On 12/2/05 4:36 PM, "Jeremy Wieland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One question that I have for both the pro- and anti-stadium crowd is why we > can't hang the public obligation for a new stadium on ticket prices? The > Twins average about 1.9 million fans a year. Maybe 2 million with a new > ball park. (Everyone involved with building the dome need not apply.) 2 > million folks, over ten years taxed an average of $10 per head rounds out to > $200 million. Set a progressive ticket tax rate, a $9 ticket becomes a $12 > ticket and a $44 ticket goes to $75, something like that. I recognize that > a bond would have to be floated and the ticket taxes used to repay the debt. > I also have not figured in the financing. Nevertheless, what are the > challenges to having the 2 million people who would most appreciate a new > stadium pay for it? Because bond interest rates are determined in part by the "risk" associated with a project. Taxpayer-backed bonds are lower risk than bonds backed by ticket surcharges and so the interest rates are lower and the overall project cost is lower. And please note that "risk" in this case should be understood to refer to how you make investment decisions to balance risk/reward (i.e. allocating for stocks, bonds, etc.), not "risk" in terms of whether project would be a success or failure. That's a big part of why all of the various permutations on tickets, parking and other attendance/fan-based surcharges that have been proposed over the many years of this ballpark debate have fallen by the wayside. To make sure my point is understood, it's not a question of a $450 million project backed by a 3/20 sales tax increase vs. a $450 million project backed by ticket surcharges. If the project were backed by ticket surcharges, it would cost a lot more. I used to be a big proponent of financing scenarios like Jeremy suggests, until I learned how much it added to the cost. And while I'm not super-enthused about a sales tax increase, I recognize that the personal impact is pretty negligible compared to what the benefits would be. I did the math and figured out that for someone at my income range ($40K) and spending habits, the 3/20 sales tax increase amounts to about $15 a year for me. Big whoop. I have that much deducted from my paycheck every two weeks for charitable contributions. And before anyone complains that $15 a year might be a lot for someone of lesser means, please note that someone of lesser means probably spends less money than I do, so their personal impact would also be less. Anyone who's so poor that they only have money to spend on necessities like food and clothing probably wouldn't pay hardly anything extra because those sorts of items are exempted from sales taxes. > A second question I have is what can we do, if a stadium were to be built, > to ensure that the same short-sighted thinking behind the dome isn't > duplicated? Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Baltimore and Houston essentially > duplicated the look and feel of older stadiums like Wrigley, Fenway and > Yankee. Clearly such visionary thinking was absent when we ordered up the > dome. Given the opportunity we'll have to do a better job in the future. I think you answered your own question here - we now have many examples of what works better for Major League Baseball than the Metrodome does. At this point, it doesn't even require "visionary" thinking - just common sense. And if you look at the proposal for a Twins ballpark at the Rapid Park site, you'll notice it looks a whole lot more like those parks in Pittsburgh and Baltimore than the Metrodome, so I honestly doubt this will be an issue. Mark Snyder Windom Park REMINDERS: 1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. If you think a member is in violation, contact the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:mpls@mnforum.org Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
