New Arena Thread - Plans Announced Tomorrow? pg 58

[MartyConlonOnTheRun]

So from my understanding the bond is paid off with the future increases of athlete tax that could take 30 years to pay off. The state continues to take the current amount during this time. Which is how much? less than 10 mil? That is a fairly small number compared to the entire budget. By the time this is paid off won't they want a new stadium? Couldn't the increase in future revenue in baseball and football make up for the loss of the Bucks if this doesn't get done? Plus the revenue isn't capped at 6.7 mil. Or is the tax strictly on NBA players?

I'm pretty sure it is strictly NBA players/employees. There is also no redistribution of spending money in this scenario as the increase in salaries is derived from out of state tv revenues that will be redistributed to other states with NBA teams, not other entertainment options within the city.

ETA: I see your point on if the cap is too low or drags out too many years. i could easily see the state lowering their contribution to $150M to pay it off sooner and thinking that would be a fair compromise. Hell, paying 33% for a public arena and influx of development seem like a great deal. That would limit the risk for the more foreseeable future.

[trwi7]

Old picture off twitter to help those envision.

Yeah that mall would be neat, especially if it was an indoor/outdoor setup. I'd love to see Milwaukee get an ESPN Zone downtown and maybe some other type of attraction.

ESPN Zone is still a thing?

[Enrique]

Grand Admiral, I get it that it's future increases in revenue. Whether it's future tax revenue or current tax revenue it doesn't change the fact that it is indeed tax revenue. Do you support all other businesses getting to cap their taxes at their current level? If not, why not? If we let all businesses do this it will create a huge shortfall in state tax revenue. This will have to be made up somewhere.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

No, it doesn't have to be made up ANYWHERE. This is not the government's money. If that money is so vital to the budget, then perhaps the Bucks remaining here is more vital than some people would have us believe...

Yes, I do support ANY business being presented with an option to cap their income taxes at the current level as part of a proposal to pay back bonds issued to fund vital infrastructure to that business that would enable said business to continue to exist here. IF it's good business sense, I'd support it. Being able to have a new sports & entertainment arena for our city, region, and state that also allows us to keep our NBA team makes good business sense. Having Northwestern Mutual remain here makes good business sense, etc., etc.

Individual projects will be evaluated on a case by case basis. The notion that somehow a precedent would be set is an argument without merit. If Governor Walker's budget with the arena proposal in its current form was approved TODAY, that wouldn't impact subsequent proposals of issuing bonds that would be repaid by increases in targeted income tax revenue to fund projects. Perhaps down the road, people might point to the arena proposal as either being a success or a failure in their arguments for or against a subsequent proposals.

Your obsequiousness to Governor Walker and big business in general is truly scary. And yes, taxes ARE the government's money. Government is just a word we use for "things we do together". I just don't think one of those things we do together should be creating special tax breaks for billionaires. Do you have any examples of government/business relationships that you didn't agree with? Is there a mathematical formula that you use to determine if it's a good deal?


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[Gianstoppable]

Old picture off twitter to help those envision.

Yeah that mall would be neat, especially if it was an indoor/outdoor setup. I'd love to see Milwaukee get an ESPN Zone downtown and maybe some other type of attraction.

ESPN Zone is still a thing?

lol, I meant it to mean something like an ESPN Zone, but Bucks related/owned.

[mediocrityrules]

Grand Admiral, I get it that it's future increases in revenue. Whether it's future tax revenue or current tax revenue it doesn't change the fact that it is indeed tax revenue. Do you support all other businesses getting to cap their taxes at their current level? If not, why not? If we let all businesses do this it will create a huge shortfall in state tax revenue. This will have to be made up somewhere.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

No, it doesn't have to be made up ANYWHERE. This is not the government's money. If that money is so vital to the budget, then perhaps the Bucks remaining here is more vital than some people would have us believe...

Yes, I do support ANY business being presented with an option to cap their income taxes at the current level as part of a proposal to pay back bonds issued to fund vital infrastructure to that business that would enable said business to continue to exist here. IF it's good business sense, I'd support it. Being able to have a new sports & entertainment arena for our city, region, and state that also allows us to keep our NBA team makes good business sense. Having Northwestern Mutual remain here makes good business sense, etc., etc.

Individual projects will be evaluated on a case by case basis. The notion that somehow a precedent would be set is an argument without merit. If Governor Walker's budget with the arena proposal in its current form was approved TODAY, that wouldn't impact subsequent proposals of issuing bonds that would be repaid by increases in targeted income tax revenue to fund projects. Perhaps down the road, people might point to the arena proposal as either being a success or a failure in their arguments for or against a subsequent proposals.

Your obsequiousness to Governor Walker and big business in general is truly scary. And yes, taxes ARE the government's money. Government is just a word we use for "things we do together". I just don't think one of those things we do together should be creating special tax breaks for billionaires. Do you have any examples of government/business relationships that you didn't agree with? Is there a mathematical formula that you use to determine if it's a good deal?


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Okay, that last sentence (in fact the whole last paragraph) just proves that you're trolling now. You measure the success of a business deal is if the money stacks up. It's the numbers. It's not whether someone feels as though it's good or not, it's the measurable outcome that dictates the result one way or the other with all factors taken into account. And it happens time and time again when looking at large public expenditure of any kind. People don't continue to get re-elected if they aren't bringing in measurable economic benefit to their constituency. They are made accountable, so need to do what's in the public interest. If a tax incentive is required to bring large economic benefit to the region that otherwise would not have occurred, no one should be against this.

Seriously?!?

[GrandAdmiralDan]

It's odd to see the words "things we do together" from someone arguing that the owners of the Bucks should have the construction of a new sports & entertainment arena be a "thing they do themselves".

The owners bought the team to keep it HERE and are putting in an additional $150 mil into the $500 mil arena. Senator Kohl is putting in another $100 mil. That's 50% of the cost. 41 regular season Bucks games. 2 preseason. 2 or 3 other Bucks events. Most seasons we aren't going to be making the NBA Finals, but let's add in all possible home playoff games through the Conference Finals, just for the hell of it. 12 playoff games. That's 58 days out of 365. The Bucks won't even be using the arena even 16% of the year. But yet 50% of the arena cost is already being covered by the Bucks former & current owners.

Some people think the Bucks ought to front 100% of the arena costs & the city, region, state, etc. should front 0%, even if though we'll have the benefit of an arena to hold non-Bucks events for 84% or more of the year.

That is insane to me.

[oldy0717]

So just to be clear even though they don't own it the team will control the building year round won't they? It's not like they rent it for their 41 nights and on other nights the city can rent it and collect the money? I don't think it works that way. They become the primary tenant and control it, subleasing to Marquette, concerts, etc.

[mcfromage]

Interesting that throughout the day there's been no media confirmation of a press conference tomorrow. Are they planning to do it as a sort of surprise? Wouldn't it make sense to sort of leak it to one of Kirchen, Walker, etc ahead of time? Perhaps that'll happen early A.M.

[GrandAdmiralDan]

So just to be clear even though they don't own it the team will control the building year round won't they? It's not like they rent it for their 41 nights and on other nights the city can rent it and collect the money? I don't think it works that way. They become the primary tenant and control it, subleasing to Marquette, concerts, etc.

Under the terms of Governor Walkers' arena proposal, the Bucks would neither own the building, nor control it year round, just as is the case with the Bradley Center. A government entity would be created that would control and operate the arena, just as is the case for the Bradley Center and the Panther Arena (Wisconsin Center District).

[GrandAdmiralDan]

Interesting that throughout the day there's been no media confirmation of a press conference tomorrow. Are they planning to do it as a sort of surprise? Wouldn't it make sense to sort of leak it to one of Kirchen, Walker, etc ahead of time? Perhaps that'll happen early A.M.

It's possible it will happen, but it's also possible it won't, at this point.

[EastSideBucksFan]

Interesting that throughout the day there's been no media confirmation of a press conference tomorrow. Are they planning to do it as a sort of surprise? Wouldn't it make sense to sort of leak it to one of Kirchen, Walker, etc ahead of time? Perhaps that'll happen early A.M.

If it was happening there probably would've been someone to pick up on it.

It's probably not.

But....when the team sale happened, it was tight lipped and kept quiet until the day of....about 11am it was spread and there was a presser at 2pm at the BC.

[trwi7]

Interesting that throughout the day there's been no media confirmation of a press conference tomorrow. Are they planning to do it as a sort of surprise? Wouldn't it make sense to sort of leak it to one of Kirchen, Walker, etc ahead of time? Perhaps that'll happen early A.M.

It's possible it will happen, but it's also possible it won't, at this point.

[GrandAdmiralDan]

Interesting that throughout the day there's been no media confirmation of a press conference tomorrow. Are they planning to do it as a sort of surprise? Wouldn't it make sense to sort of leak it to one of Kirchen, Walker, etc ahead of time? Perhaps that'll happen early A.M.

It's possible it will happen, but it's also possible it won't, at this point.

We won't know until we ask the right guy if they've got a time.


Big boy.

[midranger]

Its truly terrifying that someone (presumably a young person) whole heartedly believes that his money belongs to the government and that they just graciously allow him to keep what they see fit. Not just that. But that this is a suitable arrangement between a government and its citizens.

Further, I would assume that this person would call himself liberal. John Locke is rolling in his grave.

[asmith44]

There's not going to be a press conference tomorrow. Let's just say a little birdie told me.

[VooDoo7]

But 'insiders' said there was gonna be.

[trwi7]

A little alligator told me that it likes crickets.

[Ill-yasova]

Its truly terrifying that someone (presumably a young person) whole heartedly believes that his money belongs to the government and that they just graciously allow him to keep what they see fit. Not just that. But that this is a suitable arrangement between a government and its citizens.

Further, I would assume that this person would call himself liberal. John Locke is rolling in his grave.

Yep, a person saying that tax money is the government's money is one of the scariest things I can think of. There is close to no accountability on government spending because there is no bottoming out point. When you run out of money you raise more taxes, so there's no accountability for inefficiency or poor decision making. Seriously staggering statement to make.

[HaroldinGMinor]

Its truly terrifying that someone (presumably a young person) whole heartedly believes that his money belongs to the government and that they just graciously allow him to keep what they see fit. Not just that. But that this is a suitable arrangement between a government and its citizens.

Further, I would assume that this person would call himself liberal. John Locke is rolling in his grave.

Yep, a person saying that tax money is the government's money is one of the scariest things I can think of. There is close to no accountability on government spending because there is no bottoming out point. When you run out of money you raise more taxes, so there's no accountability for inefficiency or poor decision making. Seriously staggering statement to make.

On a national scale, if you don't have money to fund stuff you just borrow it. This practice is not limited to one party.

[Ill-yasova]

Its truly terrifying that someone (presumably a young person) whole heartedly believes that his money belongs to the government and that they just graciously allow him to keep what they see fit. Not just that. But that this is a suitable arrangement between a government and its citizens.

Further, I would assume that this person would call himself liberal. John Locke is rolling in his grave.

Yep, a person saying that tax money is the government's money is one of the scariest things I can think of. There is close to no accountability on government spending because there is no bottoming out point. When you run out of money you raise more taxes, so there's no accountability for inefficiency or poor decision making. Seriously staggering statement to make.

On a national scale, if you don't have money to fund stuff you just borrow it. This practice is not limited to one party.

Agreed. Neither party is exempt from this criticism.