Tag: yegarena

Roundup: Edmonton’s downtown arena will be called Rogers Place

This afternoon at Startup Edmonton, Rexall Sports (or should that be the Edmonton Arena Corporation) announced that it has reached a deal with Rogers Communications on the naming rights for Edmonton’s new downtown arena. When it opens in 2016, it’ll be known as Rogers Place.

Rogers Place

Here’s what the folks involved had to say. First, Daryl Katz:

“Today’s announcement helps make the new arena a reality and underscores its potential to make downtown Edmonton a magnet for our community and for new investment by world-class companies like Rogers.”

Here’s what Rogers Communications Executive Vice-President and Chief Marketing Officer John Boynton said:

“Today’s announcement builds on our long-term commitment to the Edmonton Oilers, its hockey fans and our investment in Alberta. Rogers Place will be one of the most technologically enabled stadiums in North America; we look forward to bringing passionate fans a connected game experience powered by the country’s fastest LTE network.”

And here’s what Mayor Don Iveson said:

“This is a great day for Edmonton’s downtown and our city. Rogers Place will become a beacon in our downtown, one that will foster a new sense of energy that will further attract development and investment in the heart of our city.”

Here’s a look at how the arena is envisioned to fit into the new downtown:

The name certainly didn’t inspire everyone, but some were more annoyed by the revenue than the name. Under the terms of the agreement between City Council and Daryl Katz, his Edmonton Arena Corporation (EAC) would receive revenue from the naming rights:

EAC will operate the new arena and pay all operating and maintenance expenses, and will receive all operating revenues, including naming rights and parking revenue.

Of course, no financial terms were disclosed as part of today’s announcement. Rogers said the deal is part of its previously announced investment into Alberta:

Rogers announced on October 1st a $700M commitment over the next four years to further enhance and expand Rogers LTE – Canada’s fastest LTE network, open additional retail locations, fuel business growth and continue to build its presence in sports in Edmonton and across Alberta.

In addition to network enhancements, new retail locations, and new business services, Rogers acquired the official sponsorship and marketing rights for the Edmonton Oilers, Edmonton Oil Kings, and Rexall Place.

Rogers Place

I’m happy that the arena has a name and has moved another step toward becoming a reality, but I do think this is a missed opportunity for Edmonton. Rogers benefits from this deal obviously, but Edmonton doesn’t because “Rogers Place” could be anywhere. This is something we get wrong so often, partly because of our “capital city curse” as I like to call it, but partly because we don’t have a strong brand to hang these sorts of things on. Sure, most arenas and sporting complexes carry a sponsored name, but isn’t that a great opportunity to be different? Instead, it’s all about the money.

David Staples seems to agree with me on this point:

“The first naming of the arena, back in 1974 when it was called the Edmonton Coliseum was the best. That was the right name for our building. It still is.”

Yup. Too bad.

Here’s some other reaction from around the web:

https://twitter.com/OilersNation/status/407971780406435840

https://twitter.com/EricWarnke/status/408089659978571776

https://twitter.com/uncleheth/status/408084022309289985

In a vote on the Cult of Hockey blog, “Rogers Coliseum” seemed to be the favorite choice, ahead of “Some other name entirely” and “Rogers Place” in last. In a poll on Global’s website, more than 60% said they didn’t like the name “Rogers Place”. You can watch an overview of the announcement at CTV Edmonton. Also check out the Huffington Post’s coverage here.

You can learn more about Rogers Place on its new website. You can also follow it on Twitter.

Edmonton’s downtown arena is finally approved; get on board and help make it a success

City Council voted in favor of the arena today by a vote of 10-3, and while there are some things still outstanding (final approval of the CRL, approval of the regional grant) the project is most likely going to move ahead. This one feels final. We could argue about the deal forever, but it’s now done. I’m not happy about all the specifics, but I’m happy that we can move past this endless debate and get on to more important things.

Now that we know there’s going to be a shiny new arena downtown, it’s time to get on board and help to ensure that the project is as successful as possible. The hard work doesn’t stop with approval of the deal…it’s really just beginning.

There’s a lot of outstanding questions that need to be explored, including:

  • How does the deal impact the City of Edmonton’s debt and debt servicing levels?
  • What will the marketing/branding partnership with the Oilers actually look like?
  • Will the Gretzky statue get relocated?
  • What happens to the Baccarat Casino?
  • What is the impact of this decision on Rexall Place and Northlands? Can we sustain two large venues?
  • I’d rather see local restaurants and shops in the new arena than chains. How can we ensure the arena benefits local?
  • How does replacing MSI funding with additional CRL funding impact other downtown projects? How can we ensure those still move forward?
  • Where is the list of property developers ready to announce projects in the downtown area? What else do we need to do to ensure that surrounding development goes ahead?
  • What happens if the CRL doesn’t result in the lift we all hope for? What’s plan B, C, and D?
  • If the arena is the carrot to entice speculators to do something with their empty parking lots, taxation/policy changes are the stick. How can we get the stick implemented too?
  • How are Administration and Council going to learn from this to ensure future large projects follow a much smoother process, with more communication and transparency, and less ambiguity?
  • How will construction of the arena impact residents and businesses downtown, especially considering it’ll take place alongside a number of other large construction projects like the LRT?  How can we reduce that impact?
  • What else is the City of Edmonton prepared to do to support downtown’s ongoing revitalization? How soon can we get other related projects off the ground?

And my favorite:

  • When will Mayor Mandel announce he’s not running in the October election?

In his closing remarks, Councillor Henderson noted that the downtown arena “is not a magic wand”. For it to work, a lot of other things need to happen alongside and around the project. It’s a big step, but it’s just one step, in ensuring our downtown continues to grow. We need to make sure we take those other steps too.

Edmonton’s downtown is being held hostage by the arena

Edmonton’s downtown hasn’t gotten its fair shake when it comes to capital funding over the last decade. There’s now a pretty pie chart that magically appeared to illustrate that (I’m not sure where the data comes from specifically, but it seems more or less accurate to me). I am totally on board with the idea that we should be putting our money where our mouths are. If downtown is so important to Edmonton, and I believe it is, we should be willing to back that up with dollars.

I think it’s fair to say I’m one of the biggest downtown supporters in the city. I talk about it all the time. I’ve organized plenty of events for downtown. I seeded the I ❤ YEGDT campaign. I built and operate the website. I work downtown. Sharon and I chose to live downtown and purchased a condo here.

With all of that said, I want to support what the newly formed Downtown Vibrancy Coalition is trying to do, but I’m finding it very difficult to get on board. Here’s what their backgrounder states:

“If we lose the arena – over a missing $55 million – approximately $3 billion in downtown revitalization projects will be shelved or scrapped. The arena represents only one-sixth of the proposed investment. But if the arena fails, Edmonton’s downtown will lose $2 billion of private investment in the related entertainment district – new hotels, office towers, retail shops, clubs – as well as downtown parks, a river valley promenade and Jasper Avenue streetscape enhancements.”

Every single time I read that, I can’t help but think: bullshit. Is downtown important or not?

This all stems from the August 2011 decision to make the proposed arena the centerpiece of the Community Revitalization Levy. I wrote in that post that I was worried we’d be doing more harm than good for downtown by tying the two together. Now, as we’re about the lose the arena, the impact of that decision is becoming clear. We’ve put all of our eggs in one basket, or at least that’s what it looks like.

But I see no reason why downtown revitalization has to die along with the arena. The notion that you need an anchor or catalyst project for a CRL to work is false (as proven by the existence of CRLs for The Quarters and Fort Road). Furthermore, we know that programs like housing incentives work and lead to the outcomes we want. There are ways to ensure downtown gets the funding it deserves with or without a shiny new arena. Why would everything need to be shelved or scrapped?

I would love to see a new arena built downtown, and I do agree that $55 million seems like a surmountable barrier. But I don’t like that MSI funding is being used to help pay for the arena and I really don’t like that our downtown is being held hostage by it.

Full disclosure: I’m a member of the Downtown Vibrancy Task Force and of ONEdmonton.

Edmonton City Council and Katz Group move forward on new downtown arena

Today was the latest episode in the downtown arena saga and it was a weird one. Council received an update from Administration on negotiations with the Katz Group and ultimately voted 10-3 to move forward with an altered deal, though one that still closely resembles the framework that was approved in October 2011. Today is being called a “landmark” day for Edmonton, and supporters of the arena are understandably happy that the project is moving ahead, even though they may not be entirely sure why.

Let’s start with what’s new. The price of the arena has gone up $30 million to $480 million, and that pushes the total cost of the project (including the community rink, land, and other elements) to more than $600 million. The other changes include:

  • The additional $30-million for the arena over the previous framework will be split between the City and the Katz Group
  • The LRT connection, solely funded by the City, has been reduced from $17-million to $7-million
  • Katz Group will pay for the slightly increased costs of the Winter Garden
  • Under the new framework, the City will own the arena and land, and the Katz Group will pay all operating costs and receive all revenues

There are some other changes too, such as a property tax clause that no one seems to understand. But the biggest difference? Congratulations and optimism all around. Speaking to the media afterward, Mayor Mandel declared:

“It’s 100%, a deal is done. All the other stuff is just going through some steps. I’m absolutely totally confident that we will go ahead…”

And here’s the statement from the Katz Group:

“This is a milestone agreement for a world class facility that will drive the ongoing revitalization of downtown Edmonton,” said Daryl Katz, Chair of the Katz Group. "It also helps to ensure the Oilers’ long-term sustainability in Edmonton. This has been a challenging process for all concerned but we are confident we will all look back on the end result with pride and satisfaction at what we have achieved. I want to thank City Council and City Administration for their work on this file. This is a great day for Edmonton and we are excited to get to work on realizing this incredible opportunity.”

You may recall that when the original agreement was passed in October 2011, there was quite a bit of optimism then too. But it wasn’t along the lines of “the deal is done” as much as it was about moving forward. To be fair, it’s not like there was cheering in Council Chambers today, as Paula noted:

“After all the years of negotiations, the vote was greeted by silence — followed by an awkwardly belated round of quiet applause from the Katz Group and their supporters.”

But for Mayor Mandel and Daryl Katz in particular, their comments represent a complete turnaround. Last September, the mayor was “frustrated” and issued a statement calling for “the Katz Group to clarify its full position.” In response, Daryl Katz wrote a letter in October in which he called for “more time and political leadership.” He said negotiations had “gone backwards” and noted there were 15 open issues. In December, the Mayor said “we’ve gone as far as we’re going to go” and said a deal had to be reached within six weeks.

My read of the report suggests fewer than 15 changes were made, but maybe Katz was just grandstanding in his letter. What’s most interesting of course are the things that have not changed.

There’s still $100 million missing from other orders of government (plus another $14 million for the community rink). Mayor Mandel today said he is “very confident” that the province will come to the table for that amount, but no one knows when or how. There’s also no guarantee that that province would approve the proposed downtown CRL (though it seems unlikely they would reject it) nor that the Katz Group will actually invest in the commercial development surrounding the arena (it’s all “subject to commercial viability”).

I don’t see much of a difference between today’s deal and the agreement from October 2011, but apparently it was enough for Mandel and Katz to declare that we’ve crossed the finish line.

So what’s next? Well someone needs to come forward with $114 million, for starters. Given that the City expects construction to start as early as August 2013, getting the remaining funding issues sorted out would seem to be the priority. But perhaps more importantly, this agreement significantly increases the likelihood that Mayor Mandel will decide not to run again in the next election. As Paula noted, that means “a new political game is just beginning.”

I’ll give Don Iveson the last word on today’s proceedings: “I don’t want our city to fight about this anymore. It’s been an open wound in Edmonton.”

The arena deal is dead, but the City of Edmonton came away the victor

After a heated discussion on the arena yesterday afternoon, City Council voted to cease all negotiations with the Katz Group and directed Administration to explore alternatives. Here are the three motions they passed:

  1. As a result of Mr. Katz’s letter and unwillingness to have an open discussion with Council and the frustration of the Interim Design Agreement, all negotiations and ongoing City work related to the October 26, 2011, framework cease immediately.
  2. That Administration provide a report, as soon as possible, to City Council to report on the completion of the cessation of negotiations and the status of the City’s current, transferable investments in a potential downtown arena project.
  3. That Administration provide a report outlining a framework for Council to explore potential avenues to achieve the long term goals of sustainable NHL Hockey in Edmonton.

That means the arena as we know it is dead, but it doesn’t mean that a new arena is completely off the table. With that third motion, Administration is empowered to explore alternatives to working with the Katz Group, which could mean the City builds a new arena by itself. Here’s the full video of Mayor Mandel and City Manager Simon Farbrother answering questions about yesterday’s meeting:

Supporters of the arena will no doubt lament the fact that we appear to be no further ahead than we were four years ago, but I don’t think that’s true. Here are some of the reasons that I think the City and Council came away the victors in this whole debacle:

  • The City owns the land. No matter what happens with the arena, that land was a great investment. And I’d much rather have the City own it than some speculator who is just going to sit on it.
  • The City owns the design of the arena. Last October, Council directed Administration to spend $30 million to get the design completed to 60%. The City can take this design to a new partner or use it as the basis for building the arena itself.
  • The City now has a head start on a CRL for downtown. I think a case could be made for a downtown CRL even without the arena. Maybe it would be scaled back, but all the work that has already been done to develop the CRL plans could be reused.
  • Council no longer look like the bad guys & gals. I’m no fan of the way that Council handled the negotiations over the last couple of years, but fortunately for them Katz handled things even more poorly!
  • It may seem as though Katz has the upper hand with the ability to move the team elsewhere, but that has always been an empty threat and remains so. The NHL still wants hockey in Edmonton, and I honestly believe that Katz wants to keep the Oilers here too. If anything has changed, it’s that the NHL would be even less likely to allow a move now that Council has done everything it can to work with the Katz Group.

I’m less confident this will actually come to pass, but I was encouraged by comments made yesterday by one of the Councillors that the “unprecedented” use of in-camera sessions should be avoided in the future. It’s clear that the private meetings did more harm than good in progressing the deal and getting Council what they wanted, and I hope that means Council will avoid in-camera sessions in the future.

The arena is getting all the attention right now, but in the grand scheme of things, there are far more important issues for Council to be dealing with. More than 150 neighbourhoods need renewal and it’s going to take billions to maintain all of that infrastructure. At the same time, Edmonton’s population and economy continue to grow much faster than the national average and that means big pressures in terms of where we put new infrastructure, how we move people efficiently throughout the city, etc. As soon as they were done with the arena issue yesterday, Council starting talking about the LRT.

Back to business.

Should MSI funding be used for Edmonton’s downtown arena?

Even if you’re optimistic and think the Katz Group and the City can resolve their current differences, let’s not forget that the arena project is short at least $100 million. Under the current agreement, that amount is slated to come from “other orders of government” such as the province. Over the last year or so, various ministers have stated that the province will not be providing any new funding for the arena. In May, Municipal Affairs Minister Doug Griffiths said:

“The province is not going to write a separate cheque for a particular project. We provide MSI funding for every municipality in the province, which is $896 million this year. We have proposed that’s going to increase. The reason why we do so is municipalities can choose what their priorities are.”

While the downtown arena project would certainly be eligible under the Municipal Sustainability Initiative (MSI), I have long wondered if it would really make sense to use our limited funding for that purpose. How much MSI funding do we have? What have we already spent? Can we really count on an increase? These are some of the question I’ll explore below.

What is the Municipal Sustainability Initiative (MSI)?

MSI is a way for the province to provide cities, towns, and other municipalities in the province with funding for infrastructure projects. From the MSI website:

In 2007, the $11.3 billion MSI program was announced to provide predictable, sustainable funding for our province’s municipal infrastructure projects to keep our municipalities strong.

The objectives of the program are:

  • To work in partnership with municipalities to manage growth pressures;
  • To provide municipalities with sustainable funding; and
  • To support infrastructure needs.

All eligible municipalities in the province receive an amount each year that is calculated based on the following formula:

  • 48% is allocated on a per capita basis;
  • 48% is allocated based on education property tax requisitions;
  • 4% is allocated based on kilometers of local roads.

A wide range of municipal projects are eligible for MSI funding, which means that each municipality can decide where the money is best spent.

How much MSI funding will the City of Edmonton receive?

Edmonton is slated to receive a total of $2.1 billion by the end of 2021. From 2007 through 2011, we received about $567 million. In order to take advantage of favorable economic conditions, Council also decided to fast-track another $250 million or so, which means we have used roughly $850 million in MSI funding already. This chart shows the amount of funding per year (with FT designating the fast-tracked amount):

That means we have roughly $1.3 billion still to come over the next ten years. The projected amounts for 2012-2021 take into consideration repayments on the fast-tracked amount. The City’s fast-tracking strategy requires an annual repayment of $57 million, including interest for five years, reducing the amount of MSI available in 2012-2016 by $285 million.

What have we spent our funding on so far?

The MSI website provides a list of accepted projects by year for each municipality in PDF. I extracted the data for Edmonton, and organized it in a spreadsheet. Based on the description, I categorized each project as either “new” or “existing” to indicate whether it was for a new asset or to rehabilitate/upgrade/repair an existing one. I also assigned each project a category such as “Parks” or “Transit”. Here’s what we have spent per year:

The total spent is roughly $850 million. The big jump in 2009 was the fast-tracked funding, which allowed us to take advantage of lower construction costs.

Here’s the breakdown of new vs. existing:

As you can see, roughly 53% of our MSI funding has been spent on “new” projects.

Here’s the breakdown by category:

The bulk of our MSI funding has been spent on transit and roads. Parks and recreation facilities are the only other two categories that have received more than $100 million in funding.

A total of 82 capital projects were listed, with an average project cost of $9.9 million. No project has cost more than $100 million. The largest project we have constructed so far was the new Centennial Garage in southwest Edmonton, which had a total project cost of $99 million ($89.3 million of which came from MSI). It would be fair to call that project an anomaly however – only one other project, to rehabilitate several roads for $61 million, came with a price tag greater than $40 million.

Can we count on an MSI increase in the future?

MSI funding has always been tied to the economy. The amount allocated to municipalities over the first five years of the program was reduced due to weaker than anticipated revenues. The City of Edmonton had expected to receive $802 million over the 2007-2011 period, about $235 million more than the $567 million it ended up receiving. That does not bode well for an increase in the future.

Both Calgary and Edmonton have been pushing for an improved funding framework with the commitment to develop a big city charter. The outcome of that initiative, slated to be considered by the Legislature in the spring, could impact the way Edmonton receives funding from the province.

Should we use MSI funding for the arena?

According to the City, the average age of Edmonton’s infrastructure assets is 30 years. At the end of 2011, more than 150 neighbourhoods required renewal. An average annual reinvestment of $400 million over the next three years, plus an average annual reinvestment of $450 million over the 2015-2021 period, is the minimum amount of funding required to renew Edmonton’s existing infrastructure to achieve a reasonable state of repair. This is a big challenge, and MSI funding provides only a piece of the pie.

As shown above, our MSI spend has been more or less equally split between new projects and upgrades or rehabilitation of existing assets. A total of $87.5 million was spent on seven new recreation facilities (either brand new, or additions to existing) from 2007 through 2011. Would we have rather spent all of that on the arena? A number of new projects would need to be postponed if funding was allocated instead to the arena. A total of $384.8 million was approved by Council for recreation and cultural projects in the 2012-2014 Capital Budget.

In a poll earlier this year, two-thirds of Edmontonians opposed provincial funding going toward the new arena. An equal number supported fast-tracking the southeast LRT line to Mill Woods. It would seem that the use of MSI funding thus far more or less aligns with the desires of Edmontonians, with the largest share going toward transit projects (though not all of that was LRT-related).

This decision would ultimately need to be made by City Council, and as we approach an election next year, I’m not sure many councillors would be willing to take money away from important neighbourhood renewal projects or new facilities like libraries and parks for the arena.

Was today’s downtown arena news a setback or a setup?

Today behind closed doors City Council discussed a request from the Katz Group for more public money for the downtown arena project. In a letter to City Manager Simon Farbrother, the Katz Group’s John Karvellas wrote:

“…we believe the City has significant capacity beyond its commitment of $45 million to help fund the arena, which by all accounts is the catalyst for the CRL itself and which can help to fund so many other important projects to benefit downtown and the entire city.”

Council voted simply to reaffirm its commitment to the funding arrangement that was agreed upon nearly a year ago. Though the Katz Group letter outlines rising costs, it seems as though the request was actually for new concessions. And that didn’t sit well with Council. Only Councillors Sloan and Diotte voted against the motion (they had also voted against the funding deal).

Much of the discussion about today’s news has focused on the absurdity of a last-minute request from the Katz Group. Many have been critical of Daryl Katz’s decision to remain quiet and unseen, suggesting the approach has led to distrust among Edmontonians. And of course, Mayor Mandel’s statement that “frustrated” is a better word than “optimistic” has for many turned the arena from a done deal in to a big question mark.

But I’m not so sure. What if instead of a major setback, today was actually a major setup?

There’s a few things that don’t sit well in my mind. First, the timing is highly suspect. Two weeks ago the Downtown Business Association released a report that suggests $4.8 billion of investment could take place downtown in the next five years. Last week the Chamber of Commerce warned of a “massive setback” if the arena is not built. In between all of that, the province announced its financial outlook and said that revenues will fall short of projections, so a boost from that level of government doesn’t seem any more likely now than it did a year ago. Were the DBA and Chamber announcements simply well-orchestrated PR efforts designed to try to force the City’s hand? One wonders how much influence the Katz Group exerted.

Secondly, there’s much more than just the arena riding on the CRL. Municipal projects including the arena make up half of the DBA’s forecasted $4.8 billion, and most rely on the downtown CRL being approved. If there’s no arena, there’s no CRL, and if there’s no CRL, it’s back to the drawing board on how to fund all of the other initiatives. Talk is cheap yes, but I really do think that most on Council believe in the importance of a strong downtown. The prospect of putting all of the positive momentum and recent progress at risk must not be sitting well with them.

Thirdly, I just can’t get past that suggestion in the widely-circulated Katz Group letter that the City actually has the ability to contribute more money than previously agreed to. That seems like an odd thing to bring up now, at this juncture. Whether it is true or not, the seed has been planted.

Lastly, I think the Katz Group’s statement from this afternoon is quite strange. It focuses on the amount of time and money the organization has invested into the project, but remains optimistic about getting the issues resolved:

“The Katz Group is committed to continuing to work with the City to find creative solutions that work for both sides so that we can get on with the business of ensuring the Oilers’ long-term sustainability and accelerating the revitalization of the downtown core.”

Even more interesting, the statement seems to leave open the possibility that a larger deal can still be arranged:

“We have also offered to pay a fair share of arena construction costs above $450 million as part of a comprehensive package that makes economic sense.”

All of these things have me feeling as though today was more of a setup than anything else. Definitely to position the agreed upon $450 million limit as too low, and maybe even for a white knight to swoop in and save the deal, as I tweeted this afternoon. Could Katz himself now come forward in public with an increased financial offer and make Council look like the bad guys for refusing to match the increased funding requirements? Could someone on Council, perhaps someone angling for the Mayor’s chair next October, have a trick up his or her sleeve? Or perhaps most intriguing of all, could this finally be an opening for the province to step in and look like the heroes for salvaging the deal?

I guess we’ll find out soon enough.

More power and money to cities in Alberta? I don’t believe you!

If you haven’t already done so you should check out Cities Matter, a website created by Calgary Mayor Naheed Nenshi. It features questions in ten categories related to municipalities that all five of the major provincial parties have answered. The Municipal Financing category asks what each party would do to provide long-range, sustainable, and predictable capital funding for large cities in Alberta. Here are some highlights from the responses:

Alberta Liberals:

Our view is that provincial funding for municipalities should be provided with little to no strings attached, and that local governments are best positioned to determine what their own priorities are and how money should be spent.

Alberta Party:

We are committed to ensuring municipalities have access to stable, adequate and predictable funding. The Alberta Party will shift from 3‐year budget cycles to 5‐year cycles to ensure more long‐term planning can happen. We will also explore alternative ways for cities to raise their own revenues, so that they are less dependent on provincial funding and are more able to accurately budget for their needs.

Alberta’s NDP:

An NDP government would support municipalities’ efforts to occupy the entire property tax and would be prepared to consider additional sources of revenue for municipalities which are appropriate to their responsibilities.

PC Alberta:

The PC Party also plans to help meet the fiscal needs of our cities with city charters and more local decision making through transfer of power. Municipalities are entitled to a greater say and accountability in their own governance and fiscal management.

Wildrose:

Our Balanced Budget and Savings Pledge will lay the groundwork for growing surpluses in the short term; combined with rising income taxes this will ensure that municipal funding increases along with Alberta’s economy.  It also means that municipal leaders won’t need to curry favour with government ministers and align their ideas with the latest trendy notions among bureaucrats.  Wildrose trusts local communities to know what their short and long term priorities are, and with this formula will give them the autonomy to carry through in meeting them.

Sounds good right? More power and money to cities!

Thing is, I really don’t believe any of that.

Consider the proposed downtown arena. Our local leadership has determined (whether you agree or not) that a new arena is something the city needs, that it is something that would benefit Edmontonians. Yet none of the provincial parties seem to have acknowledged that decision. In fact, in many cases they have explicitly disagreed.

Here’s NDP Leader Brian Mason’s take:

“There are far bigger priorities for tax dollars in Edmonton than giving handouts to billionaire hockey owners. Instead, the New Democrats want to accelerate the construction of more light rail transit in Edmonton with more funding. We could use that $100 million to provide interest-free loans to 20,000 homeowners for energy efficient home renovations, or build 250 long-term care beds. New Democrats use public money for the public good.”

Wildrose Leader Danielle Smith was even more blunt:

“We would not provide funding to a new arena in Edmonton.”

PC Leader Alison Redford hasn’t been quite so direct, but her government has thus far avoided the issue and has been more than happy to move ahead with the new Royal Alberta Museum (which nobody was talking about until the announcement dropped out of the sky). And she too does not appear to agree with the need:

“I think that we have enough funding in our system right now to allow for projects that matter to communities to be built.”

I have not seen either the Alberta Party or the Alberta Liberals directly address the arena (if you can point me to something that would be appreciated).

You might argue that these leaders are just responding to what Edmontonians are saying – they don’t want public money going to the arena. Walk down the street and ask people what they think however, and you get a much different response. I think a lot of people feel that other levels of government need to come to the table to support this project.

Either way, we seem to have conflicting statements here. On the one hand, these provincial leaders are happy to suggest that they would grant more control to municipalities to determine what they should build and how they should spend their money. On the other hand, they’re opposed to providing funding to a new arena in Edmonton. So which is it? Or perhaps a better question, exactly what strings will be attached to the greater autonomy granted to municipalities? The arena is just one example. The City Centre Airport is another (and we know that at least the Wildrose would reopen that can of worms) and of course there’s LRT.

I find it really hard to believe that any of these parties would truly give more control over finances and decision making to municipalities. And that’s a shame, because cities really do matter.

Twitter statistics for City Council’s vote on the financial framework for the downtown arena

After a long public hearing on Tuesday, City Council yesterday debated the proposed financial framework and ultimately whether or not they wanted to proceed with the downtown arena project. They voted 10-3 in favor of the framework, and also voted to spend $30 million to complete the design to 60%. Here’s my analysis of the the arena-related tweets posted by Edmonton users between 9:30am and 9:30pm.

By graphing the tweets per minute, you can very clearly see the time the vote took place (~3:03pm):

I was curious to know if the things people were tweeting before and after that moment were different. Here’s a word cloud of the tweets prior to the vote:

Caterina was mentioned a lot, which makes sense considering he turned out to be the surprise dealmaker of the day. The other Councillors were mentioned quite frequently too, as myself and others tweeted their comments.

Here’s a word cloud of the tweets posted after the vote:

It’s very interesting that “Edmonton” was tweeted so often after the vote passed. There were a lot of tweets similar to “Edmonton will get a new arena” that were retweeted after the vote. You can also see that “Iveson” was fairly prominent after the vote, reflecting the large number of tweets about his final remarks on the deal.

Other stats:

  • It was another busy day for tweets in Edmonton with more than 42,000 posted by Edmontonians. That works out to an average of about 30 per minute.
  • More than 880 users posted at least one arena-related tweet.
  • On average, 5.0 arena-related tweets were posted per minute between 9:30am and 9:30pm. The peak was 43.
  • Roughly 14% of the tweets were replies to other users.
  • Roughly 29% of the tweets were retweets.

Here are the top 20 most active local users (most tweets to least):

Here are the top 20 most retweeted local users (by other local users, most retweeted to least):

I gave Paula a run for her money, but she remained the most retweeted user on the arena issue!

UPDATE: I’m always looking for better ways to analyze tweets. Finding a good, reliable way to do sentiment analysis (are tweets positive or negative) is a challenge, partially because tweets are so short and because they usually include weird entities like hashtags (weird from a natural language processing point-of-view). To analyze the arena-related tweets, I used uClassify’s Sentiment Classifier. Here are the results:

tweet sentiment

I would say this is pretty much as expected. Tweets before the vote probably expressed less emotion one way or the other. Most people tweeting after the vote seemed happy with the decision Council made.

Twitter statistics for today’s public hearing on the proposed arena deal

I think it’s fair to say that the public hearing on the proposed arena deal was the talk of Twitter in Edmonton today. Here’s my quick analysis of all arena-related tweets posted by Edmonton users today between 9:30am and 9:30pm.

A word cloud of the 4500+ tweets:

Here’s a breakdown of tweets per minute (you can clearly see the lunch and dinner breaks):

Other stats:

  • Thanks largely to the arena-related tweets, more than 44,000 tweets were posted by Edmontonians today. That works out to an average of about 31 tweets per minute.
  • More than 800 different users posted at least one arena-related tweet.
  • On average, 6.3 arena-related tweets were posted per minute between 9:30am and 9:30pm. The peak was 24.
  • Roughly 17% of the tweets were replies to other users.
  • Roughly 25% of the tweets were retweets.

Here are the top 20 most active local users (most tweets to least):

  1. Paulatics
  2. iNews880
  3. scott_lilwall
  4. KikkiPlanet
  5. ctvedmonton
  6. rjmackinnon
  7. Sirthinks
  8. jfranceska
  9. SunMichelleT
  10. JennaBCityTV
  11. canadianglen
  12. dstaples
  13. edmontoncritic
  14. Edmontonsun
  15. Darren_Krause
  16. journalistjeff
  17. SeanCollins11
  18. DennisMichael_1
  19. smoonie
  20. ScottFralick

Here are the top 20 most retweeted local users (by other local users, most retweeted to least):

  1. Paulatics
  2. ctvedmonton
  3. KikkiPlanet
  4. rjmackinnon
  5. iNews880
  6. sunterryjones
  7. scott_lilwall
  8. SunMichelleT
  9. mastermaq
  10. dstaples
  11. davecournoyer
  12. el_cormier
  13. yegmotto
  14. smah1
  15. frostiblack
  16. dantencer
  17. Edmontonsun
  18. dirklancer
  19. journalistjeff
  20. tedgbauer & alexabboud

Council voted to deal with the issue at 9:30am tomorrow (Wednesday). You can watch or listen live here.