View Single Post
09-25-2012, 07:59 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 6,861
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by KINGS17 View Post
I completely agree with this sentiment, but at the same time I can understand why taxpayers are tired of funding revenue generating buildings for professional sports teams.

If it is such a great investment it should be easy for the Oilers' owners to get the investors and capital to fund the building of a new arena. The truth is taxpayers almost never get a return on investment from publicly financed sports arenas.

I really don't know what kind of financing the new arena in Seattle is going to use for its construction, but I hope the taxpayers aren't footing the bill.

247m in public bonds will be used 200m for the arena 40m for transportation fund 7m for Seattle center. It will be paid back by revenue generated by the arena. Rent, ticket tax, food/drink tax merchandise tax etc Only those that purchase a ticket to the events will pay for it. Any revenue short fall will be covered by Hansen, all cost over run will be covered by Hansen.

120m city 80m country. I can't recall how the transportation fund is being split off hand. 200m max in bonds if NBA and NHL 120 max 115 city 5m county if NBA only.

If no NHL Hansen is on the took for that 80m difference.

It was specifically clear by King county and Seattle that the general fund is off limits and no new taxes.

Due to I-91 the arena proposal has to show a return and this revised agreement meets I-91. City/county would own a 500m arena for only a cost of 200m. + the 47m for transportation and Seattle center. And when the arena is paid off after the 30 years the city has the option of having Hansen buy the land and the arena back for 200m.

gstommylee is offline