Get with the program Detroit!

[kimmy]

My concern is that a sports owner's agenda is not necessarily to benefit the city. He might have little care whether the arena causes revitalization in Detroit, so long as he gets his arena.

However, from what I am reading, Red Wings owner Mike Ilitch has been a tireless champion for Detroit.

From what I am reading, the public money raised for this will be raised by selling a special bond issue, so it seems to me that it's not like the project is taking money away from schools and policing. It sounds as if people will have the opportunity to opt in if they wish.

And, they do have to do something. I'm not sure who exactly "they" are or what they need to do, but it's a city full of cheap land right next to major shipping infrastructure... there should be lots of possibilities.

Anyway, the headline ("Bankrupt city to spend $444 million on hockey rink!") certainly sounds worse than the reality.

-k

[The_Squid]

I don't think billionaires should be subsidized to build stadiums so they can pad their bank accounts. If there isn't enough money in the NHL to build new stadiums without subsidies, then they need to change their business plans....

These economic spinoffs are a myth. Unless you think subsidizing billionaires and their millionaire employees is beneficial to taxpayers.

http://www.fieldofschemes.com/2013/04/01/4822/nine-out-of-ten-economists-agree-sports-stadium-subsidies-are-dumb/

[Bryan]

I don't think billionaires should be subsidized to build stadiums so they can pad their bank accounts.

Not only that, but teams that use publicly built facilities are the ones most often in financial trouble again soon after. The teams with the best finances are the ones that own and control their own facility because they generally need ALL of the revenue from the place to make a decent go of it.

[Accountability Now]

[quote name="kimmy" post="912122" timestamp="

(in contrast with places like Edmonton, for example, where you can move to the suburbs and still be within the city limits and be paying city taxes. -k

Not sure I agree with you here...Edmonton still has this problem as lots of people live in St. Albert, Leduc, Sherwood Park and pay their respective taxes to those municipalities while enjoying the big city benefits. It's not nearly as bad as Deteoit but still an issue that Mandel would love to get rid of! I can't remember the exact numbers but the number of season ticket holders of non-Edmontonians for the Oilers was pretty high. Like you said...most of these people hop in their cars and head back home after the game which leaves no benefit for the city.

[Accountability Now]

I mentioned the arenas in Ottawa and Edmonton earlier. They both illustrate that plunking down an arena doesn't just generate a food and entertainment district. In Ottawa, when I lived there at least, the only thing outside the arena was an off ramp; in Edmonton the area around the arena has been a run-down part of town for decades, and the presence of an arena has not generated any sort of entertainment district. People get in their cars and leave as quickly as possible after the game. I had quite a few game-night evenings out when I lived in Edmonton; often involving eating out and drinks; none of that food and entertainment money was spent anywhere near the arena.

My question about "hanging around Detroit" has a negative connotation, because the idea of "hanging around Detroit" itself has a very negative connotation. It's no secret that the city has an incredibly negative reputation, and I don't think game-night revelers will want to spend time or money in the area before or after the game.

On its own, I don't think an arena will change that. Trying to create an environment where people will want to spend time before and after the game will be a very ambitious project that will take more than just building an arena and hoping that positive environment just magically appears.

-k

I agree with you on this one but keep in mind this is why Edmonton is looking to build downtown and not just create an an arena but an entertainment district.

Los Angeles did the same thing with theirs which has Staples center, Nokia theatre (where American Idol performs) ESPN zone and a conference center all in one area. Without it I would say there is no reason to go downtown.

Conversely Ottawa just put an arena in Kanata. They're lucky that people are willing to make that drive. Phoenix did the entertainment district but put it way out in Glendale which is over an hour away from the snow birds in the east valley. Not too wise on that end.

All in all..Deteoit needs to learn from all those lessons.

[GostHacked]

Take a look at Ottawa on the google maps and then check out the arena. What benefits to the local community does it offer?

If Detroit goes ahead with this new stadium it should be close to downtown or a populated area. Otherwise, a half billion dollar investment in a town that cannot constitutionally declare bankruptcy, but either way cannot pay out pensions. All while having these sports heroes make millions of dollars off the already poor suckers who can barely go to a game in the first place.

A very sound and wise investment, what could possibly go wrong?

[Accountability Now]

Take a look at Ottawa on the google maps and then check out the arena. What benefits to the local community does it offer?

The taxi cabs are living large with that 45 minute ride! Lol

[Accountability Now]

I'm not sure how the local taxes work outside the Detroit limit work but I do know that if you are working in Detroit your wages are garnished 3% if you are a resident of Detroit but only 1.5% if you live outside of Detroit. I would almost think it would be the other way in order to allow locals to get that work but maybe the same taxes apply in surrounding communities. Maybe the 1.5% city income tax doesn't really matter too

[GostHacked]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-25203691

A federal judge has ruled Detroit should be granted protection from its creditors, marking the largest public bankruptcy in US history.

US bankruptcy judge Steven Rhodes said payments to retired staff, which make up half of the city's liabilities, could be "impaired" as a result.

Detroit is now expected to submit a plan to rid its balance sheet of $18bn (£11bn) of liabilities.

The city filed for bankruptcy protection more than four months ago.

A coalition including retired city employees, police and fire-fighter unions, and others sued in July to block the filing.

However, Mr Rhodes said Detroit's bankruptcy was a "foregone conclusion", adding the city should have probably filed years ago.

Now, the city's emergency manager, Kevyn Orr, is expected to present a plan by the end of this year for how the city will deal with its more than 100,000 creditors.

City officials say they hope Detroit can emerge from bankruptcy by the end of 2014.

I will bring up the notion that it's silly to call the bankruptcy claim illegal/unconstitutional if they have no money to pay out pensions later on. The caption in the pic claims that there are over 150,000 abandoned buildings in Detroit.

An estimated 40% of the city's streetlights do not work, while there are almost 150,000 vacant and abandoned plots in the city, according to the Detroit Future City report.

Detroit has seen a dramatic decline in economic activity and population, as the big car makers - once the city's main source of employment - shifted production to cheaper locations in the US and overseas.

So the car makers get a bail out only to start to shift productions overseas. And Detroit benefited from the bail outs how?

[Accountability Now]

So the car makers get a bail out only to start to shift productions overseas. And Detroit benefited from the bail outs how?

In my opiniton only, the call for the bail out by these car companies wasn't about needing the money rather it was about needing an excuse. They wanted a way to break the union and find the cheaper spots to build and the fact the government was going to pay them for it was bonus. I remember seeing a video of a Ford plant in Brazil right around the time of the bail out that already showed them making all their cars with robots in fully automated plants. I don't think they really wanted to stay in Detroit where they get to deal with the unions.

To answer your question....the bailout did not help Detroit one bit as the jobs have left and you still have all these 'union' people demanding work. Not a good situation.

[Bonam]

I don't think they really wanted to stay in Detroit where they get to deal with the unions.

No kidding. Who would?

[Accountability Now]

No kidding. Who would?

Lol....I still remember that one union boss after asked if he would take cuts in order to keep their jobs and he said "We have worked too hard for too long to take cuts now". Yes...no cuts just unemployment now.

[Bonam]

Lol....I still remember that one union boss after asked if he would take cuts in order to keep their jobs and he said "We have worked too hard for too long to take cuts now". Yes...no cuts just unemployment now.

It really sucks for the younger workers at places like that. Union leaderships are made up almost exclusively of older workers that are a few years from retirement and don't really care if they end up retiring a few years early. Meanwhile the younger people are out of a job.

Edited December 3, 2013 by Bonam

[bush_cheney2004]

I remember seeing a video of a Ford plant in Brazil right around the time of the bail out that already showed them making all their cars with robots in fully automated plants. I don't think they really wanted to stay in Detroit where they get to deal with the unions.

OK....but technically Ford did not get a government bailout in the U.S. Ford did benefit, however, because Tier 2 and Tier 3 parts suppliers were able to survive the recession. The unions bet the farm...and lost.

[Accountability Now]

OK....but technically Ford did not get a government bailout in the U.S. Ford did benefit, however, because Tier 2 and Tier 3 parts suppliers were able to survive the recession. The unions bet the farm...and lost.

Yes... I remember that. It was because they came to the table and then walked away from the money made be beleive they were just their to fight the unions off.