Entry tags:
Life in these Untidy States: Stadium--The Abridged Edition
I guess I can boil down my last post into a couple of simple questions:
Does investing public money into building a stadium actually yield a net economic benefit to the community?
*Note that Santa Clara is one of the few municipalities in Northern California that has its own, independent power generation facilities, and thus is not a serf to PG&E; as a result, they're one of the targets of Proposition 16, officially named the "Right To Vote Act", but generally recognized as the "PG&E Power Grab" or "Monopoly Preservation Act".
Does investing public money into building a stadium actually yield a net economic benefit to the community?
If so, does it actually provide more of a benefit than investing the same public money into, say, public transit or public utilities*?
*Note that Santa Clara is one of the few municipalities in Northern California that has its own, independent power generation facilities, and thus is not a serf to PG&E; as a result, they're one of the targets of Proposition 16, officially named the "Right To Vote Act", but generally recognized as the "PG&E Power Grab" or "Monopoly Preservation Act".
no subject
no subject
A little lead time and a chance to adjust to the concept of "work is over, but home is in the opposite direction" should leave me more amenable; I kinda have to steel myself to the idea of "going out and doing stuff".
no subject
no subject
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/10217817.stm
'Local people love it. Even those who live in shacks in Matsafeni village right next to it love their new "giraffe stadium". But they would also like to have mains water and electricity - and proper housing. And a tar road ... Mbombela council promised the people of Matsafeni that the building of the stadium would be matched by improvements to the village. But nothing happened.'
no subject
This kind of thing can revitalize an inner city -- bringing people outside the city limits inside to spend money, prop up new restaurants, hotels, etc.
Now, in the long run, this can make the inner city more appealing to businesses looking for a city structure office location.
But it all depends on so many factors. Maybe the team sucks constantly and has trouble selling tickets. Maybe the only businesses that pop up are strip clubs and sports bars that release drunks into the streets. Maybe the businesses that are attracted in are unethical or become too large so that the community finds itself entirely dependent on the company doing well. It's a gamble.
But for some cities, it's pretty much a given that it will increase tourism and spending.
Did something similar in Minneapolis. It helped, but once you cross into a certain area, property taxes triple. This is why I don't a condo north of I-94 :P
no subject
It still sounds like a bad deal for this area, though, especially since Santa Clara doesn't really have much in the way of an "inner city" to benefit; the stadium will be dropped into an area currently dominated by business parks, hotels, the Santa Clara convention center, and the Great America theme park (which seems to change hands annually). In fact, it's slated for the land that the city currently leases TO Great America for parking overflow.
And again, I'm still not convinced that an inner city venue wouldn't benefit more from other forms of urban renewal, including, say, tax breaks or rent subsidies for downtown businesses.
no subject
- Santa Clara born & bred
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
Most likely, taxation will be dropped hardest on property owners -- both to tax the more wealthy who can own/afford lovely condos and homes, as well as force out "undesirable" businesses and local shops. It's not all pretty -- some decent book-stores or other well-loved shops with a deserved reputation will probably get hurt...
no subject
In addition to our recent experience with the newly built Cowboys' stadium, we had a similar experience some years ago with the construction of the Ballpark at Arlington (the Texas Rangers' baseball stadium). Just about the time that stadium outlived its tax breaks, we started a second one. And the whole idea of it revitalizing other local businesses like restaurants and hotels, the fact is that games/events cause so much traffic that people would rather go to further away from the stadium itself to eat and sleep after. Furthermore, many of the studies I read (in the run up to the stadium being built) suggest that tourism is not actually good for the people who live in a community.
no subject
OLYMPICS.
And after?
Lok at the crap at Wembley and White City...
White City is just improving (maybe) now, the 'Lympies were 1908 and 1948