Black or African American: 41.81%
Other race: 25.34%
Two or more races: 3.73%
Native American: 0.79%
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander: 0.15%
Would love to see the numbers 20 years from now after this "investment".
Exactly. People are too naive. First of all, you should be skeptical anytime someone makes a "public-private" investment. 99 times out of 100 the private investor has designed a partnership where they can profit on the upside in the short-run but in the long-run taxpayers are the ones left holding the bag when the deal eventually sours. These guys didn't get rich out of nowhere and people don't become politicians out of the goodness of their hearts. Trust that plenty of people's palms were greased to make this "dream" a reality.
Beyond that, arena financing is ALWAYS a terrible deal for taxpayers and the fact that this is a low-income part of the country (relative to cost of living) just means the high end of the taxpayer base is about to get smoked. And ultimately to support this debt financing you can believe this neighborhood is about to become seriously gentrified. As I'm sure connected people have been gobbling up land ahead of this development as speculative investment.
All of that said, I believe Ballmer is a pretty good guy for a rich person (huge caveat). I don't have any real reason to back that up. He was an absolutely terrible CEO by all accounts and Microsoft has been a travesty for two decades running, but that doesn't make him a bad person.
But let's be careful deifying a person for stuff like this.
Remember what happened to the poor people of Charlotte? They financed the Hornets arena based on long-term Revenue Bonds. Then the team escaped the lease and there was no revenue to pay the bondholders back with. Faced with the decision between handing the bondholders huge losses on their investment the city elected to continue paying the bonds even though there was no revenue to support the re-payments. Why you may ask? Well who owns municipal bonds? Rich people who were looking to avoid taxation. And you don't get re-elected by stiffing rich people. Ultimately, taxpayers got nailed to the wall for over a decade to continue making lease payments on an empty arena so that rich bond holders didn't lose money on their "can't miss" investment that missed. In turn, those who helped facilitate the re-payments (illegally IMO, but at the very least unethically) had their political coffers filled, were given sweetheart property/business deals, and became privately wealthy for being willing to "play the game".
Just wait and look at those demographics twenty years from now. $100m doesn't buy a lot of "affordable housing" in California. Just a few condos at rent-control prices for people who know people. It'll be great for the Nieces, nephews, etc who get a baller condo for 30% of what it should rent for though.
Mom was right when she told you the world wasn't fair. Be skeptical. Think for yourself. Question authority.