Re:Taxpayers Should Never Subsidize Stadiums
by capkutay on Sunday January 06, 2019 @01:12AM
(#18836868)
It was PRIVATE land, zoned for OFFICES, owned by SALEFORCE, then sold to the Warriors. And 50% of the land is still being used for corporate offices (Uber HQ will occupy it).
Not sure what closed doors you're talking about.
The Warriors stadium is literally a gold standard and a model that other sports teams should follow. Not only did they pay out of pocket, but they donated millions to the city to help manage traffic in the area.
Re:Taxpayers Should Never Subsidize Stadiums
by muzz on Monday January 07, 2019 @01:39AM
(#18843271)
So will the traffic to/from be on private roads?
Re:Taxpayers Should Never Subsidize Stadiums
by Animats on Sunday January 06, 2019 @01:13AM
(#18836869)
While the city of San Francisco put too much city money into the ballpark, that really was a run down warehouse area at the time.
Re:Taxpayers Should Never Subsidize Stadiums
by masonic on Sunday January 06, 2019 @05:34PM
(#18841179)
What city money?
Pacific Bell Park was wholly privately financed, much of that from seat licenses. And the ballpark was key to the redevelopment of the entire China Basin area -- look at aerial photographs of the region before 1999.
You’re also overstating the support from “local residents”: the fact is that the city council gave a prime plot of redevelopable land (in a city with little available) to a sports team, as part of a sweetheart tax deal. It’s a criminal misappropriation of resources that was made behind closed doors.