EDMONTON – Twenty-two years after Calgary turned into active profit while maintaining what's the most expensive Olympics ever, the city intends to vote on whether they are & Thinking they can pull it off again – and one that's worth it or not.
The 2026 Winter Games will bring huge government investment, better sports infrastructure and Calgarians' combination as a whole, the "yes" side says – all attractive prospects to a city that still recovers of the accident in oil prices. In addition, the application corporation promises that Calgary will receive $ 10 for every $ 1 the city gives. But can those trusts be trusted? There is still a matter of dispute whether the 1988 Match is a matter of dispute, depending on where and how the expenditure is calculated against the revenue. And the Olympic Games are famous for running over the budget.
The Oxford University 2016 study found that the Olympic Games had the highest average cost of any kind of mega project. "In addition, there are too many costs to see in each Games, with no exception, for any other kind of mega-here project," said the study.
That does mean that Calgarians who vote in a pledge on Tuesday will ask themselves: What exactly is Calgary going to get out of the Olympics this time? Can the city really break even? Is the financial risk worth it?
Emotional conversation is a non-measurable allegation
Part of the field is based on fun, says Calgary Coun. Evan Woolley, who is the chairman of the committee that oversees the application process. There is a sense that Calgary is a special city, an Olympic city and that it would have a great Winter Games featuring the Jamaica bobsleigh team immunized by Cool Runnings, and the British ski dragon Eddie the Eagle, and He finally finished dead, but many people were equipped.
"The charming is an emotional conversation that is not measurable," said Woolley. "The economic debate is measurable, but it is measurable in different perceptions, and you have seen the economists' battle on this, and there is a million different ways to support argument or no yes. "
Depending on how you make the maths, the Vancouver Games cost somewhere from $ 4 billion to $ 7 billion. The circular figure for the Sochi Games is about $ 50 billion. Winter Games in Calgary cost $ 1.5 billion. The cost for the 2026 Games is transported at just a shy of $ 3 billion; $ 1.5 billion from the federal government, $ 700 million of the Alberta government and $ 390 million from Calgary itself.
Any economic breakdown in the Olympic Games is difficult because budgets often exclude operating costs such as refuse disposal. There is also the question of whether the money coming from the provincial and federal governments is an extra money, or if it is taken from other funding areas that would be & # 39; The city has been received.
An economic analysis of the cost of the Calgary region, made by Ernst and Young, is predicted that the cost will cost more than $ 65 million to $ 575 million. In other words, economist of the University of Calgary, Trevor Tombe, said the Olympic Games will cost money – flatting out.
"There's no way unlikely they will be profitable," said Tombe in an email. "Public contributions to the Games are currently estimated at $ 2.7 billion. They would have to never run an incredible operating surplus."
Still, the Games could be worthwhile – in terms of a "feel good" cost and the legacy infrastructure that would continue.
There is no unlikely way to be profitable
"Some of the potential benefits may include the pride, enjoyment and community spirit that the Calgarians are from the 2026 Games and all the related events, but also the enjoyment of the & Due to the new and renewal locations used by local residents during and after the 2026 Games, "Ernst and Young's report said.
Many people support the bid. The 7 heads of the First Nations agreed to him; so the Chamber of Commerce of Calgary; such as Calgary Economic Development, not for profit that encourages economic growth in the city; and Calgary Mayor Naheed Nenshi, who wrote at the Herald said "we have to future generations" upgrade the facilities of the last Games.
The "yes" side indicates the ambitious levels of reasonable ambition behind the scheme as a good reason to support. The support plan, to date, depends largely on the infrastructure built for 1988, which needs to be refurbished, regardless of whether Calgary hosts other Games.
Wooley, who said he hopes to be a fan of the Games, has found it on the "no" side, due to uncertainty about the costs, including, for example, the security price and fears that & # 39; the federal and provincial governments in & # 39; t enthusiastic partners in the field.
Jason Ribeiro, a campaign spokesman said, since the last time Calgary was done, "the model (for the Olympic Games) kept more and more and came unsustainable, "and things like this are no longer.
"We can not build white elephants like this anymore, the challenges are too complicated. So what did this, I believe, have the conditions for common time lines among governments, private partners and, The public can say, let's look at a conservative, credible, thoughtful keeper, "he said.
The infrastructure development plan does not talk about huge, flashy, city-built projects, beyond affordable housing, field house and new arena. Even so, in a bid to cut costs, around 1,000 promised units were affected by the initial pledge of 2,800 new units for athletic homes.
Although Vancouver is Canada Line, Calgary, so far, is not drawing anything quite as ambitious – for better or worse. (Although an Olympic bid could develop discussions about a shipping line to Calgary airport or a new arena for the Calgary Flames).
Ribeiro argues that the upgrades and new housing needs to be done if Calgary is running the Olympics, so the city can also take money from the federal government and the province to pay for them. But Woolley disputes this logic, saying that some of the facilities that have been located for upgrading by the Olympic scheme will not cost the city's money anyway, as it is not city owned.
Woolley said the economics and funding arrangement – including ongoing fears for security costs – there is not enough clarification for the Calgarians to vote in full information.
"Too much is not explained and there is a great deal of risk not counted," he said. "We're going to vote in a place that was promised to Calgarians that we would not, and I can not support that."