You do realize that almost all of the professional Sports Arenas are, at best,

[WCGreen]

publicly subsidized and, at worst, public owned with only minimum benefit to the community.

Even the practice areas for these teams are almost exclusively publicly owned for the benefit of the few elite athletics who, BTW, are almost certainly millionaires.

Now the real twist in all of this is that most of the Team Owners are free marketing proponents who are big donors for the GOP.

This is what we call Privatizing the Benefits and Socializing the Costs.

Most big northern cities are literally held up for "abatements" of potential public money in order to keep what for many is the only attraction left in the Down Town area. In many cases the Stadiums are built with a sales tax which is the most regressive of all taxes.

Remember, these are the same guys who are always letting the free-market rule the day. Unless, of course, they set up thievery of epic proportions.

GWBush was one of those socializing the costs back when he was granted almost free partnership in The Texas Rangers Baseball team, the one business he wasn't a failure in. But his success depended on public financing and privatized benefits.

Oh the Irony and yet people will blindly support ballot initiatives to tax themselves so the rich can get richer and the poor, well, we all know where that proof goes...

[RollWithIt]

1. I kind of disagree that all of them have little public benefit

Particularly NBA and MLB facilities. Thousands and thousands of jobs are created. A majority of those jobs are actually outside the arena to service the mass of people as they come in and out of town.

It really depends on the city itself though.

[Ikonoklast]

3. Yeah, Thousands of low-paying service industry jobs.

And those lowly-paid proles are taxed so millionaires can run around chasing a ball.

For many of them, they'll never be able to afford a ticket to see the very games they subsidize with their tax money, unless they got a job selling beer or hot dogs inside.

What a great deal for them.

[quiller4]

43. I question your categorization of the jobs as "low pay".

In more than a few communities the sports stadium jobs are the only hospitality industry jobs that are union and pay substantially better that the comparable jobs at hotels, restaurants and non-municipal conference centers in the region.

[WCGreen]

47. Pleae enlighten me...

Name the cities that have union service workers in sports arenas?

[WCGreen]

4. So you have 80 days with a Baseball Team, 41 with a Basketball Team

And 8 with a Football Team...

Spike in Traffic and a bit of bonus time in the Parking Lots.

A plus but not an off set...

Here in Cleveland, they are letting Charities come in for about half the games and man a good chunk of concession stands. The folks from the Charities are not being taxed on their wages. They take jobs away from low income people who depend on that income. The Team gets free publicity, the charity gets tax free funds and, the best part for team owners, they cut operating costs by not having to pay payroll taxes and unemployment insurance.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

24. Wow - we're even bashing charities now?

Are you listening to yourself?

[WCGreen]

32. Promising jobs to inner city people and then giving several

of these jobs to charities such as Catholic and Lutheran Schools in order to offset their parents tuition obligations or supporting a girls attempt to be a professional Figure Skater.

These are Charities they are non profit organizations. Big difference.

And yea, I take that action to task especially when the unemployment for Clevelanders is about 25% and I am listening to myself.

And you know what, the Club gets a tax cut a feel good publicity while taking money from the people who need it most.

[Ikonoklast]

51. WC is exactly correct on this one.

If you have a non-profit organization, or a charity, and the labor is donated, they get a cut of the profits for manning the concession stands.

Team owners get free labor, don't have to pay health and welfare, or workers comp on those volunteers, and less jobs are available to those city residents that were promised the moon in response to raising their own taxes.

I know. I've done it, and it's a fucking sweet racket for the owners.

About 50% of the stands are mannned by volunteers at any given game.

[Hawkowl]

44. Can you do math?

Divide the subsidy by the number of jobs and you will be appalled. Fortunately there is study after study on the monumental waste of money and lack of jobs that these "public" stadiums create. Go ahead stretch yourself and do a little research.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

2. Absolutely right!

And yet people will support these measures...

Because why? I have no idea. Patriotism? Love of the game?

It makes me think of voting against your own self-interest.


K&R

[TreasonousBastard]

5. And it's been fascinating watching...

the torches and pitchforks out for CEOs who make too much money running companies that make stuff and hire people, while nobody seems to object to a point guard or pitcher signing a $10 million contract and doubling that with endorsements.

(The trick must be to find a CEO with a good fastball.)

[WCGreen]

6. Good point...

What's really ironic is that the public financing of the playing venues has allowed owners to pay huge salaries since they have virtually no cost other than talent and administration.

The players know this so there is a huge bargaining position to work from.

[TreasonousBastard]

7. Years ago I read many studies showing what a bad deal a...

new stadium is. Convention centers are another boondoggle sold to cities, but that's another story...

Anyway, back when Rudy was trying to get a new Yankee Stadium, and the Mets, Nets, Jets, Giants, Islanders, and a few others were making noises, all these studies came back to haunt.

Build we must, though, whether it makes sense or not.

[SharonAnn]

16. THe owners are making mega-millions, but their revenue isn't published.

They're in it for the money (for themselves). No other reason.

And, studies show that attendees are simply siphoned from other entertainment venues who then lay off workers and close down.

[Ironman3476]

20. True,with at least 1 exception-Green Bay

The fans own the Green Bay Packers,and the attendees oftentimes travel great distances. It's almost like a religous revivalor something. They're not siphoned off something else-it's been said that they're the ONLY game in town.

[xxqqqzme]

45. My brother travels from Sacramento

to attend Green Bay games for the very reason you mention. He loves staying after the game to help 'sweep' up too. (No, he has never lived there.)

[Captain Hilts]

9. The point guard doesn't cost me anything if I don't go to the games. nt

[WCGreen]

33. Wanna bet. If you buy anything taxable in most city's that

have a publically financed venue, you are more than likely paying for that point gaurd, or the back-up Center and all the other guys on the bench.

[Captain Hilts]

8. Baseball stadiums employ a lot of people, including the homeless who get paid to clean the stands

after games.

And the places around the stadium benefit a lot.

[WCGreen]

10. But the investment doesn't justify the results...

Money raised through taxation and spent on private enterprise should have a better return than 81, 41 or 8 days of work a year.

What would be better would be to create money to find gainfully employment for the homeless and unemployed.

[Captain Hilts]

11. The results are not all quantifiable, though I have consistently criticized cities

for building stadiums that people vote AGAINST, as in Pittsburgh and Philadelphia.

Building football-only stadiums is a stunning waste of money. Ravens stadium in Baltimore right in the parking lot of Camden Yards. Disgusting welfare for the wealthy.

The $800m project for the Nationals' stadium is obscene. They could have put $50m in RFK and used it for another ten years. Disgusting.

[ProudDad]

17. Have you lived near a stadium?

Just wondering ... cause the area around the ones I've seen are pretty run-down...worst parts of town...

[Captain Hilts]

21. That is often the case, but not always. I've lived near those in Toronto, DC and Baltimore.

The stadiums really helped the areas there, though I know that is always not the case.

[JMMendez1989]

12. All About Message

While 80 % of the rich are a bunch of greedy people, there is a 20 % that doesn't want inequality, BUT the Republicans do a good job of making them think Democrats (Progressives) don't like them. We should focus on a message that reassures those good 20 %. It could be great for us and a bad for Wingers.

FDR was great with this, other then his huge mistake of trying to pack the courts.

[amborin]

13. totally agree!

[KittyWampus]

14. Yes I realize it and that's why Michael Vick and ALL arena sports team members should be subject

to a morality clause with no exemptions for certain behavior.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

25. They all already have morality clauses. (nt)

[Zoeisright]

15. Yep! In Minnesota, the 35W bridge fell down. MNDOT funding was slashed.

And we're getting a brand new Twins baseball stadium and have a brand new Gopher's stadium for the U of M. And the Vikings are whining for one too.

Don't we have our priorities in order, though??

:sarcasm:

[ProudDad]

18. Bread and Circuses

The working class gets some circus (mostly on TV)

And the rich f*ck owners take home the bread...

And the sheeple sleep on...

[NYC_SKP]

26. +1 Pay no attention to what you're government is doing, there's a game to watch. nt

[eridani]

19. Whythehell not just allow cities or regions to own the teams outright?

Way cheaper than the stadium subsidies.

[Blue_Tires]

22. fwiw the Packers are publicly owned, iirc

[eridani]

29. That's a model for all major league sports, IMO

The fans own Lambeau Field as well. When I last visited Madison, my cab driver told me that the Packers don't even have professional cheerleaders--high school squads from around the stste of Wisconsin take turns doing the honors.

[thoughtcrime1984]

39. The Packers ARE publicly owned

They also had to ask the residents of Brown County to pay a .5% increase in sales tax to pay for the renovation of Lambeau Field back in 2001, or thereabouts. The referendum barely passed, as there were a lot of contentious non-football fans fighting against it. This .5% increase will be removed when the bond is retired. The cost of the renovation was around 295M, but I know the team picked up a significant portion of that, around 130M. I am a gigantic Packer fan, so I would have personally been willing to pay the increase in sales tax, but I can understand why some would not want to pay it. The renovation really was necessary to keep the GBP viable, as their revenue was slipping towards the bottom of the league, as other, bigger cities, with rich owners were getting brand new stadiums at the expense of taxpayers. Lambeau before the renovation was an antiquated, although much revered stadium, that was not really set up to bring in much revenue outside of actual game days. The new Lambeau is outstanding in design, with many newly added revenue streams, and has allowed the organization to move up to 9th among 32 NFL teams in revenue. The Packers have made available several thousand seats per game, available only to Brown County taxpayers, and those are chosen lottery-style. The winners for each game, if they accept the chance to buy tickets (unsure of the limit, probably 2), pay face-value for the seat, which is $59. Anybody who has ever gone to a game at Lambeau, knows that season tickets have been sold out for decades, and generally the only way to get tickets is through a ticket broker or from a private party who is unable to make it to the game, or just wants to capitalize on their assets. Tickets for the seats like those the Brown County residents receive will generally cost $125-$300 each, sometimes even more, depending on the opponent, and how the Packers are faring in the particular season. So, the $59 tickets seem to be a good deal for those who receive them.

[Jennicut]

23. I think Bob Kraft (Patriots) has been giving to Dems since the 70's. But I know the other ones are

total Rethugs.

[newportdadde]

27. Nothing like paying sales taxes to renovate stadiums for billionares for tickets I can't afford.

[AngryAmish]

28. Another reason why the PGA rocks

[Zoeisright]

34. +1

[RepublicanElephant]

30. nfl team money to gop....

most $$$$:
San Diego Chargers:
total: $2,455,200
to dems: $40,773 - 2%
to repubs: $2,414,427 - 98%

least $:
St Louis Rams
total: $234,800
to dems: $230,050 - 2%
to repubs: $4,750 - 98%

list of all teams here:
http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2009/09/politicians-score-significant.html

[WCGreen]

31. Great find....

[Yavin4]

35. New Stadia Can Raise The Property Values of the Surrounding Area

SF's Pac Bell stadium has definitely improved the area where it was built. As the property around it goes up in value, more tax revenue flows into the city.

[WinkyDink]

36. Housing, or commercial properties owned by the wealthy?

[WCGreen]

38. Does it off set the Property tax rebate given to the Stadium...

Of course San Fran is acity that doesn't depend all that much on the Giants for attracting people down town.

But cities such as Cleveland and Detroit do.

[Yavin4]

40. I Lived In SF For Four Years

This was long before that stadium was built. I went back to go to the stadium, and that was the very first time that I was ever in that neighborhood. Before that stadium, it was a really depressed economic area.

So, my argument is that if you can revive a poor economic area by building a new stadium there, then yes, it's worth it to the tax payers because over time, new revenue comes into the city.

[WCGreen]

46. Most cities that host Major Leagues don't have established Downtowns

all ready such as San Fran. They just expanded growth to a new area. For most cities, it's go to the game and then go home.

[Yavin4]

48. That's Not 100% True

Look at Baltimore. Their baseball stadium lead to a brand new tourist attraction known as the inner harbor which has also attracted new development and more businesses. Or Cleveland with the Rock & Roll HOF and their stadiums and ballparks.

The key question is how much does a new stadium lead to other commercial and residential development around the new stadium, esp. if you're talking about a moribound development area. If you're a city that's looking to raise property values in a bad area, then yes, it may make sense to build a new arena in that area.

I think that the Baltimore inner harbor and SF China Basin developments prove that it may be worth it.

[Telly Savalas]

53. What happens to the property values of the stadium that gets abandon when the team moves

into the new stadium?

I'm not saying it's a zero sum game, but if you ignore the impact of closing down the old stadium then you're radically overestimating the net economic benefits of building a new stadium.

[conscious evolution]

37. Add in the training subsidies for future athletes

that every school board pays out to feed the pro leagues and it adds up to a lot of taxpayer dollars being wasted for a handful of peoples private profit.

Has anyone ever added up all the money taxpayers are billed to subsidize pro sports farm sytems in public schools?

[RepublicanElephant]

41. george bush and texas stadium...

"I have a stack of court documents from Arlington that portray the ''sordid and shocking tale'' of the Rangers stadium, as one lawsuit puts it. Essentially, Mr. Bush and the owners' group he led bullied and misled the city into raising taxes to build a $200 million stadium that in effect would be handed over to the Rangers. As part of the deal, the city would even confiscate land from private owners so that the Rangers owners could engage in real estate speculation."
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/16/opinion/bush-and-the-texas-land-grab.html

[Hutzpa]

42. Put in simpler terms

"using you won fat to fry you" big corporations have been doing this since Reagan
and it got escalated by Bush II where companies use public money (tax payer funds)
to build public entities and in turn charge joe public exorbitant amount to use
these same facilities that have been funded by the tax payer.

[Yavin4]

49. Most Businesses Get All Kinds of Breaks from the Taxpayers, not just Stadiums

If a business wants to locate in most cities in the U.S., they will get breaks from the local and state governments in the name of tax breaks or even direct subsidies, some of those breaks are going to be even larger than a stadium gets.

For example, in NYC, before Times Square was gentrified, it was teeming with porn theaters, prostitutes, and street crime. The Marriott opened a big hotel there, and they got all kinds of tax breaks from the city and the state to do it. Over time, the porn theaters closed. The prostitutes and street crime left, and the area has returned to being a booming tourist haven, which has created 1000s of jobs and increased city revenue.

The lesson learned here is sometimes it does make sense for a city to offer tax breaks and subsidies to revitalize an economically depressed area.

[johnaries]

50. Wait a minute, let me tell you what happens in my town.

Our football arena (LP Field - TN Titans) is in the dowtown area. Whenever there is a football game, downtown businesses BOOM! Both from locals and out-of-towners. Downtown businesses benefit. Waiters, waitresses, bartenders, and other workers benefit. Plus, since we have both a state and county sales tax, both governments get additional revenue (much of it from people out of state).

So, even though the arena was subsidized by the city and the state (hence "TN Titans" instead of "Nashville Titans"), both are seeing recurring revenues as a result of their investments. Including revenues from out-of-state.

Taxpayers win!

[Telly Savalas]

54. 8 Sunday afternoons each fall is enough to make the subsidies pay for themselves?

That's kind of hard to believe without seeing any numbers to back it up.

On edit: sorry --- that could be up to 10 or so Sundays each year. I live in Kansas City, so it's kind of easy for me to forget about playoff football.

[johnaries]

55. Actually, the stadium is owned by the city and used for a wide

variety of events, including concerts. Also, much of the funding was done through personal seat licenses. Also, LP Building Products pays the cit $30 million over 10 years for naming rights. So the stadium itself is also a source of recurring revenue.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LP_Field

[WCGreen]

58. Are you poticive that doesn't off set the teams obligations

because that happens in other sities all the time...

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

52. +1, -1

[TheKentuckian]

56. Predictably, people are blinded to economic impact from things they dislike

You get benefits from teams in your cities from many direct and probably even more indirect ways, like their ability to help attract companies as well as educated people to communities.

Its not just the jobs created within the stadiums themselves and attracting a slew of millionaires to town but the additional restaurants, stores, hotels, and night life. It drives up the value of tourism for your city, acting as a centerpiece for the arts and attractions in place as well as those cultivated by adding a heavy hitter of a point of interest. A pro sports team is probably worth more than a car plant, an airline hub, or a company headquarters to your town in total economic impact (in fact it may prove difficult to attract or maintain those things without a pro team) and benefits those that never watch a game. Hell, a franchise may well be right up there with a military base in the ability to create a diversified financial impact.

Pro sports are regional stimulus that make your performing arts centers, theaters, and museums (not to mention service based businesses) more viable and attractive.

[WCGreen]

57. If they win....

and that's a big if.

[johnaries]

59. Exactly. I always hated football, yet I supported bringing an NFL

team to town. Simply because I knew it would be good for the area's economy.

Although I'll admit, after watching the Music City Miracle season I've been a huge Titans fan ever since. One yard short of tying the SuperBowl. Dam!

[BlooInBloo]

60. Yep - that's why we lost the sonics. The grifter owners couldn't sucker enough of us to pay for...

a new one.