Home builder vs nenshi goes another round

[finboy]

http://www.cbc.ca/m/touch/canada/calgary/story/1.2428488

This should be interesting

[rage2]

Wenzel will lose. Nenshi is very smart in how he says things, anything that is accusatory is wrapped as an opinion that he truly feels is legitimate. Pretty much what I've taught all of you to do on beyond haha.

I followed the whole part 1 of the Nenshi vs homebuilders fued, and Nenshi said nothing that could've been used against him for defamation.

[suntan]

Originally posted by rage2
Wenzel will lose. Nenshi is very smart in how he says things, anything that is accusatory is wrapped as an opinion that he truly feels is legitimate. Pretty much what I've taught all of you to do on beyond haha.

I followed the whole part 1 of the Nenshi vs homebuilders fued, and Nenshi said nothing that could've been used against him for defamation. Yikes. Well, that's not really true. Defending a statement as opinion isn't foolproof. If the statement, even if it is an opinion, can be proven true or false then it is actionable.

I think one of the ex-mods over at CP got in trouble ages ago over this.

Anyhoo whatever.

[austic]

So really now the builder will cost us tax dollars to defend this suit as I bet Nenshi does not have to pay his own legal fees as mayor.

[Xtrema]

If the lawsuit is based on that interview, don't think Wenzel has a chance.

This is just throwing some money out and say fuck you.

[roopi]

Originally posted by rage2
Wenzel will lose. Nenshi is very smart in how he says things, anything that is accusatory is wrapped as an opinion that he truly feels is legitimate. Pretty much what I've taught all of you to do on beyond haha.

I followed the whole part 1 of the Nenshi vs homebuilders fued, and Nenshi said nothing that could've been used against him for defamation.

So to avoid getting sued I would say 'In my opinion Cal Wenzel is an idiot'? Or am I not understanding this correctly?

[FraserB]

Originally posted by suntan
Yikes. Well, that's not really true. Defending a statement as opinion isn't foolproof. If the statement, even if it is an opinion, can be proven true or false then it is actionable.

I think one of the ex-mods over at CP got in trouble ages ago over this.

Anyhoo whatever.

If this was the case, Beyond would have been shut down 7 or 8 lawsuits ago lol. Even one of the lawyers who wrote a letter to Rage got put through the wringer over shitty spelling and grammar.

[Khyron]

Originally posted by roopi


So to avoid getting sued I would say 'In my opinion Cal Wenzel is an idiot'? Or am I not understanding this correctly?

I believe Cal Wenzel was responsible for 9/11. I've never met him, but how he writes just strikes me as shady. I also think it's possible he killed a hooker.

You can't sue me for having an opinion.

[suntan]

Originally posted by FraserB


If this was the case, Beyond would have been shut down 7 or 8 lawsuits ago lol. Even one of the lawyers who wrote a letter to Rage got put through the wringer over shitty spelling and grammar. Well, they still need to prove damage stemmed from the statement. I highly doubt that's ever happened from stuff here.

[ZenOps]

Since when is "godfather" derogatory or worthy of defamation.

It used to be quite the compliment - before the movie.

If he said that he was going to cut off his nose, that would be slightly more worthy of suing.

As for Beyond: Yous grammer nazis are getting youreself bent out of shape.

[GoChris]

Cal Wenzel seems like a shady business person from what I've seen of him on the moving picture box.

[heavyfuel]

Don't really know nothing about nothing on this topic, other than I'd like to see an, in my opinion, arrogant fuck get put in his place.

[GTS4tw]

Originally posted by heavyfuel
Don't really know nothing about nothing on this topic, other than I'd like to see an, in my opinion, arrogant fuck get put in his place.

Who do you mean? Could apply to either guy IMO.

[heavyfuel]

Originally posted by GTS4tw


Who do you mean? Could apply to either guy IMO.

That's right. I guess they can both try to sue me now haha.

[Sugarphreak]

...

[frozenrice]

Originally posted by GoChris
Cal Wenzel seems like a shady business person from what I've seen of him on the moving picture box.

This is a good example of what Wenzel means when he talks of Nenshi speaking ill of him.
People who aren't involved in home building don't know otherwise and rely solely on what the media shows Nenshi saying. If you read some of the comments on either the Herald or Sun sites, there are a lot of people who have formed an opinion of Wenzel, some going as far as saying they won't ever buy a house from his company based on this incident.

Working in the building business, I've never heard a bad word about him or his company via all the trades that deal with him or his company. From what I understand from knowing people that have worked directly within his company, he's a total class act, far from the shady, mafia character that he's being made out to be. Of course this is all word of mouth. I don't know him personally nor have I ever met/dealt with him but only one side knows the truth. I'd lean more to the side that knows the building business a bit more.

[403Gemini]

Originally posted by frozenrice


This is a good example of what Wenzel means when he talks of Nenshi speaking ill of him.
People who aren't involved in home building don't know otherwise and rely solely on what the media shows Nenshi saying. If you read some of the comments on either the Herald or Sun sites, there are a lot of people who have formed an opinion of Wenzel, some going as far as saying they won't ever buy a house from his company based on this incident.


Yep, exactly.

Social media is also rearing it's ugly head and acting as a double edged sword to Nenshi right now. He used it to attract younger followers, with that it brought on the immaturity of the lot. Death threats to Wenzel are likely huge Nenshi fan boys who think it's hilarious to 'troll' in real life.

Just makes me laugh to think this could basically be 6 million dollars avoided by a simple apology. :dunno:

[rage2]

Originally posted by Sugarphreak
Didn't Nenshi go on record stating that he was engaging in illegal activity? That may be, but if Nenshi can't prove it, there is some merit to Wenzel's claim.
No, Nenshi said Wenzel may have broken election laws and that an investigation should be started to look into the practices. There was no investigation nor inquiry and it ended there, because nothing illegal took place. Meanwhile, the public thinks Wenzel is shady.

It's pure genius on Nenshi's part.

[luxor]

I think Cal Wenzel is an idiot loser. Don't sue me please, I'm just a nobody with an opinion.

[frozenrice]

Originally posted by luxor
I think Cal Wenzel is an idiot loser.

Based on what info? Just curious.....:dunno:

[403Gemini]

Originally posted by roopi


So to avoid getting sued I would say 'In my opinion Cal Wenzel is an idiot'? Or am I not understanding this correctly?


Originally posted by FraserB


If this was the case, Beyond would have been shut down 7 or 8 lawsuits ago lol. Even one of the lawyers who wrote a letter to Rage got put through the wringer over shitty spelling and grammar.


Originally posted by Khyron


I believe Cal Wenzel was responsible for 9/11. I've never met him, but how he writes just strikes me as shady. I also think it's possible he killed a hooker.

You can't sue me for having an opinion.


Originally posted by GoChris
Cal Wenzel seems like a shady business person from what I've seen of him on the moving picture box.


Originally posted by luxor
I think Cal Wenzel is an idiot loser. Don't sue me please, I'm just a nobody with an opinion.

I see the point you're all trying to make, but there is a significant difference from randoms on the internet typing this vs a mayor of a city. The word of mouth from a mayor carries a lot more weight than random postings and could very well tarnish his reputation and business. He could simply provide statistics of a dip in business after Nenshi's accusations that Wenzel MAY have broken election laws.

Should be interesting to see how this unfolds, I honestly dont think anything will happen but Nenshi's twitter has been remarkably quiet about it(likely cause his legal council told him to probably put down his fucking phone and don't act like a 13 yr old girl about this)

[gatorade]

Originally posted by 403Gemini
He could simply provide statistics of a dip in business after Nenshi's accusations that Wenzel MAY have broken election laws.



And that would still be entirely irrelevant. Proving correlation is something that would be tough, further proving causation is difficult if not even impossible here.


Originally posted by 403Gemini I see the point you're all trying to make, but there is a significant difference from randoms on the internet typing this vs a mayor of a city.


I'm not sure that this would be dealt with any differently legally. Pretty sure the definition of slander would stay the same.

[Sugarphreak]

...

[Cos]

.

[GoChris]

Originally posted by Cos


Did you get one of them damn fangled ones that have music coming out of them too? Scared the bejesus out of Aunt Alice on Sunday dinner.

Ya but the scariest part is, there's no knobs on it to turn. I pressed some squishy thing on another tiny box and it made it do stuff and it wasn't even connected to it or near it!

[cam_wmh]

Originally posted by GoChris


Ya but the scariest part is, there's no knobs on it to turn. I pressed some squishy thing on another tiny box and it made it do stuff and it wasn't even connected to it or near it!

MY TARNATIONS! THEM THERE WITCHCRAFT!!!1!!1!one

[Cos]

.

[FraserB]

Originally posted by Sugarphreak


I think a lot of it hinges on that David Grey interview, Nenshi is well spoken when is he prepared... but when he gets emotional he doesn't do so well.

I just don't think Wenzel is suing him without some reasonable evidence... then again the amount is also absurd, this isn't the US.

Six million works out to 12 houses? Maybe less?

Or he could just be doing this to get back at Nenshi, since the city is not being sued I assume that Nenshi is on the hook to pay for his own lawyer fees?

[triplep]

Originally posted by FraserB

Or he could just be doing this to get back at Nenshi, since the city is not being sued I assume that Nenshi is on the hook to pay for his own lawyer fees?

Hm... interesting, I wonder if maybe he is trying to get Nenshi to expense this on his expense reports, and then go back and be like wtf?! These aren't legit expenses for the city, why is the city paying these expenses?! And then the real shit show will start.

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by triplep


Hm... interesting, I wonder if maybe he is trying to get Nenshi to expense this on his expense reports, and then go back and be like wtf?! These aren't legit expenses for the city, why is the city paying these expenses?! And then the real shit show will start.

I think that is Wenzel's plan all along. Stir shit up. City doesn't seems to have a firm policy if they will pick up the tab on these cases. Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't. Either way, it's a turd sandwich for Nenshi.

I think city will probably pay for the legal fee and Nenshi will be on the hook on the damage if he loses.

[Feruk]

Not sure why the city wouldn't pick up the legal fees. As Mayor, Nenshi is always "on the job." When an employee gets sued for something on the job, it's the company that is actually getting sued.

Honestly, I had no issue with this until I read Wenzel wants to donate any winnings to charity? In my opinion, this is just wasting everybody's time.

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by Feruk
Honestly, I had no issue with this until I read Wenzel wants to donate any winnings to charity? In my opinion, this is just wasting everybody's time.

I can't see how Wenzel can pocket that money without making him seems like a bigger asshole than he already is. And it already said the suit can't go forward without damages specified. Charity is the only way to go.

[rage2]

Originally posted by Sugarphreak
I think a lot of it hinges on that David Grey interview, Nenshi is well spoken when is he prepared... but when he gets emotional he doesn't do so well.

I just don't think Wenzel is suing him without some reasonable evidence... then again the amount is also absurd, this isn't the US.
I didn't know about the CBC Interview. You summed it up Nenshi's style quite nicely.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/naheed-nenshi-to-be-sued-by-home-builder-over-godfather-comments-1.2428488

Judging from the comments, I'd say Nenshi might get in trouble here when accusing Wenzel of breaking the law, and encouraging others to break the law. The Godfather comment is fairly irrelevant.

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by rage2

I didn't know about the CBC Interview. You summed it up Nenshi's style quite nicely.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/naheed-nenshi-to-be-sued-by-home-builder-over-godfather-comments-1.2428488

Judging from the comments, I'd say Nenshi might get in trouble here when accusing Wenzel of breaking the law, and encouraging others to break the law. The Godfather comment is fairly irrelevant.

That's his position since the video was out in spring.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/calgary-home-builder-admits-illegal-activity-in-video-mayor-says-1.1308214

http://globalnews.ca/news/504916/mayor-calls-for-investigation-of-civic-election-campaign-contributions/

Basically, Wenzel said on video that he had 13 trucks available to Kevin Taylor beyond the $5K donation. So while this isn't investigated or proven in court, Nenshi comment is based on Wenzel's statement in the video.

So Wenzel is either a liar or a law breaker. I guess he preferred to be a liar? :rofl:

[busdepot]

Reading some of the comments on the CBC website are ridiculous. People blaming developers for building homes in a flood plain and blaming developers for making housing prices sky rocket. Really unfortunate that people really do lack the most basic understanding of economics.

1) houses built in the flood plain were put there before the majority of the current developers were even founded.
2) cutting the supply of new homes INCREASES prices

I don't really know what would constitute defamation, libel, or slander in court for this situation, but I'm behind Wenzel. You put the squeeze on the developers and then make them, specifically Cal, look like the assholes who are the ones behind it all behind some sort of cartel? Some people are fucking retarded. And because Nenshi has a Facebook account, people buy this shit.

GL Wenzel. He is really a stand-up business man and like others have said has given millions and millions to the Calgary community. What has Nenshi really done other than a couple funny tweets and raise property taxes? :bullshit:

[colinxx235]

Originally posted by FraserB


Six million works out to 12 houses? Maybe less?

Or he could just be doing this to get back at Nenshi, since the city is not being sued I assume that Nenshi is on the hook to pay for his own lawyer fees?


12 houses = 6 million... maybe in revenue?

Because we all know that building houses is free? :rofl:

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by busdepot
I don't really know what would constitute defamation, libel, or slander in court for this situation, but I'm behind Wenzel. You put the squeeze on the developers and then make them, specifically Cal, look like the assholes who are the ones behind it all behind some sort of cartel? Some people are fucking retarded. And because Nenshi has a Facebook account, people buy this shit.

The densification and removal of subsidies will hurt builders like Shane Homes. There is no doubt about that.

Shane Home and the likes are in no position to build 15-20 stories high rise apartments. These are much riskier ventures due to higher capitals needed to get these project started. That's why they want urban sprawl to continue.

Again, the one that make Wenzel look like an asshole was himself and the guy who filmed him. Everyone else is just commenting on the video.

[ercchry]

Originally posted by busdepot

1) houses built in the flood plain were put there before the majority of the current developers were even founded.


taking a look at cranston's valley in june would make me disagree with you

[busdepot]

Originally posted by Xtrema


The densification and removal of subsidies will hurt builders like Shane Homes. There is no doubt about that.

Shane Home and the likes are in no position to build 15-20 stories high rise apartments. These are much riskier ventures due to higher capitals needed to get these project started. That's why they want urban sprawl to continue.

Again, the one that make Wenzel look like an asshole was himself and the guy who filmed him. Everyone else is just commenting on the video.

While I agree that Shane and some of the others are not in the business of building Condos, why should they?

I agree that Calgary's population is not dense at all when compared to a city like Montreal or Vancouver. But you can't just change that one day by chopping off development. Condo living is convenient downtown, not in the boonies. The advantage of living out of the core is you can buy a house. Look at a few other Alpha cities that do not have a geological barrier (London, Paris, Moscow, DC). They have a dense core where there's multi-family living and as you leave the core of the city, it turns into more houses. Tear down some old shitty houses in the belt line to put in condos, because that's where they should be, not in the residential areas in the outskirts.

I don't want to turn this into a debate about development, but if you're going to demonize the developers, you had better be ready to demonize the city too.



Originally posted by ercchry


taking a look at cranston's valley in june would make me disagree with you

Agreed, this was a dumb play by Genstar. Even if that area wasn't affected this summer, there's no saying it won't be next time.

[suntan]

Originally posted by Xtrema


The densification and removal of subsidies will hurt builders like Shane Homes. There is no doubt about that.

Shane Home and the likes are in no position to build 15-20 stories high rise apartments. These are much riskier ventures due to higher capitals needed to get these project started. That's why they want urban sprawl to continue.

Again, the one that make Wenzel look like an asshole was himself and the guy who filmed him. Everyone else is just commenting on the video. What council says and what they do are two different things.

Oh look, another massive development!

http://www.calgary.ca/getinvolved/Pages/Keystone-Hills-Area-Structure-Plan.aspx

Whenever you think that Nenshi agrees with curtailing outward development, think two things:

He lives in a house way, way, out in the NE.
His council lifted the previous development freeze.

Shane Homes will not be "hurt". They'll be just fine.

[frozenrice]

Originally posted by Xtrema


The......... removal of subsidies will hurt builders like Shane Homes. There is no doubt about that.

Shane Home and the likes are in no position to build 15-20 stories high rise apartments. These are much riskier ventures due to higher capitals needed to get these project started.

What are these subsidies that you speak of? I'd like to know more about them.....

As far as high rise developments, home builders are just that- home builders not high-rise developers. Two totally different markets, marketing and construction wise.

It's like your average Ford or GM dealer tying to sell buses. Sure they're all forms of transportation, but would you walk into a normal car dealership to buy a touring bus?

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by suntan

Shane Homes will not be "hurt". They'll be just fine.

They won't. It's about access to the market. When Sprawl was unchecked, they have access to 80% of the market. As City policy til more towards densification, the access will drop.

[busdepot]

Originally posted by frozenrice


What are these subsidies that you speak of? I'd like to know more about them.....

As far as high rise developments, home builders are just that- home builders not high-rise developers. Two totally different markets, marketing and construction wise.

It's like your average Ford or GM dealer tying to sell buses. Sure they're all forms of transportation, but would you walk into a normal car dealership to buy a touring bus?

:werd:

Same people who think oil companies need to invest in alternative energies.

[busdepot]

Originally posted by Xtrema


They won't. It's about access to the market. When Sprawl was unchecked, they have access to 80% of the market. As City policy til more towards densification, the access will drop.

I think Calgary's sprawl is not just being given to the market with no thought behind it. What Calgary is experiencing is not sprawl. It's called growth. Calgary's population is sky rocketing, and with that comes more new homes. Houston has sprawl. Toronto has sprawl. I flew over Regina this weekend, and even there's new homes being built on the outskirts. Calgary's footprint is growing, and yes, there needs to be some checks and controls on it. I don't think any one would argue the contrary.

But because infrastructure isn't keeping up with demand for services like transit and ring roads etc, that's not the home builders fault or problem really. That's the problem of the City and the Province. If you don't want Calgary's footprint to grow, you should also be prepared to advocate for housing prices to go up substantially to stop that footprint from growing.

[rage2]

Originally posted by suntan
What council says and what they do are two different things.

Oh look, another massive development!

http://www.calgary.ca/getinvolved/Pages/Keystone-Hills-Area-Structure-Plan.aspx
haha you didn't even read the ASP did you? Keystone Hills is the new condos in the suburbs plan that the city approved to attempt to curb urban sprawl. It's going to be condo city over there. That's what the developers like Wenzel are bitching about.

I'm quite excited to see how this project turns out, if there is an actual demand for high density housing in the middle of nowhere (I don't believe there will be).

[ercchry]

Originally posted by busdepot

If you don't want Calgary's footprint to grow, you should also be prepared to advocate for housing prices to go up substantially to stop that footprint from growing.

im okay with that :bigpimp:

here is the thing though when comparing calgary to other areas

areas like van and t.o are greater :insert city: area concepts... where you have amenities and business areas that are not just in the downtown core. multiple cities that just blend together.

toronto is the best example... but i dont see calgary ever being like that since the formula is giant bigbox stores+sprawling detached houses mixed with a sprinkle of multi-res that creates a horrible commuter nightmare since there are no local to the area business centres... sure we we have a few "business parks" but since they are so new a lot of people are not living near them that have found their offices moved to them.... which is actually just making rush hour worse

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by rage2
I'm quite excited to see how this project turns out, if there is an actual demand for high density housing in the middle of nowhere (I don't believe there will be).

After Beacon and Nolan barely got by, I don't know how well that will sell as well. But city policy is artificially inflating the market. So $300K apartments/condos will soon be the starting point for ownership. This may drive people inward to older 20-30 year old neighborhoods.


Originally posted by busdepot
But because infrastructure isn't keeping up with demand for services like transit and ring roads etc, that's not the home builders fault or problem really. That's the problem of the City and the Province. If you don't want Calgary's footprint to grow, you should also be prepared to advocate for housing prices to go up substantially to stop that footprint from growing.

Then why should the City subsidize itself a future problem? Yes, house prices should go up all over the board. That's the only way to justify apartments and densification.

If you want cheap, big houses, Cochrane, Airdrie are your choices. And if you read the stats on houses sold in the $600K-$1.5M range, Calgary is still way too affordable.


Originally posted by frozenrice


What are these subsidies that you speak of? I'd like to know more about them.....


The ones that Manning center say should be abolished? And taxes should be raised to cover the services? And nothing should be subsidized, new or redevleopments?

http://www.calgaryherald.com/business/Higher+property+taxes+suburbs+urged+think+tank/9013380/story.html

[busdepot]

Originally posted by ercchry


im okay with that :bigpimp:

here is the thing though when comparing calgary to other areas

areas like van and t.o are greater :insert city: area concepts... where you have amenities and business areas that are not just in the downtown core. multiple cities that just blend together.

toronto is the best example... but i dont see calgary ever being like that since the formula is giant bigbox stores+sprawling detached houses mixed with a sprinkle of multi-res that creates a horrible commuter nightmare since there are no local to the area business centres... sure we we have a few "business parks" but since they are so new a lot of people are not living near them that have found their offices moved to them.... which is actually just making rush hour worse

You're right. You can't really compare any city to one another. Toronto area also has this tiny little pond beside it which forces development one direction. Calgary will never be like GTA. Calgary is only one actual incorporated City too. The city isn't prepared to handle business parks outside of downtown. Once IOL moves to Quarry Park, the deep south is even more fucked. 18th ST already sucks balls in the morning. So you're right on that for sure.

I'm perfectly fine with real estate going up too. That means more money when its selling time. But my issue is that people complain about housing prices being too high or climbing too fast, but then say we need to stop the cities outward expansion, which I suspect would comprise a good amount of Nenshi's voter support.

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by busdepot
I'm perfectly fine with real estate going up too. That means more money when its selling time. But my issue is that people complain about housing prices being too high or climbing too fast, but then say we need to stop the cities outward expansion, which I suspect would comprise a good amount of Nenshi's voter support.

Nenshi supportors are supposed to buy $400K 600sqft lofts @ East Village.

[ercchry]

Originally posted by Xtrema


Nenshi supportors are supposed to buy $400K 600sqft lofts @ East Village.

i really hope so... actually thats what i am banking on with my latest purchase :rofl:

[busdepot]

Originally posted by Xtrema


After Beacon and Nolan barely got by, I don't know how well that will sell as well. But city policy is artificially inflating the market. So $300K apartments/condos will soon be the starting point for ownership. This may drive people inward to older 20-30 year old neighborhoods.



Yes, you're driving people to certain areas. Sure, too bad there's already people there. The problem right now is supply. That's why a 2bed appartment in the belt line costs $400k+. That's why a shitty house in Acadia costs $450k+.


Originally posted by Xtrema


Then why should the City subsidize itself a future problem? Yes, house prices should go up all over the board. That's the only way to justify apartments.

If you want cheap, big houses, Cochrane, Airdrie are your choices.



Because that's what your property taxes and income taxes to the Province are for. There are many better ways to generate revenues to pay for the increased development and growth. Trying to cut off the development all together is the wrong one.

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by busdepot
Trying to cut off the development all together is the wrong one.

It's not a cut off, it's managed.

Please go play SimCity to see why density is needed.

And you can't get people into dense area until anything with a backyard is out of reach for the average buyers.

[busdepot]

Originally posted by Xtrema


It's not a cut off, it's managed.

Please go play SimCity.

I have played SimCity. My nuclear reactors kept melting down and there was tornadoes.

Sure, we have disagreeing opinions on how to manage the cities development. I'm ok for that, but to imply that its not currently managed is naive. While I think the city has done a piss poor job of keeping up with the developments they approve, I don't they were wrong to approve it. They just need to keep their end of the bargain, as does the province with their come to Alberta to work initiatives.

But because it's starting to cause a real problem for people who live here, why does that make it ok for Nenshi to scapegoat the developers and home-builders and make them sound like a white-collar Los Zetas cartel who are just out to make a dollar a fuck up the city and leave?

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by busdepot
Sure, we have disagreeing opinions on how to manage the cities development. I'm ok for that, but to imply that its not currently managed is naive. While I think the city has done a piss poor job of keeping up with the developments they approve, I don't they were wrong to approve it. They just need to keep their end of the bargain, as does the province with their come to Alberta to work initiatives.

I agree that it was poorly managed as in nobody was thinking of the consequences down the road when they are approved. Now you can't really provide the services without raising taxes. Sin of the fathers.

That's why the restriction now.

Anything with infrastructure, effect of change won't be felt til a decade later. We are just feeling effect of overdevelopment during the Bronco era.

[ercchry]

Originally posted by busdepot


I have played SimCity. My nuclear reactors kept melting down and there was tornadoes.

Sure, we have disagreeing opinions on how to manage the cities development. I'm ok for that, but to imply that its not currently managed is naive. While I think the city has done a piss poor job of keeping up with the developments they approve, I don't they were wrong to approve it. They just need to keep their end of the bargain, as does the province with their come to Alberta to work initiatives.

But because it's starting to cause a real problem for people who live here, why does that make it ok for Nenshi to scapegoat the developers and home-builders and make them sound like a white-collar Los Zetas cartel who are just out to make a dollar a fuck up the city and leave?

oh yeah, HAPPY BIRTHDAY!

[dirtsniffer]

Originally posted by ercchry


i really hope so... actually thats what i am banking on with my latest purchase :rofl:

Why do you need to talk about this in every single post you make?

We get it, you're awesome.

[ercchry]

Originally posted by dirtsniffer


Why do you need to talk about this in every single post you make?

We get it, you're awesome.

every post? or only when its relevant? either way, you are the master of your own beyond. hit the ignore button :dunno:

[bspot]

Since we're getting into the sprawl argument, it seems like both sides try drag each other down with rhetoric and there isn't much for actual facts going around.

What I'd like to see is an example of the life cycle of a Calgary neighborhood.


Take one of the older low density suburbs. Maybe some of the 50s/60s stuff.


How often do the roads need to be repaved?

What does it cost?

How often do the sidewalks need to be replaced?

What does it cost?

How often does sewer/water infrastructure need maintenance?

What does it cost?

Do the same for police/fire/parks.

Add all those up for the life of the community so far. Divide by years in existence.

How does the cost per year line up with property taxes? If it's more than property taxes, well our property tax system, which most will already agree is arbitrary at best, is now in even worse shape than we thought.

These costs need to be addressed either in purchase price or in taxation. I prefer taxation, as it's not a one time source of income.

If places are paying less in taxes then they cost to maintain, that isn't "fair", in my opinion. Do this for all neighborhoods in the city, map it out, see what a tax structure should look like. If condos use less resources compared to somone on a 50 foot loot, then let them pay less. (I'm on a 50' lot, and I agree it's not fair my neighbours with half as much frontage pay the same or in some cases more than me).

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by bspot
If places are paying less in taxes then they cost to maintain, that isn't "fair", in my opinion. Do this for all neighborhoods in the city, map it out, see what a tax structure should look like. If condos use less resources compared to somone on a 50 foot loot, then let them pay less. (I'm on a 50' lot, and I agree it's not fair my neighbours with half as much frontage pay the same or in some cases more than me).

It's all about assessment and market value. Your 1000 sqft on 50' worth at least 30% less than your neighbor's redeveloped 2000 sqft on 25'. (Lot's assumption here).

That's why I think Manning's report is fair.

Don't bother figuring out who subsidizes who. If the services cost X, charges X.

[speedog]

Originally posted by rage2
haha you didn't even read the ASP did you? Keystone Hills is the new condos in the suburbs plan that the city approved to attempt to curb urban sprawl. It's going to be condo city over there. That's what the developers like Wenzel are bitching about.

I'm quite excited to see how this project turns out, if there is an actual demand for high density housing in the middle of nowhere (I don't believe there will be).
From the city's Keystone Hills ASP...

A minimum of 30 per cent of the housing units within each
Neighbourhood should be non-single-detached housing units

This still leaves a lot of room for single detached housing although the plan appears to be leaning to a high density non-single-detached housing environment - will be interesting to see how this all builds out.

[Sugarphreak]

...

[ercchry]

Originally posted by Sugarphreak


My guess is probably like the ghetto’s of Taradale

nooo, its too west... but it sure will fuck up centre street

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by ercchry


nooo, its too west... but it sure will fuck up centre street

They will carve out 2 more lanes for buses and eventually street car. 301 is already a shit show on most days.

[bspot]

Originally posted by Xtrema


It's all about assessment and market value. Your 1000 sqft on 50' worth at least 30% less than your neighbor's redeveloped 2000 sqft on 25'. (Lot's assumption here).



I know how it works, that's why I refer to it as arbitrary ;)

Your example is pretty much bang on of what happens all over my neighborhood.

There's a condo building at the end of the street with pretty nice units. I'd say average price is over $400K for sure. Say there is 100 units in there, and 200' of sidewalk and road frontage.

That's 2' of sidewalk and road per unit. Yet they all pay tax at the same rate as me.

There is likely one water and sanitary service to the complex. Yes they are larger than mine, but still, they are splitting the cost 100 ways, and yet still pay the same rate as me.

I'm being subsidized.

It's not suburbs vs inner city, because there is subsidization going on all over the city. On average it is higher in a suburban neighborhood because of lower assessed values and less population density than my specific neighborhood, but there are lots of communities considered inner city that have really low density.

[Xtrema]

Your $500K 40 year old infield will pay same or less tax as a $500K condo in the same area.

Roads are less, sewer cost less because more share the same footprint.

But they will still have to pay for police/fire and other services that's more per capita regardless where they live. Those cost would not change much.

[Xtrema]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/mayor-naheed-nenshi-to-fight-6m-godfather-lawsuit-1.2431118

[sabad66]

Originally posted by bspot


I know how it works, that's why I refer to it as arbitrary ;)

Your example is pretty much bang on of what happens all over my neighborhood.

There's a condo building at the end of the street with pretty nice units. I'd say average price is over $400K for sure. Say there is 100 units in there, and 200' of sidewalk and road frontage.

That's 2' of sidewalk and road per unit. Yet they all pay tax at the same rate as me.

There is likely one water and sanitary service to the complex. Yes they are larger than mine, but still, they are splitting the cost 100 ways, and yet still pay the same rate as me.

I'm being subsidized.

It's not suburbs vs inner city, because there is subsidization going on all over the city. On average it is higher in a suburban neighborhood because of lower assessed values and less population density than my specific neighborhood, but there are lots of communities considered inner city that have really low density.
I understand what you're saying, but I think your argument is flawed because you're saying the road/sidewalk costs should belong to the homeowner - why? All of the people in the condo complex use that road to get to their house so they should be responsible for the road maintenance costs just as much as the guy who's house it is in front of.

[UndrgroundRider]

I haven't seen this posted yet. Here's Nenshi's response via his legal counsel.

http://blog.calgarymayor.ca/2013/11/mayor-nenshis-statement-regarding.html



We are counsel for his Worship, Mayor Naheed K. Nenshi and have been provided with your correspondence dated October 31, 2013. The Mayor is disappointed with the inflammatory language and hyperbole contained in your letter. Set out below is the Mayor's response to the accusations made by your clients.

Distilling the rhetoric in your letter, it appears that Mr. Wenzel and Shane Homes Limited claim that they have been slandered in three ways:
[list=1] Mr. Wenzel is said to have broken the law;
Mr. Wenzel told others during his secret meeting how to break the law; and
Mr. Wenzel's secret meeting was referred to as a scene out of the movie "The Godfather" and Mr. Wenzel considers that he was referred to as the Godfather.[/list=1]

In respect of the first two matters, I would strongly suggest that your clients review the Local Authorities Election Act, RSA 2000, c.L-21 ("LAEA"). The LAEA now sets out (as of February 3, 2010) specific rules for municipal election finance and contribution disclosure. It sets out maximum contribution amounts in Section 147.2(1). For ease of reference that provision provides:


Limitations on Contributions
147.2(1) Campaign contributions by any person, corporation, trade union or employee organization to a candidate shall not exceed $5,000.00 in any year.

In addition, the LAEA also defines the scope of "Campaign contribution" for the purposes of the Act. Again,for ease of reference I set out that provision below:


Definitions
147.1(1) In this Part,

(A)"Campaign Contribution" means any money, personal property, real property or service that is provided to or for the benefit of a candidate or the candidate's election campaign without fair market value compensation from that candidate but does not include services provided by a volunteer who voluntarily performs the services and receives no compensation, directly or indirectly, in relation to the services or time spent providing the services.

On a plain reading of the LAEA, "Campaign Contribution" would include any goods and services that are provided to the candidate at less than fair market value compensation from the candidate, including things "donated" to be used during the campaign by the candidate. By contrast, the exception for "services provided by a volunteer" appears to contemplate services (and not goods) that are "performed" personally by a volunteer and may not have separate fair market value. Indeed, a review of Hansard Debates at the reading of Bill 203, which amended the LAEA to include the maximum limits on campaign contributions in Alberta municipal elections, the Honourable Mr. Lukaszuk of Edmonton — Castle Downs made the following comment on the definition of contributions for the purposes of campaign expenses:

So if somebody gives you an office to use for the duration of the campaign, that actually has a market value. You should declare it as a donation. That's what we do in provincial elections.

Returning to the secret meeting convened by Mr. Wenzel of his colleagues and supporters, I quote below verbatim the statements made by Mr. Wenzel:

Cal Wenzel:

"Druh Farrell — In case anyone doesn't know — she doesn't like me and I don't particularly like her. I had 13 trucks out last election delivering signs and assembling them and I got called by Druh in the elections because they said I'd given $5,000 in cash so therefore my trucks that were out delivering put me over the $5,000 limit so they were going to take us to court. So Druh and I don't see eye to eye obviously."

"Now, one of the things you know, when you're looking at getting rid of an incumbent you know, such as Druh Farrell or Pincott, the candidates that you know, Kevin Taylor and James Maxim, are suggesting that they need somewhere in the area of $150,000 to $250,000 in their campaign funds. Now that could be maybe a little bit less, because Chris has promised every United truck to be made available and he's going to print the signs on their computers, and so you know, maybe he can get by with $125,000. That's how much money these guys think they need. Now the other thing is, keep in mind you can only send them $5,000 per year, and that means you've 35 days to send in this year's tranche and then next year you can send in an additional. So it's really quite important that you know,that you get on that."

"So how much does it really cost you? So if we have to sit here and say, you know, we have to fund maybe ten candidates here for $5,000 — that's $50,000 this year and $50,000 next year. Keeping in mind, in order to bring Preston on board, eleven of us put up $100,000 — so a million one. So its not like we haven't put up our money, you know, and we're going to be there to put it up again and yet we're also supporting the candidates. So I'll leave you with that."

As your clients are probably aware, justification is a complete defence to any claim of alleged defamation. That is, truth is a complete answer. The law provides that it is sufficient if the substance of the allegation is justified. Based upon the definition of "Campaign Contribution" it is difficult to understand how Mr. Wenzel's confession to a group secretly called to a meeting that he had donated $5,000 and then in addition had thirteen trucks out delivering signs and assembling them would not be a clear violation of the law. Indeed, it would appear that Mr. Wenzel is fortunate that he was not pursued or prosecuted under Section 147.2(5) for contravening the LAEA. In addition, during the course of his statements to his various friends during that meeting, he was clearly explaining to them how they could provide services such as "every United truck" or printing signs for the candidates as a way to obviate the $5,000 limit. That, reasonably construed, again would be a violation of the LAEA.

Therefore, your letter is accurate that Mr. Wenzel did not admit to breaking the law. However, based on his confessions in the meeting, it is difficult to understand how he did not break the law.

In addition to the defence of justification, all three allegations (i.e. the accusation of breaking the law, telling others how to, and the reference to the Godfather) attract the protection of qualified privilege. This defence protects statements made in the protection of the public interest and in furtherance of a duty to the public. In this context, the importance of the communication outweighs any potential harm to a Plaintiff. The interview given by Mayor Nenshi to the CBC was done in the course of a public debate during an election campaign. It is without doubt in the public interest for there to be a full airing and debate about policy issues from a mayoral candidate. As such, a qualified privilege attaches to all of the statements made by the Mayor during his interview.

Thirdly, aside from justification and qualified privilege, the statements made by the Mayor of which Mr. Wenzel now complains are fair comment. The comments made by the Mayor regarding Mr. Wenzel's secret meeting were based upon fact as recorded and published by an attendee at that meeting. The matter at issue, an attempt by Mr. Wenzel and his friends to drum up electoral support (financial and otherwise) for like-minded candidates is also a matter of important public interest. The question is thus whether any person could honestly express those opinions on the proved facts? Speaking frankly, it is difficult to understand how any reasonable person would not.

As part of his comment, Mayor Nenshi noted that the secret meeting called by Mr. Wenzel was like a scene out of the movie "The Godfather". This reference is without question an expression of subjective opinion and hyperbole which constitutes "fair comment" under Canadian law. In the context of the proven facts, no reasonable thinking person would conclude, based on this comment, that Mr. Wenzel must be involved in a "mafia-like" organization, as you referred to in your letter, or that he was committing heinous crimes. Rather, the reasonable person would consider this statement as a fair comment about Mr. Wenzel's approach to politics: an individual who has gathered 150 friends to raise money, who is kind and benevolent to those who give respect and agree with his views, but, perhaps, ruthless when something stands in his way.

Finally, I do note, in relation to that "Godfather comment" that Mr. Wenzel, in an interview given to the Calgary Sun published on April 23, 2013, was quoted as follows:

"Then when I think about it, I built this company as a family business. My son now runs this thing day to day. I hope one day my grandson runs it. So we will stay and fight and we won't run away. If Nenshi wants to fight then he's going to get it."
"Our family is more resolved than ever to go after him."

It is unclear what "family" Mr. Wenzel was referring to or how he would "go after him," but I would draw your attention to the further qualified privilege that allows an individual to respond to direct criticism or personal attacks. The statement by Mr. Wenzel to the Calgary Sun certainly appears to engage that definition in respect of Mayor Nenshi. I trust the above fully answers any concerns that Mr. Wenzel or Shane Homes have in this matter. The Mayor respectfully declines your offer to provide an apology "to Mr. Wenzel's satisfaction" as demanded in your letter. To be clear, should your clients decide to pursue a claim, the Mayor will be seeking full reimbursement for any costs incurred in defending such a claim.

Yours truly,
Munaf Mohamed

[Sugarphreak]

...

[FraserB]

Either way, all costs for this should be coming out of Nenshi's pocket. Him campaigning on a talk show is not executing the city's business, so his comments are those of a private party seeking election to office.

[Sugarphreak]

...

[Lex350]

I think Nenshi is a whiney little bitch. He can go off an anybody that doesn’t have their head up his ass but god forbid someone as opposing views to his. He’s a grandstander. He isn’t political savvy, he is media savvy…sadly that will win you more votes in this day and age.

[mr2mike]

Glad I decided against voting for Kevin Taylor this past election. Clearly he's in with the home builders and developers.

[Lex350]

Nenshi makes it sound like the builders are some sort of evil entity that is trying to take over the city and rape your children. The level of influence that the home builders have is peanuts compared to what level of lobbying the BIG developers do. This stuff goes on all the time and like it or not it is part off the political game. I see either a current or former political figure in my boss's office on a bi-weekly basis.

It is no coincidence that many ex-political figures from the city seem to end up invloved with major developments in this city after they have "left" politics.

[Masked Bandit]

Originally posted by FraserB
Either way, all costs for this should be coming out of Nenshi's pocket. Him campaigning on a talk show is not executing the city's business, so his comments are those of a private party seeking election to office.

I heard on the news that at least one of the councilors (Diane Colley-Urquart -sp?) was pretty clear that taxpayers should not be on the hook for his legal costs.

[rage2]

Even if the city doesn't pay for it, there is no way Nenshi will be paying out of pocket. Any law firm would be more than happy to take this pro bono for the media exposure that it's going to get.

I love how it's drawn out in public. I love legal fights like this haha. It is a fairly solid defense that Nenshi's council has.


As your clients are probably aware, justification is a complete defence to any claim of alleged defamation. That is, truth is a complete answer. The law provides that it is sufficient if the substance of the allegation is justified. Based upon the definition of "Campaign Contribution" it is difficult to understand how Mr. Wenzel's confession to a group secretly called to a meeting that he had donated $5,000 and then in addition had thirteen trucks out delivering signs and assembling them would not be a clear violation of the law. Indeed, it would appear that Mr. Wenzel is fortunate that he was not pursued or prosecuted under Section 147.2(5) for contravening the LAEA. In addition, during the course of his statements to his various friends during that meeting, he was clearly explaining to them how they could provide services such as "every United truck" or printing signs for the candidates as a way to obviate the $5,000 limit. That, reasonably construed, again would be a violation of the LAEA.
The reason why Wenzel wasn't pursued or prosecuted was because he didn't do anything illegal, I brought this up in the original thread talking about these accusations. He didn't really personally offer 13 trucks. Those trucks were DD's for employees, who were persuaded enough to volunteer outside of work hours to Kevin Taylor's campaign. I think he just made those comments to exaggerate a bit, and make a point to his peers that he's doing as much as he can. Druh tried to complain about it but it went nowhere. Nenshi bitched about it, and it went nowhere because it didn't break any laws.

Of course, Nenshi's defense can easily be "oh, so that's what you meant when you said offer 13 trucks" and he'd get away with it. You'd have to prove that Nenshi didn't know the actual truth, which isn't exactly easy. Sure, a regular joe like myself figured it out in 10 mins, Nenshi could claim he's too busy to research it properly.

At the end of the day, all Wenzel wants is an apology. He didn't do anything illegal, Nenshi just has to retract his statements, and it all goes away. But we all know Nenshi is too proud to do that, cuz he's never wrong. It's not as fun as the Rob Ford sideshow, but I'll enjoy this while it lasts. :)

[Khyron]

I personally don't want my politicians stepping on eggshells worrying about getting sued for anything they say. Aside from blatant lying for personal gain I want them open and honest.

Nenshi should be covered by the city legal team. That's why he's fighting the lawsuit - Wenzel is throwing out some huge million dollar number as a scare tactic to try and silence opposition. It's not like this was all made up.

If Wenzel thought this was hurting his reputation before, it's 10x now. This isn't the USA. I will gladly remind people what Shane Homes stands for.

I find it funny that no one can do anything to Ford, yet Neshi gets sued for millions for calling someone a name.

[Mibz]

Originally posted by Khyron
I personally don't want my politicians stepping on eggshells worrying about getting sued for anything they say.
This isn't the USA. I'm sure you've seen that fucking hilarious political ads on American channels where candidates make each other out to be pedophile wife beating drug addicted devils. That's what you get when politicians are allowed freedom to make borderline slanderous statements.

Would it be great to have politicians that could be free to say what they want? Yeah, absolutely, but you're dreaming if you think that freedom wouldn't be abused. Nenshi knows the laws and he chose to push his luck. This is the result. What Nenshi said, he said during a campaign, not as mayor. If a losing candidate got sued for something he said during campaign would the City cover it? I don't fucking think so.

I had to unsub from /r/calgary after this. Fucking people are talking about a Kickstarter for Nenshi if he has to pay out of pocket.

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by Mibz
I had to unsub from /r/calgary after this. Fucking people are talking about a Kickstarter for Nenshi if he has to pay out of pocket.

Even if city won't cover it, he should have campaign funds left over to deal with this. But I'm not surprise /r/calgary will raise more $ for him.


Finally, I do note, in relation to that "Godfather comment" that Mr. Wenzel, in an interview given to the Calgary Sun published on April 23, 2013, was quoted as follows:

"Then when I think about it, I built this company as a family business. My son now runs this thing day to day. I hope one day my grandson runs it. So we will stay and fight and we won't run away. If Nenshi wants to fight then he's going to get it."
"Our family is more resolved than ever to go after him."

It is unclear what "family" Mr. Wenzel was referring to or how he would "go after him," but I would draw your attention to the further qualified privilege that allows an individual to respond to direct criticism or personal attacks. The statement by Mr. Wenzel to the Calgary Sun certainly appears to engage that definition in respect of Mayor Nenshi. I trust the above fully answers any concerns that Mr. Wenzel or Shane Homes have in this matter. The Mayor respectfully declines your offer to provide an apology "to Mr. Wenzel's satisfaction" as demanded in your letter. To be clear, should your clients decide to pursue a claim, the Mayor will be seeking full reimbursement for any costs incurred in defending such a claim.

I love how the lawyer is implying Godfather again at the end of that release. :rofl:

[guessboi]

I guess Nenshi didn't purchase any liability insurance as a Mayor for advertising injury, otherwise he is covered under insurance.

[cam_wmh]

Originally posted by Masked Bandit


I heard on the news that at least one of the councilors (Diane Colley-Urquart -sp?) was pretty clear that taxpayers should not be on the hook for his legal costs.
Of course she'd say that, she's as much as in Cal's pocket, as Kevin Taylor is.

[rage2]

Originally posted by Xtrema
I love how the lawyer is implying Godfather again at the end of that release. :rofl:
haha yup, sounds a lot like our lawyers when we draft up our responses lol.

[asp integra]

Originally posted by Khyron
I personally don't want my politicians stepping on eggshells worrying about getting sued for anything they say. Aside from blatant lying for personal gain I want them open and honest.

Nenshi should be covered by the city legal team. That's why he's fighting the lawsuit - Wenzel is throwing out some huge million dollar number as a scare tactic to try and silence opposition. It's not like this was all made up.

If Wenzel thought this was hurting his reputation before, it's 10x now. This isn't the USA. I will gladly remind people what Shane Homes stands for.

I find it funny that no one can do anything to Ford, yet Neshi gets sued for millions for calling someone a name.

Agreed 100%

[rage2]

Originally posted by Khyron
I personally don't want my politicians stepping on eggshells worrying about getting sued for anything they say. Aside from blatant lying for personal gain I want them open and honest.

Nenshi should be covered by the city legal team. That's why he's fighting the lawsuit - Wenzel is throwing out some huge million dollar number as a scare tactic to try and silence opposition. It's not like this was all made up.

If Wenzel thought this was hurting his reputation before, it's 10x now. This isn't the USA. I will gladly remind people what Shane Homes stands for.

I find it funny that no one can do anything to Ford, yet Neshi gets sued for millions for calling someone a name.

Originally posted by asp integra
Agreed 100%
I think that's the point of the Wenzel lawsuit, and that's Nenshi was lying for personal gain. Contrary to what Nenshi says about free speech and silencing opposition, defamation laws still exists so that you can't say anything you want without consequences.

[UndrgroundRider]

This whole thing has been blown so far out of proportion that it's comical. It's absolutely ridiculous, on both sides.

With that said, and being completely honest, I do think Carl Wenzel has been defamed. But I also think that's part of politics. As the saying goes, if you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen.

I found the original "secret meeting" video to be extremely tame compared to how the media was portraying it. It didn't appear to me that Wenzel did anything wrong in the video. It was the media that attached labels like "secret meeting" and "hidden camera." Simply put Wenzel was promoting pro-development candidates. He recommended that people who have industry interests also contribute campaign donations to those candidates. There is nothing wrong with that. That's how democracy is supposed to work.

Also, I have a variety of issues with the claim that Wenzel has over contributed or admitted to over contributing.
[list=1] Perhaps I'm being pedantic, but who's to say the trucks weren't operated by volunteers? Wenzel said "I had 13 trucks out last election delivery signs and assembling them". If I had organized and recruited a bunch of volunteers to deliver signs, that's exactly how I would've put it too. So I don't think anything he said implicitly admits guilt to anything.
This one surprised me the most, and maybe I'm missing something, but under the LAEA, the volunteering of services doesn't appear to be limited to just people. As such, a corporation (being a legal entity), can volunteer its own services to the candidate. This would allow its services to be excluded from the contribution limit according to 147.1(1)a.
It's unclear whether Wenzel is contributing his own personal funds, or corporate funds. Since both himself and his company each have separate $5,000 contribution limits, it's conceivable that he could contribute $5,000 in cash personally, and then the services through the corporation.
The issue was clearly known to the authorities. If Wenzel was guilty of this, why was there no fine? Nenshi has claimed there's no recourse, yet the LAEA clearly sets out a fine of up to $5,000 for infractions.[/list=1]

Ultimately, I'm of the opinion that Wenzel appears to be acting in good faith and abiding by what he thought was the contribution limit. This is a far cry from the mob boss Nenshi has suggested Wenzel is. And that's my ultimate point, regardless of the legal questions, even if we assume the worst, it's hardly damning enough to be calling someone a criminal or to suggest they're involved in organized crime.

On the other hand I feel the media has twisted Nenshi's interview as well. He was goaded into making that statement by the host of the radio show, and to top that off, the tone of his voice made it obvious that he was half-joking and talking in a very tongue-in-cheek manner. To respond to that with a $6m defamation suit is just insanity. The lawsuit could be the poster boy for vexatious litigation. It's clearly an abuse of the legal system. Even though I do think Nenshi was wrong to make his comments on Wenzel, I don't think Wenzel has a legal basis for his claims.

[cam_wmh]

Nenshi files statement of defence

http://www.cbc.ca/m/news/#!/content/1.2496736

[GTS4tw]

Originally posted by cam_wmh
Nenshi files statement of defence

http://www.cbc.ca/m/news/#!/content/1.2496736

Link doesnt work

[interlude]

Originally posted by GTS4tw


Link doesnt work

Maybe try copy and pasting

link (http://www.cbc.ca/m/news/#!/content/1.2496736)

[cam_wmh]

Odd. I copy/pasted the link while on my phone. Just clicked it in my browser and works fine.

[suntan]

Originally posted by rage2

haha you didn't even read the ASP did you? Keystone Hills is the new condos in the suburbs plan that the city approved to attempt to curb urban sprawl. It's going to be condo city over there. That's what the developers like Wenzel are bitching about.

I'm quite excited to see how this project turns out, if there is an actual demand for high density housing in the middle of nowhere (I don't believe there will be). Every new community for the past 15-20 years has required "high-density" development in it. There's a ton of condos in Royal Oak, for instance. There hasn't been an exclusive R-1 community in decades. Hell there's literally zero R-1 communities left in Calgary because of rezoning (Parkland, I think, was the last holdout).

Sorry for the late reply, for some reason Beyond's forums have been loading super-slow for me for the past while. Posting here has been a clusterfuck. Fucking Shaw.

[rage2]

Originally posted by rage2
No, Nenshi said Wenzel may have broken election laws and that an investigation should be started to look into the practices. There was no investigation nor inquiry and it ended there, because nothing illegal took place. Meanwhile, the public thinks Wenzel is shady.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/nenshi-wenzel-ten-thousand-1.3365311


Cal Wenzel has been ordered to pay Naheed Nenshi $10,000 as part of an ongoing legal dispute between the two men that started when Calgary's mayor referenced the film The Godfather in relation to the homebuilder.

Judge David Gates' decision relates to an attempt by Wenzel, the founder of Shane Homes, to avoid a jury trial in his $6 million defamation suit against Nenshi for the comments, made during the 2013 municipal election campaign.

Look at those comments haha. Mission accomplished Nenshi, regardless of what the outcome of the trial is going to be.

[88CRX]

Originally posted by rage2

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/nenshi-wenzel-ten-thousand-1.3365311



Look at those comments haha. Mission accomplished Nenshi, regardless of what the outcome of the trial is going to be.

Yup. Nenshi got away with exactly what he's being accused of doing.


Smart judge, this was a nuisance lawsuit filed by a cry baby who hates Democracy.


Justice. That arrogant swine of a developer got caught pushing nothing but BS.


Good, I will never consider Caz's homes for purchase. The arrogance of this guy is mind boggling. He should just drop the entire thing and save himself some embarrassment.


Shane homes shall forever be known as SHAME homes. Never going to buy a home from them for this arrogant attitude. The video says it all.... What a joke, Wenzel, give it up..


Developers are a plague upon this city.
.

Mr. Wenzel has been given terrible advice in this matter. Of course sometimes you cannot advise arrogant people.


Not a fan of people like Cal Wenzel...a man who sells over-priced homes so that he can fund his frivolous lawsuits...proof that money cannot buy happiness...some people are "miserable for life".


A residential developer being sketchy? That never happens xD

[Xtrema]

Just a recap, correct me if I'm wrong.

This is an attempt that Wenzel want to keep the $6M suit away from a jury trial and lost. Hence only $10K.

The trial is still going in Feb and since there's a jury, Wenzel most likely will lose. So Wenzel will end up with all the fees and nothing to show for it.

[rage2]

Originally posted by Xtrema
Just a recap, correct me if I'm wrong.

This is an attempt that Wenzel want to keep the $6M suit away from a jury trial and lost. Hence only $10K.

The trial is still going in Feb and since there's a jury, Wenzel most likely will lose. So Wenzel will end up with all the fees and nothing to show for it.
Correct. I do think this is a lost case for Wenzel.

In the eyes of the public, he's fucking Satan. Sad, because he's done a lot for this city that in some way benefited some of the authors of those above comments. :(

[88CRX]

Originally posted by rage2

In the eyes of the public, he's fucking Satan. Sad, because he's done a lot for this city that in some way benefited some of the authors of those above comments. :(

Most/all the larger home builders in this City do tons of charity work/donations for local and community improvements that go unknown or unappreciated as they are all "greedy devil developers" according to some.

[rage2]

Originally posted by 88CRX
Most/all the larger home builders in this City do tons of charity work/donations for local and community improvements that go unknown or unappreciated as they are all "greedy devil developers" according to some.
Except Cardel, because they're car guys trying to get us a racetrack. :thumbsup:

[88CRX]

Originally posted by rage2

Except Cardel, because they're car guys trying to get us a racetrack. :thumbsup:

:rofl: :rofl:

Except when people start to put two and two together.... like at the end of this thread when the hate starts.

http://forums.beyond.ca/st/385590/spotted-lambo-of-some-sort-lol/

and there's plenty more.

[R-Audi]

From what I heard, Cardel wont be around Calgary much longer... while I cant find anything besides their building being for sale to back it up, apparently they have major tax issues with the Gov't and are trying to get out of Canada all together...like in the hundreds of millions owing

[rage2]

They're in the middle of a huge legal battle with the CRA. It's been ongoing for some time now. Last I heard they countersued the CRA for damages.

[88CRX]

I was trying to find that thread on here as I'm sure there were a few lol's directed at that home builder. Couldn't find it though.