Public Financing of Stadiums

[Billsmovinup]

Im all for the Bills leaving when NYS employees agree to a 30% across the board paycut, complete elimination of their pensions, and a 50% out of pocket contibution to their health insurance benefits with all savings being directly reflected in lowering of our income taxes, property taxes, and sales taxes.

[What a Tuel]

Whatever your views are on a publicly financed stadium they are valid. But you, like almost everyone, is being subsidized one way or another. If you buy or build a house and borrow to pay for it the interest you pay on your mortgage can be deducted from your income. The real estate taxes you pay also can be deducted from your income. Those deductions are very much a subsidy that renters don't have.

 

Another example is if you have children who go to public schools and your neighbor who doesn't have children is paying taxes for the cost of educating your children while they don't get any direct benefit from their taxes going to the school system.

 

Again, I'm not challenging you on your view about public financing. I'm simply bringing up the point that there are subsidies that most of us get directly or indirectly.

 

Not to mention there are consistently subsidies being handed out to all kinds of for profit businesses.

 

http://buffalonews.com/2013/12/19/yahoo-to-save-200-million-in-sales-tax-on-lockport-center/

 

Yahoo will save $200 million over the next 20 years by not having to pay sales tax on equipment for the second set of buildings in its Lockport data center campus.

 

It was already known that Yahoo would have a 20-year sales tax exemption for building materials and equipment for the second complex it will soon begin building in the town industrial park off Junction Road. The IDA approved that, along with an 18-year property tax exemption, in April.

 

For 205-390 jobs.

 

Yahoo told town planners in September that its second facility will have a capacity of 300 employees, although the company promised in its IDA application to deliver only 115 jobs in the new call center. The existing data center employs about 90 people.

 

But a football team is where we cross the line! They don't employ anyone at all.

Edited May 29, 2017 by What a Tuel

[DriveFor1Outta5]

Whatever your views are on a publicly financed stadium they are valid. But you, like almost everyone, is being subsidized one way or another. If you buy or build a house and borrow to pay for it the interest you pay on your mortgage can be deducted from your income. The real estate taxes you pay also can be deducted from your income. Those deductions are very much a subsidy that renters don't have.

 

Another example is if you have children who go to public schools and your neighbor who doesn't have children is paying taxes for the cost of educating your children while they don't get any direct benefit from their taxes going to the school system.

 

Again, I'm not challenging you on your view about public financing. I'm simply bringing up the point that there are subsidies that most of us get directly or indirectly.

Yes, but the tax break from interest and property tax isn't really a subsidy. I'm still going to pay in more on property than I get back from the tax break. I'm also still going to pay more interest than I'm going to get in return from a tax break. The only equivalent as I mentioned would be the government cutting me a check for half the price of a new home. That's essentially what they are doing, and its ludicrous. I promise I would be beneficial to the local economy too. Build me a house and I'll offer everyone free beer every Friday night.

 

Not to mention there are consistently subsidies being handed out to all kinds of for profit businesses.

 

http://buffalonews.com/2013/12/19/yahoo-to-save-200-million-in-sales-tax-on-lockport-center/

 

 

For 205-390 jobs.

 

 

But a football team is where we cross the line! They don't employ anyone at all.

I don't agree with any of these subsides. I'm a believer in small government that doesn't meddle

with the economy. Unfortunately that ship has sailed as evidenced by many of the responses on this topic. Big government is just sadly part of the world we live in today. Both sides of the political spectrum want to over govern. I will play devils advocate though.

 

Business is often given tax breaks to spur the local economy. Football stadiums do not help local economies. Other business can offer the local economy jobs that are above minimum wage. Without these breaks many of them would fail. We all know that the Pegulas and other NFL owners could pay for their own stadiums. They wouldn't fail without the help.

[Augie]

Im all for the Bills leaving when NYS employees agree to a 30% across the board paycut, complete elimination of their pensions, and a 50% out of pocket contibution to their health insurance benefits with all savings being directly reflected in lowering of our income taxes, property taxes, and sales taxes.

I rarely get into these topics, but.... I don't like the idea of slashing people's pay or increasing the medical expenses. But that's an unfortunate part of life. Things change, and they are free to go find new employment. Wiping out pensions is unconscionable as they may have worked for decades for the benefits they earned. There is no promise of the future, but you have to live up to the promises that were made where one side lived up to the deal. But maybe that's just me.

[Webster Guy]

The part that makes me laugh is when Goodell says we need a new stadium to "compete" with the other NFL cities. Like it would magically help our team win games with a special new field that gave us powers and weakened our opponent. Compete is the wrong word Roger, you mean 'fall in line with other teams and their seat licensing and corporate box ripoffs'

 

It's such a joke, and I'm glad Terry is ignoring that dope. We have a place to tailgate, go inside for three hours, get a beer and maybe some food, watch the team play (and replay on the big screen) and then leave. I need nothing more than what we have, and neither do you.

 

The same goes for NFL owners bank accounts, lets stop pretending everybody needs more when neither the fans nor the owners really do. All cities are different, stop trying to force Buffalo into being something they aren't.

[DriveFor1Outta5]

I rarely get into these topics, but.... I don't like the idea of slashing people's pay or increasing the medical expenses. But that's an unfortunate part of life. Things change, and they are free to go find new employment. Wiping out pensions is unconscionable as they may have worked for decades for the benefits they earned. There is no promise of the future, but you have to live up to the promises that were made where one side lived up to the deal. But maybe that's just me.

No one has to live up to any promises if they don't want to. That's the scary truth. Your pay or health coverage can be slashed, and so can your pension. You're saying that people "earned" their pension. You're right they have, but why should someone else care?

The part that makes me laugh is when Goodell says we need a new stadium to "compete" with the other NFL cities. Like it would magically help our team win games with a special new field that gave us powers and weakened our opponent. Compete is the wrong word Roger, you mean 'fall in line with other teams and their seat licensing and corporate box ripoffs'

 

It's such a joke, and I'm glad Terry is ignoring that dope. We have a place to tailgate, go inside for three hours, get a beer and maybe some food, watch the team play (and replay on the big screen) and then leave. I need nothing more than what we have, and neither do you.

 

The same goes for NFL owners bank accounts, lets stop pretending everybody needs more when neither the fans nor the owners really do. All cities are different, stop trying to force Buffalo into being something they aren't.

Good post. We can debate the merits of corporate welfare all day, but we are missing the point. Why should the local government be forced to pay for something we don't need? All you need is a field with seats for fans. We already have that. Forcing taxpayers to foot the bill to build something we already have is inexplicable.

[Augie]

No one has to live up to any promises if they don't want to. That's the scary truth. Your pay or health coverage can be slashed, and so can your pension. You're saying that people "earned" their pension. You're right they have, but why should someone else care? Good post. We can debate the merits of corporate welfare all day, but we are missing the point. Why should the local government be forced to pay for something we don't need? All you need is a field with seats for fans. We already have that. Forcing taxpayers to foot the bill to build something we already have is inexplicable.

I was a banker/lender for a couple decades. You are a guy I would hope I'd have had enough sense not to deal with. It usually comes down to a gut feeling. I didn't read past the first sentance, as that wa enough.

[DriveFor1Outta5]

I was a banker/lender for a couple decades. You are a guy I would hope I'd have had enough sense not to deal with. It usually comes down to a gut feeling. I didn't read past the first sentance, as that wa enough.

I'm just saying how the world works. I'm glad everyone kept every promise they ever made to you. I never said that it was right. I keep promises that I make. I'm just saying that no company has to keep any promise it makes to its employees. That's the sad truth. You might want to read what I said again. I'd also prefer to go to a lender/banker who reads things twice, and reads beyond the first sentence. So, I'm glad you wouldn't deal with me. I wouldn't want to deal with you either. I like bankers who read and interpret things correctly. Instead, you read poorly and randomly attack someones character. Edited May 29, 2017 by DriveFor1Outta5

[Augie]

Maybe because of my background, I can go on about this forever. That's not relevant or productive here. It always comes down to what's in writing. That's how the courts will judge. I will say, cancelling retirement plans is going too far. I'll prefer not to side with the devil on that one. Have you heard of Chainsaw Al Dunlap? I used to play tennis with him. I regret that. He should have been shunned.

[Augie]

 

There is a reason courts protect retirement accounts beyond the level of other assets.

[Boatdrinks]

Yes, but the tax break from interest and property tax isn't really a subsidy. I'm still going to pay in more on property than I get back from the tax break. I'm also still going to pay more interest than I'm going to get in return from a tax break. The only equivalent as I mentioned would be the government cutting me a check for half the price of a new home. That's essentially what they are doing, and its ludicrous. I promise I would be beneficial to the local economy too. Build me a house and I'll offer everyone free beer every Friday night. I don't agree with any of these subsides. I'm a believer in small government that doesn't meddle

with the economy. Unfortunately that ship has sailed as evidenced by many of the responses on this topic. Big government is just sadly part of the world we live in today. Both sides of the political spectrum want to over govern. I will play devils advocate though.

Business is often given tax breaks to spur the local economy. Football stadiums do not help local economies. Other business can offer the local economy jobs that are above minimum wage. Without these breaks many of them would fail. We all know that the Pegulas and other NFL owners could pay for their own stadiums. They wouldn't fail without the help.

They certainly wouldn't fail without the help. They also would just move somewhere else that will give them what they want. We all realize that stadiums don't benefit the economy. But protesting by not giving what is requested gets you nothing for being a trend setter. Just costs the city it's team. Perhaps that's fine in say , San Diego where there's many other things to do that time of year. Paying for stadiums may not be right, along with many other things in the business / political world. Pretending you can change it is pointless.

[gjv001]

 

As Kirby has explained several times, the Bills can't increase revenues, like ticket prices, in any significant way in the current stadium.

I don't know Kirby, nor have I had the opportunity to hear his arguments. But to say the Bills can't raise ticket prices in the current stadium seems short sighted.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

...link to summary of stadiums opened since 1997 breaking down public vs private funding percentages.......

 

https://cbsminnesota.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/nfl-funding-summary-12-2-11.pdf

[SoCal Deek]

This topic always cracks me up. It's way more complicated than all of the arm chair Developers on here make it out to be.

 

For example, if the 'billionaire' Owner had to build his own stadium you do realize he'd also have to substantially raise the ticket prices to pay for the debt service...right? How do you think a restaurant pays for their kitchen?

 

Stadiums have always had a community value. And it's not all that easy to measure that impact. They are not the Pegula Bills. They are the Buffalo Bills. The community at large gets 'some' name recognition benefit.

 

In the end it's the same supply and demand challenge as every thing else. When the supply of Cities wanting a team is less than the number of teams the stadium race will be over.

 

Finally, as I've said before, and others have alluded to, the real problem is the lavish nature of the most recent stadiums. You could build an NFL Stadium for HALF the cost if the Architects and Owners weren't trying to 'one up' each other every time. Nothing in the revenue side of the model would change, just the costs would go down. And...I'm an Architect!

[DriveFor1Outta5]

This topic always cracks me up. It's way more complicated than all of the arm chair Developers on here make it out to be.

 

For example, if the 'billionaire' Owner had to build his own stadium you do realize he'd also have to substantially raise the ticket prices to pay for the debt service...right? How do you think a restaurant pays for their kitchen?

 

Stadiums have always had a community value. And it's not all that easy to measure that impact. They are not the Pegula Bills. They are the Buffalo Bills. The community at large gets 'some' name recognition benefit.

 

In the end it's the same supply and demand challenge as every thing else. When the supply of Cities wanting a team is less than the number of teams the stadium race will be over.

 

Finally, as I've said before, and others have alluded to, the real problem is the lavish nature of the most recent stadiums. You could build an NFL Stadium for HALF the cost if the Architects and Owners weren't trying to 'one up' each other every time. Nothing in the revenue side of the model would change, just the costs would go down. And...I'm an Architect!

You could build a stadium for half the cost of what NFL teams build cost. That would defeat the purpose of building a new stadium. If they weren't interested in building lavish palaces, stadiums like New Era would work just fine. We wouldn't be having this conversation.

[SoCal Deek]

You could build a stadium for half the cost of what NFL teams build cost. That would defeat the purpose of building a new stadium. If they weren't interested in building lavish palaces, stadiums like New Era would work just fine. We wouldn't be having this conversation.

You're right. But that's another topic. I didn't say a new stadium was needed. Remember of course that buildings don't last forever. Especially ones sitting out in the elements year after year. It's hard to believe but New Era is already older than the Rockpile was when it was abandoned. With that said, a true remodel and upgrade...not the nonsense they did a few years back is quite do-able.

[dayman]

In a lot of ways I see this issue as not so different than education, healthcare, and a lot of other issues where costs are skyrocketing. The argument for some public assistance is ok until you see the bill. It's just too damn expensive that's the problem. ~2B is insane. Kick in ... say ... $300B total including land and some infrastructure...fine. Kick in almost $1B? Insane. And of course, the stadium wouldn't be $2B if the public funny money was not there.

 

We can help pay for stadiums every now and then, it's ok. We should not go into 30 years of public debt to build lavish temples to the football gods.

Edited May 29, 2017 by dayman

[JohnC]

Yes, but the tax break from interest and property tax isn't really a subsidy. I'm still going to pay in more on property than I get back from the tax break. I'm also still going to pay more interest than I'm going to get in return from a tax break. The only equivalent as I mentioned would be the government cutting me a check for half the price of a new home. That's essentially what they are doing, and its ludicrous. I promise I would be beneficial to the local economy too. Build me a house and I'll offer everyone free beer every Friday night.

I don't agree with any of these subsides. I'm a believer in small government that doesn't meddle

with the economy. Unfortunately that ship has sailed as evidenced by many of the responses on this topic. Big government is just sadly part of the world we live in today. Both sides of the political spectrum want to over govern. I will play devils advocate though.

 

 

What you are basically saying is that because you still are paying taxes even after the deduction that you are not receiving a benefit. That is a stupendous amount of twisted logic in your argument. You are paying less in taxes because of the deduction. That is a subsidy! You are receiving a benefit that a renter doesn't get. Your argument can be reduced to because you are not receiving a total subsidy that you are not receiving any subsidy. Your peculiar reasoning makes little sense to me.

 

I am also making the same case for your twisted logic on the real estate tax. You get a direct subsidy by being able to write off your real estate taxes from your income when computing your taxes. In other words you are paying less than you would without the deduction. That is a subsidy! Again, the renter is not getting the benefit that you get as a homeowner.

 

You act as if you are being unfairly burdened by paying any tax on your house. If you aren't paying taxes then who is going to pay for the fire department to respond to a fire at your residence? If your house is burglarized and the police respond to your 911 call who is going to pay for the police response? Your neighbor? Whether you like it or not it is a shared financial obligation.

 

As I said in my first post the position you take on stadium subsidies is reasonable and understandable. But not acknowledging the fact that you, as an individual, also receive subsidies in some form is willful blindness to the reality of living in a community with public benefits such as police, fire, education, public works etc. I say this with no harshness intended but it is a very narrow and self-centered perspective to take.

 

Make no mistake that I'm not arguing against your position of having smaller government compared to a more expansive government. But going back to my original point you are receiving many subsidies that you are not aware of or unwilling to acknowledge.

Edited May 29, 2017 by JohnC

[DriveFor1Outta5]

What you are basically saying is that because you still are paying taxes even after the deduction that you are not receiving a benefit. That is a stupendous amount of twisted logic in your argument. You are paying less in taxes because of the deduction. That is a subsidy! You are receiving a benefit that a renter doesn't get. Your argument can be reduced to because you are not receiving a total subsidy that you are not receiving any subsidy. Your peculiar reasoning makes little sense to me.

 

I am also making the same case for your twisted logic on the real estate tax. You get a direct subsidy by being able to write off your real estate taxes from your income when computing your taxes. In other words you are paying less than you would without the deduction. That is a subsidy! Again, the renter is not getting the benefit that you get as a homeowner.

 

You act as if you are being unfairly burdened by paying any tax on your house. If you aren't paying taxes then who is going to pay for the fire department to respond to a fire at your residence? If your house is burglarized and the police respond to your 911 call who is going to pay for the police response? Your neighbor? Whether you like it or not it is a shared financial obligation.

 

As I said in my first post the position you take on stadium subsidies is reasonable and understandable. But not acknowledging the fact that you, as an individual, also receive subsidies in some form is willful blindness to the reality of living in a community with public benefits such as police, fire, education, public works etc. is a very narrow and self-centered perspective to take.

 

Make no mistake that I'm not arguing against your position of having smaller government compared to a more expansive government. But going back to my original point you are receiving many subsidies that you are not aware of or unwilling to acknowledge.

We all recieve public services that we benefit from. I agree with you. Many of these services are vital, and I don't mind paying for them. My point was that a tax subsidy is not the same as being handed millions of dollars to fund something that I want to build. They may both be subsidies by definition. I'll admit to my blunder in stating that I don't recieve any subsidies. However, a tax discount is much different than getting money handed to you to build something. Overburdened working families receiving a tax discount is different than a billionaire being handed money. I just don't believe in socialism for billionaires. Edited May 29, 2017 by DriveFor1Outta5

[Mr Info]

...link to summary of stadiums opened since 1997 breaking down public vs private funding percentages.......

 

https://cbsminnesota.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/nfl-funding-summary-12-2-11.pdf

Thanks for posting that. What I found interesting in that article is that most of the sources for stadium public funding do not typically impact the locals such as hotel & rental car tax increases. Edited May 29, 2017 by Mr Info