OT:Stadium discussion

[JTthe2nd]

With the current proposal(funding = 46% private money + 54% public money) who's pro stadium and who's anti stadium?

Just reading the RJ article and seeing how the last 7 stadiums used no more than 45% public funding it frankly makes me angry that the Raiders and the NFL dangle the prospects of having a pro team like some kind of ransom to the city. IF they offered revenue sharing then it would be worth considering but for the public to take on the majority of the financial risk and not have a share of the income brought in by the stadium is incredibly insulting. The idea that the public will rake in massive amounts of tax dollars due to the stadium's affect on tourism does nothing to change the fact that we, the public, will have invested 3/4s of a billion dollars into the stadium and deserve a share of the profits as any private entity would demand. No way I'd support the stadium proposal as it stands.

 

[lvhiker]

Count me as anti stadium. This deal can get done tomorrow if serious people decide that the stadium makes financial sense. People like Davis (NFL support), Adelson (serious about stadium and not just trying to screw MGM), and Wynn(if he can ally himself to Adelson). All they need to do is chip a cool 500 million each and voila, the deal is done. Of course there other potential players who can climb on board.

At the moment, I see people trying to use the stadium to leverage other deals. Davis to "blackmail" Oakland and Adelson to throw a wrench into the expansion of the conventions center. If the stadium was front and center, it could get done without public financing.

 

[Rebel1986]

If the deal gets done and private funds come up with all the money, they sure as hell are not going to put the stadium on the UNLV campus. In this case it will not matter to UNLV, because they will not be playing at the stadium.

 

[rebelluver]

UNLV will be playing at the stadium regardless of where it is. Obviously it is way better if it is near campus, but it isn't a deal breaker if it isn't.

I hope there is a better offer to be made still because that would make it an easier sell to the public. Still, most won't care since the tourists are footing the bill.

Even though it burns me a little that the rich will use this deal to get richer, I am still a Raider and UNLV fan so I don't care how it gets done personally, but I definitely understand those that have reservations.

 

[Gator 82]

I make no claim to understand all the financial dynamics of funding this stadium, but from what I understand about the proposed hotel tax is that the only tax dollars being used would be from the tourists and not from the residents.

 

[calvegas04]

read the RJ comments and you will see everyone hating on the stadium. Im pro stadium I wish the billionaires would put up more money than what they are offering, but I rather have a stadium than no stadium. And I will be less for it if it is not on UNLV's campus, and I could care less if the raiders are part of the deal, Id rather have the Chargers.

 

[rebelluver]

I make no claim to understand all the financial dynamics of funding this stadium, but from what I understand about the proposed hotel tax is that the only tax dollars being used would be from the tourists and not from the residents.

That is correct, unless of course you stay in a hotel or rent a taxi. Even raising the taxes would still put us below a lot more tourist destination towns tax rates.

In the end the anti stadium people still have valid concerns. Why can't we take those hundreds of millions and put it into schools?

A valid concern of course, but we aren't talking about a choice from A or B.

After seeing how competitive our tax rates for tourists are, I wouldn't mind them taxing another half percent on top and making the best school system in the country. Unfortunately that isn't how it works though.

 

[2ndGenRebel]

I'm pro-stadium whether it's 100% privately funded, the current proposal, or 100% public funded. UNLV Football needs this stadium ASAP and it would be huge for Las Vegas in general. The tax hit to Las Vegas residents will be very minimal but the opponents keep talking about how "we" would have to foot the bill, even though 90%+ would come from tourists.

In a perfect world, we could get it fully funded through private dollars but Las Vegas/UNLV needs this stadium to happen regardless of who is footing the bill.

 

[lvhiker]

It does not matter who pays the tax, it is still money that ought to be part of the state budget. The state has historically underfunded education and as we post, there are people trying to repeal the corporate tax that was implemented to help fund education. Tax money is part of the general fund regardless of who pays it.

 

[Moscurry91]

I'm on the fence on this. As has been mentioned, Las Vegas is unique in that hotels are already undertaxed and to raise them for this purpose would not need to be subjected to a vote of the residents. They would just call a special session and ratify it. But, to go further into our problems, why haven't they done this to better fund education? I know the answer, but it's a moot point- so the principle is, do we as residents want to swallow this pill where Sands will bribe their way to control of the Clark County Stadium Board and reap all the benefits (along with Davis, and possibly Wynn) without putting much skin onto this game?
The way it's currently broken down, the biggest investor among the 46% private money is the NFL, at $300m. How is that? Why can't Sands put up at least as much as the NFL, if not more, then call the shots?
Incidentally, I think that moving the stadium to a different plot of land kills this deal dead.
In the end, as a long time resident of Clark County, do I want these powerful entities to build a stadium that will bring the NFL and the Superbowl and all the money that comes with it with tourist dollars?I have to grudgingly say yes, but I would demand full impartiality on the CCSB as well as an answer as to why Sands doesn't put up more money (besides greed).

 

[XFactorRebel]

I can see the Fertita's wanting a piece of this pie, especially if they are seriously considering a sale of the UFC. I think if they can gather a few more hundred million, it get's done. I am pro-stadium. I also think Wynn is just waiting to see what is needed to keep what he already knows he will contribute lower than his initial thought. Sands will put up more as well. I say by the 3rd Thursday meeting, it's ironed out (including the last Thursday meeting).

 

[j. spilotro]

I'm on the fence on this. As has been mentioned, Las Vegas is unique in that hotels are already undertaxed and to raise them for this purpose would not need to be subjected to a vote of the residents. They would just call a special session and ratify it. But, to go further into our problems, why haven't they done this to better fund education? I know the answer, but it's a moot point- so the principle is, do we as residents want to swallow this pill where Sands will bribe their way to control of the Clark County Stadium Board and reap all the benefits (along with Davis, and possibly Wynn) without putting much skin onto this game?
The way it's currently broken down, the biggest investor among the 46% private money is the NFL, at $300m. How is that? Why can't Sands put up at least as much as the NFL, if not more, then call the shots?
Incidentally, I think that moving the stadium to a different plot of land kills this deal dead.
In the end, as a long time resident of Clark County, do I want these powerful entities to build a stadium that will bring the NFL and the Superbowl and all the money that comes with it with tourist dollars?I have to grudgingly say yes, but I would demand full impartiality on the CCSB as well as an answer as to why Sands doesn't put up more money (besides greed).

Everyone here knows I love sports and want UNLV to succeed on every front. And I do think the stadium can have a huge impact on the economy and the stature of Las Vegas. I'm all for anything that's great for the community.

But, having lived here for more than 40 years, "the community" is much more than the Strip, it's much more than gaming, it's much more than UNLV athletics. With the way Nevada lags so badly in education... We don't need education to get stronger in the state, we need it to get MUCH stronger. It's embarrassing and crippling.

So I'm a little bit torn. If a pro-sports guy is a little torn, then I imagine there's going to be a rather large contingency dead set against all money going to a stadium instead of increased funding with education.

Remember, not everyone is a die hard sports fan. Most aren't and they see sports as silly and unnecessary distractions. When people see money continually allocated to make the rich even richer, they're gonna have a tough time with it. Doesn't matter if the money doesn't go/can't go to education or any other area - you're going to have a smattering of outspoken sports haters.

 

[stuto]

Everyone here knows I love sports and want UNLV to succeed on every front. And I do think the stadium can have a huge impact on the economy and the stature of Las Vegas. I'm all for anything that's great for the community.

But, having lived here for more than 40 years, "the community" is much more than the Strip, it's much more than gaming, it's much more than UNLV athletics. With the way Nevada lags so badly in education... We don't need education to get stronger in the state, we need it to get MUCH stronger. It's embarrassing and crippling.

So I'm a little bit torn. If a pro-sports guy is a little torn, then I imagine there's going to be a rather large contingency dead set against all money going to a stadium instead of increased funding with education.

Maybe education is headed in the right direction with the new school choice bill.

 

[calvegas04]

Everyone here knows I love sports and want UNLV to succeed on every front. And I do think the stadium can have a huge impact on the economy and the stature of Las Vegas. I'm all for anything that's great for the community.

But, having lived here for more than 40 years, "the community" is much more than the Strip, it's much more than gaming, it's much more than UNLV athletics. With the way Nevada lags so badly in education... We don't need education to get stronger in the state, we need it to get MUCH stronger. It's embarrassing and crippling.

So I'm a little bit torn. If a pro-sports guy is a little torn, then I imagine there's going to be a rather large contingency dead set against all money going to a stadium instead of increased funding with education.

The money won't go towards schools regardless... it will either go to expand the convention center or more road construction

 

[Rebel1986]

Agree with calvegas. The money they are talking about can only be used for improvements within the resort corridor (UNLV proposed stadium is within that area), and is not earmarked for things like education.

 

[manic water]

The NFL and Raiders expect to pocket entire naming rights for the stadium and Sands will get a tax district and income from all other events besides NFL and UNLV football.

This is not acceptable. The public pays for most of the stadium and gets nothing back and UNLV will be a second class passenger on that deal. F the NFL, I'd rather have a MLB team or NHL here anyway.

8 days a year (10 if you count up to two preseason games) and they want an entire stadium and all income from other events year round? That's a sucker bet, they can shove it. The town is already full on weekends, the NFL isn't bringing additional tourists to cover a new stadium price tag.

 

[manic water]

........ come back with a far better deal, and something tangible for UNLV and the people of Las Vegas will consider it. As it is, it's a insult and Adelson can shove it up his you know what.

 

[j. spilotro]

Agree with calvegas. The money they are talking about can only be used for improvements within the resort corridor (UNLV proposed stadium is within that area), and is not earmarked for things like education.

I still can see the general public (those outside the die hard sports fan type, which makes up most of the valley) having an issue with it. I don't, per se, I think the city would benefit from it greatly. But when you get a diversion of funds and the rich get richer, it just smells funky. And when he purchased a newspaper to mouthpiece, it stinks even more.

 

[YellowSpinE]

Someone may have mentioned this.... but I read last week about Southern University of Nevada stadium and 1.4 billion or some obscene number like that. What's the scoop on that?

And why doesn't the State do a combined deal for UNLV and S. NV to share a stadium? It will fill seats in the end and get a 2 for one deal. Granted I don't know much about the growth of S. NV and such since haven't been living in Vegas for a long time now. Figured peeps here would have some insight.

 

[calvegas04]

Someone may have mentioned this.... but I read last week about Southern University of Nevada stadium and 1.4 billion or some obscene number like that. What's the scoop on that?

And why doesn't the State do a combined deal for UNLV and S. NV to share a stadium? It will fill seats in the end and get a 2 for one deal. Granted I don't know much about the growth of S. NV and such since haven't been living in Vegas for a long time now. Figured peeps here would have some insight.

What?? Ive never heard of a Southern University of Nevada before. Im sure where ever you read that they were talking about UNLV

 

[YellowSpinE]

My bad i miss read it. The title of the story was Southern Nevada Stadium bla bla bla in the RJ. Going back and reading it closer is the unlv stadium. Which makes a lot more sense as initially i was left thinking that little start up U was growing awfully fast.

 

[Bullmastiff 1]

Agree with calvegas. The money they are talking about can only be used for improvements within the resort corridor (UNLV proposed stadium is within that area), and is not earmarked for things like education.

This....

Why is this so hard for people to understand.

 

[TimothyC3]

This....

Why is this so hard for people to understand.

Exactly. It's either $2.5 billion in new convention space or $750 mill for the dome. That's the choice and actually both can be done. The new convention space can be delayed.

 

[manic water]

There's no way the city should be giving 750 mil for a stadium they don't even own. No thanks!

 

[Rebel1986]

What I do wonder about is why we do not read anything about how the convention center wants to use this money that comes from taxes to benefit themselves only? The tax district is not put together to finance the Las Vegas convention center, but to benefit the hotel/casinos located within the Strip corridor. What benefit is there for the Sands to be paying tax money to help in the expansion of the convention center? They have their own convention center, so get absolutely zero benefits from this expansion while costing them millions in taxes every year.

 

[JTthe2nd]

This....

Why is this so hard for people to understand.

I understand it well enough however it still makes zero sense that we pony up $750 million then get entirely shut out of sharing in the revenue the stadium will generate. If it makes good financial sense then they shouldn't be afraid to share. This tells me either they think it's a bigger risk than they're willing to take with their own money OR they believe they have enough political influence to push it through despite it being a bad deal. Hell, we might as well charge a higher tax, come up with the full $1.3 billion and own the stadium outright.

 

[Bullmastiff 1]

I understand it well enough however it still makes zero sense that we pony up $750 million then get entirely shut out of sharing in the revenue the stadium will generate. If it makes good financial sense then they shouldn't be afraid to share. This tells me either they think it's a bigger risk than they're willing to take with their own money OR they believe they have enough political influence to push it through despite it being a bad deal. Hell, we might as well charge a higher tax, come up with the full $1.3 billion and own the stadium outright.

We get the return on the tourism and jobs created.

It will not get done any other way. Local residents are not going to approve a new tax on themselves to get a stadium built.

I wish the deal was better for Vegas but Billionaires don't get to be billionaires by handing out great deals out of the goodness of their heart.

We either want it or we don't.

Personally I could care less if Adelson gets 'richer' off the deal. He is rich now. He will be rich if the stadium gets built, he will be rich if it doesn't.

I agree I wish the deal was better. But I still think its better to get the 'scraps' the increase in tourism and jobs (short and long term) will bring vs nothing at all.

 

[Rebel1986]

If a deal is ever hammered out, I would expect that 750 million cost to drop to more in the 3-400 million + land cost range, otherwise I really don't see any chance it will get approved.

As for revenue sharing, I really don't see that being very much, as long as the revenue required for long term and short term maintenance of the stadium is also held back.

I also see the term of the agreement being shorter at which time all of the facilities would revert back to UNLV. Since everyone involved will be long dead, I could see the range being around 40-50 years.

 

[XFactorRebel]

The Time Is Now, LV Raiders! via @YouTube @RaidersToLV

 

[RunninRebl90]

What's all this, "we?" Local residents aren't paying a dime towards the stadium in taxes. Not even a penny. So the tourists should be sharing the revenue? I don't get it. I swear, people read that public money is somehow going to be involved and they immediately get defensive. This tax has NOTHING to do with Las Vegas residents. Tourists pay this tax REGARDLESS of if it goes to a stadium or not. Tourists have been paying this tax for ages and they're going to continue to pay it whether or not u like how it's spent.

 

[manic water]

What's all this, "we?" Local residents aren't paying a dime towards the stadium in taxes. Not even a penny. So the tourists should be sharing the revenue? I don't get it. I swear, people read that public money is somehow going to be involved and they immediately get defensive. This tax has NOTHING to do with Las Vegas residents. Tourists pay this tax REGARDLESS of if it goes to a stadium or not. Tourists have been paying this tax for ages and they're going to continue to pay it whether or not u like how it's spent.

Your nuts if you think tourism taxes are going to pay the entire bill. Who pays for the additional roads and infrastructure? What about the interest on the loan for 750 mil? They're not pulling it out of then air, buddy. I don't care how many people are willing to bend over for the NFL no matter the cost, there have been too many examples of cities being buried under debt because of a bad stadium deal. Another recession and dip in tourism numbers and the NFL stadium you're gagging for becomes a noose around the city's neck.

Like I said before and I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels this way, I'd love to have a new stadium and NFL team but come back with a (much) better deal or take your snake oil act somewhere else!

 

[Bullmastiff 1]

Your nuts if you think tourism taxes are going to pay the entire bill. Who pays for the additional roads and infrastructure? What about the interest on the loan for 750 mil? They're not pulling it out of then air, buddy. I don't care how many people are willing to bend over for the NFL no matter the cost, there have been too many examples of cities being buried under debt because of a bad stadium deal. Another recession and dip in tourism numbers and the NFL stadium you're gagging for becomes a noose around the city's neck.

Like I said before and I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels this way, I'd love to have a new stadium and NFL team but come back with a (much) better deal or take your snake oil act somewhere else!

Which stadium deals buried cities?

The only one I have heard that about that was considered bad for the city was actually in MLB with the Marlins.

I don't recall any other cities going 'bankrupt' over a stadium deal.

Not doubting just curious what the other examples in the NFL are.

 

[Slick Mick]

Which stadium deals buried cities?

The only one I have heard that about that was considered bad for the city was actually in MLB with the Marlins.

I don't recall any other cities going 'bankrupt' over a stadium deal.

Not doubting just curious what the other examples in the NFL are.

There are ZERO examples of an NFL stadium burying a city. This would be a boon for the diversification of the economy. Only a fool would let this chance slip by.

 

[Bullmastiff 1]

There are ZERO examples of an NFL stadium burying a city. This would be a boon for the diversification of the economy. Only a fool would let this chance slip by.

Hence why I asked for examples. The only stadium I can remember there being 'buyers remorse' I think was for the Marlins stadium. I believe it was Real Sports on HBO that did a piece on it but not positive.

 

[Rebel1986]

While I want to see a stadium, burying a city is not necessary for it to be an unfair burden on those who get no benefit from the stadium. My sister lives in Phoenix and is stuck with an additional tax that is used to fund the stadium. Care needs to be taken to insure that the funding formula has the least impact on those who get the least benefit, and the current proposed funding formula most likely will not be good enough to obtain the necessary votes for approval. I have no crystal ball, but believe a smaller portion of the funding will eventually come from the LV BLVD resort corridor tax funds or the project will end up being denied.

 

[ThailandReb]

Hence why I asked for examples. The only stadium I can remember there being 'buyers remorse' I think was for the Marlins stadium. I believe it was Real Sports on HBO that did a piece on it but not positive.

What about the Braves' stadium? Not even built 20 years ago and taxpayers will still be paying for it for years, even after it is torn down now that they are building a new one in suburbia. Now the Rangers, also with a perfectly good and not old stadium, are trying to do the same. It is ridiculous and a colossal waste of money.

 

[manic water]

What about the Braves' stadium? Not even built 20 years ago and taxpayers will still be paying for it for years, even after it is torn down now that they are building a new one in suburbia. Now the Rangers, also with a perfectly good and not old stadium, are trying to do the same. It is ridiculous and a colossal waste of money.

Exactly, those two come to mind. Taxpayers will continue to pay for Turner Field and Globe Life Park long after those teams have moved. Ask the people of St Louis about the NFL stadium they still have to make payments for after the Rams have split.

If Kroenke can build the world's most expensive stadium in LA with ZERO public money, why does one of the richest men in America need the city of Las Vegas to give him 750 million?

 

[manic water]

There are ZERO examples of an NFL stadium burying a city. This would be a boon for the diversification of the economy. Only a fool would let this chance slip by.

There are ZERO examples of a NFL stadium providing a boon for a city. This would depend on the number of events being held there and Sands chairman already downgraded their unrealistic claims of 46 events per year by saying "We'll probably have about 20 events per year for the first few years". Not a good sign.

Vegas already has 43 mm visitors per year. How many ADDITIONAL (new) visitors does having an NFL stadium attract to Las Vegas? One percent (430k)? I doubt it's anywhere near enough to justify spending a billion dollars or more on. We're already full on weekends. The math doesn't add up. That can all change by Adelson and company stepping up. Unless that happens, it's no chance of getting done IMO.

 

[rebelluver]

The math isn't that easy to figure. It is impossible to tell all of the ways it could possibly make money for the city.

If they are such a terrible idea and bad for a city then why is it every major city out there has a stadium?

I know some stadiums get built with no public money, but I also know that some stadiums are built with local tax payer money and that won't happen here.

We aren't getting the best deal and we aren't getting the worst.

Is there some reason to be concerned about the financing? Yes.

Is it a deal breaker? No.

My life will literally only benefit from it so there is no downside.

Sure, we can say no and hope we get a better deal.

We can also cripple the entire future of UNLV sports if it doesn't work out.

 

[TimothyC3]

Las Vegas is a small market and not LA and will have to pay a premium to get the Raiders. That's the realities. Additionally, the NFL and the Raiders are a generational opportunity that will not become available for another 25 years. Also, what's the economic value for a tourism based economy like Las Vegas to host the Super Bowl, the Final 4 and other mega events? That's the ultimate decision community leaders are going to have to make. Then there is the UNLV angle that has to be considered.