Posted on 06/21/2015 5:01:15 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
We politicize pretty much every issue these days, so it’s no surprise to see a proposed new arena for the Milwaukee Bucks pro basketball team similarly framed.
One of the rallying cries of opponents is that Gov. Scott Walker and his Republican majority allies in the state Legislature have misplaced priorities. That is, they should find ways to put more public money into public schools and the UW System rather than commit tax dollars for a new playpen for the Bucks and their wealthy players and owners.
The sentiment is understandable, but the issues are separate.
The Bucks arena funding plan calls for $4 million a year in state tax funding for 20 years; the total is capped at $80 million. Any cost overruns and interest on the bonds would be covered by the Bucks or other sources. The rest of the arena’s $500 million estimated cost would be covered as follows: $150 million from the Bucks owners, $100 million from former Bucks owner Herb Kohl, $80 million from Milwaukee County covered by more aggressive collection of unpaid taxes, etc., and $93 million in Wisconsin Center District use of existing revenue streams, such as room taxes in Milwaukee.
The city of Milwaukee would contribute $47 million by creating a tax increment finance district and paying for a parking ramp.
When the Bucks’ new owners took control last year, the deal included a provision that if construction of a new arena did not start by 2017, the National Basketball Association would buy back the team and move the franchise. That makes the choice clear; build an arena or lose the Bucks.
Rick Chandler, Walker’s budget director, said the deal is a net revenue producer for Wisconsin. He points to a March memo from the nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Burau that said that over the same 20 years we’d spend $80 million in state taxes, the Bucks would generate $130 million in income taxes from the players and another $169 million in projected income tax growth.
Chandler also pointed out that if the Bucks leave, the state would be on the hook for $120 million in needed improvements to the Bradley Center over the next 10 years. The state is responsible for upkeep on the Bradley Center, where the Bucks now play but which would be torn down if a new arena is built. Combined with the aforementioned loss of $299 million in income tax revenue, the public cost of losing the Bucks would be at least $419 million over 20 years.
The Bucks’ owners also plan to create an entertainment district around the arena, an investment estimated at $500 million. That would create additional jobs and help energize our state’s largest city and bring in visitors.
People harp about why Milwaukee can’t be more vibrant — like the Twin Cities. That’s a complex issue, but Target Center, Target Field, the new Minnesota Vikings’ stadium, the Xcel Energy Center, the St. Paul Saints new baseball stadium and the Minneapolis Convention Center all were built in the Twin Cities with public tax assistance.
Walker’s motto is that it’s “Cheaper To Keep Them” — them, meaning the Bucks — and the numbers back him up. And it also will help keep Milwaukee a major league city.
Sure, because the newspaper that counts on sports coverage to boost circulation doesn’t have a bias on this issue.
—Walker’s motto is that it’s “Cheaper To Keep Them” — them, meaning the Bucks — and the numbers back him up—
If the numbers back Walker up then the numbers support his strategy, and thereby Walker’s policies. What’s the problem?
As for the public schools, and the whinning unions, Walker’s right on with that as well. Too bad he can’t scrap the whole educational system and start over. Maybe the kids’ll learn something.
Around here, it's a real sore issue. The county gov "invested" millions for a Browns scoreboard. That's for events most residents of the county can't afford to attend. That's while towns and cities are starving because there's not enough money for local services. Then there's cigarette taxes being used to fund stadiums where there's no smoking.
Small government pols just don't use tax money (whatever the source) for unnecessary construction projects.
So if Governor Walker wants to drug test welfare recipients getting financial handouts from the state then will they be drug testing the owners of the Milwaukee Bucks?
The state makes money off its investment in the Bucks, unlike welfare recipients.
Not as much money as the Bucks make off of the deal.
I read daily hit pieces on Walker in my local socialist rag, the La Crosse (WI) Tribune. It is refreshing to read a somewhat positive article.
Because the Bucks invested more than the state.
Are you a socialist? Do you think all property belongs to the state?
Wisconsin is on the hook for the current stadium. By investing some money, they will get a positive return and be relieved of the liability the existing stadium places on taxpayers.
It is a win-win all around
Not as much money as the Bucks make off of the deal.
What's your point? Since the Bucks make more than the state, should they be forced to share?
mook
I think that the team should change it’s name because the current name is sexist. They could have called it the “Does” but they chose the masuline “Bucks”. I think the MSM and the national womens group should start a national petition to change the teams’ name to the “Dollars”. But that might be offensive to other nations who use different currencies. Maybe they should just call them the “Team with no name”. But that might be offensive to teams with names. Oh I just can’t fully understand this PC crap.
I’m with you.
Time to take the nation out from under the microscope and off the psychiatrist’s couch. People need to get real degrees in things that produce something of value - close up shop on all the social science bs. It would be nice if all the naval gazers and all the talking head experts would disappear.
So when the state pays out $20,000 it's a welfare parasite. When they pay out 2,000 times as much then it's good business. It's all clear now.
Don't put words in my mouth or this will get nasty.
The state is on the hook for the existing stadium due to past governors. This is a way to get out from that obligation and make money off it.
It is the right way to end cronyism.
It has nothing to do with welfare recipients.
Having a major sports franchise in your city is good for the economy, duh, that’s why governments sometimes fund stadiums.
As far as I’m concerned, the government has no business “investing” in anything. The role of government should be limited and it should not be in the business of either making or distributing money.
Sports, education, welfare. Three areas where the government should butt out. (I have nothing against the first two, just against government involvement. “Welfare” as we know it should not exist. True charity should be a private, non-government effort.)
This is the welfare parasite you should be ranting about.
http://spectator.org/articles/63179/government-should-stop-subsidizing-tesla-billionaire-musk
I misread the headline as “It’s cheaper to keep Buicks”. And until they disintegrate, usually it is.
: )
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.