Positive economic impact on Edmonton </li></ul><ul><li>New arena will revitalize downtown core (anchor tenant in massive redevelopment project) </li></ul><ul><li>New arena will make Edmonton “world-class city” </li></ul><ul><li>Need to compete/competitive advantage </li></ul>
  6. 6. Opponents <ul><li>Owner can afford to pay for it himself </li></ul><ul><li>Academic research consistently shows little to no economic benefit to taxpayers to subsidize </li></ul><ul><li>Proponents provided no hard data in terms of positive economic or revitalization impact </li></ul><ul><li>Cost will be much higher than announced (average overrun on arenas is 40%) </li></ul><ul><li>Arena will be empty majority of every year </li></ul><ul><li>Current location just fine (12th busiest concert venue in the world) </li></ul>
  7. 7. Opponents cont. <ul><li>Oilers currently net-contributors to NHL’s revenue sharing system (they are “haves” not “have-nots”) </li></ul><ul><li>Enjoy experience and history of current Rexall Place </li></ul><ul><li>Current location one of few historic buildings still left in NHL (more Stanley Cup wins than any other active NHL arena) </li></ul><ul><li>Oilers and Mayor manufactured false need for new arena </li></ul><ul><li>Will not solve problem of density in downtown core </li></ul><ul><li>Vast majority of public opposed to use of public dollars (76%) </li></ul>
  8. 8. “ Pr oponents of using public funds to finance stadium construction argue that the benefits from increased economic activity and increased tax revenue collection exceed the public outlays. But independent economic studies universally find such benefits to be much smaller than claimed. So does it makes sense for metro areas to use public funds to attract and retain major league sports franchises? The answer is definitely not if benefits are limited to increases in economic activity and tax revenue collection. A strong case can be made, however, that the quality-of-life benefits from hosting a major league team can sometimes justify the large public outlays associated with doing so. ” -Rappaport-Wilkerson Report
  9. 9. “ City Shaping” Recommendations <ul><li>$450 million dollar arena facility (just capital costs) as part of multipurpose “ac tivity district” </li></ul><ul><li>18,000 seats (current arena has 16,839) </li></ul><ul><li>More boxes and suites (64 luxury suites, 12 bunker suites, 2 party suites, two restaurants, club lounge) </li></ul><ul><li>30% private funding, 70% public funding through debt financing (Community Revitalization Levy) </li></ul><ul><li>Fate of current Rexall Place unknown </li></ul><ul><li>“ Why downtown? It has to be downtown.” </li></ul>
  10. 10. “ City Shaping” Failings <ul><li>No hard evidence/numbers on positive economic impact </li></ul><ul><li>No hard evidence/numbers on downtown revitalization </li></ul><ul><li>No exploration of sites in Edmonton other than downtown </li></ul><ul><li>More suites good for owner (only 65% tied to HRR) and corporations, but not necessarily good for average fan </li></ul><ul><li>Committee members hand-picked by Mayor </li></ul>
  11. 11. “ City Shaping” Failings cont. <ul><li>Seven of nine members on Committee with ties to Oilers, City, Northlands (no public involvement) </li></ul><ul><li>Neither the public, nor members of City Council, allowed to see some of the findings (HOK Study and CSL Report never released) </li></ul><ul><li>Would not release expected revenues and expenses </li></ul>
  12. 12. “ I am somewhat leery of simply looking at the best-case-scenarios from other cities and concluding: “i t happened there, it will happen here. ” 29 new arenas and stadiums have opened in North America since 2000. Columbus and San Diego are probably the most wildly successful. The others are less successful, some much less successful, in terms of revitalizing the surrounding area. For example, the new football and baseball stadiums in Cincinnati and Pittsburgh, four facilities, have had very little impact on the surrounding areas. It is possible to have a profound effect on the surrounding community, but it is far from certain that this will happen. -Professor Brad Humphreys
  13. 13. Final Thoughts <ul><li>Opposed to public funding of new arena </li></ul><ul><li>Not opposed to revitalizing downtown </li></ul><ul><li>Simply not best use of land or public resources </li></ul><ul><li>New arena will not make Edmonton “world-class city” </li></ul><ul><li>New arena will not make downtown “Greenwich Village of Western Canada” </li></ul><ul><li>Any use of public dollars to build new arena should be put to plebiscite </li></ul>