Why Have We Decided That A Guy Who Became A Billionaire Selling Us Cheap Pizza Is God

[Honky Tonk]

If the onus was on the prime developer to push for so-called ancillary development in the vicinity of major projects, making deals to support new retail and services; the city might benefit greatly.

As it stands, it seems like the major players are interested in their end of the deal; not so preoccupied with enhancing the public space with small-fry competition on the ground, so to speak.

Duggan should prepare a set of rules for further development that would include criteria that forces promoters to be creative in their use of public and commercial space. Surface parking lots need to be phased out, small business reinjected in restored buildings close to a new arena, for instance.

So, the operative sentence would be; "force them to be creative". Detroit is not in a position to be less-demanding. It needs to avoid all the pitfalls of the past.

Well put. You do need strong leadership with good negotiating skills to "bring home the bacon", so to speak. As it stands, I see the City settling for table scraps, again.

[canuck]

Well put. You do need strong leadership with good negotiating skills to "bring home the bacon", so to speak. As it stands, I see the City settling for table scraps, again.

And it's easy to think that the city is at a disadvantage etc... but why would a promoter want to bring his arena/stadium downtown if the conditions werent about right for business? I sympathize with ghettopalmetto and the folks who are opposed to the racket of pro sports arenas not the due process that should occur for it to be a win-win. It rarely ever is in any city, but if the rules are tightend before the thing is built, it may have an effect on other developments.

[Honky Tonk]

And it's easy to think that the city is at a disadvantage etc... but why would a promoter want to bring his arena/stadium downtown if the conditions werent about right for business? I sympathize with ghettopalmetto and the folks who are opposed to the racket of pro sports arenas not the due process that should occur for it to be a win-win. It rarely ever is in any city, but if the rules are tightend before the thing is built, it may have an effect on other developments.

This isn't some guy opening up a Middle-Eastern restaurant, and hoping for the best. Ilitch could play the Wings in the middle of a swamp and fans would wade in to see them. Why is he having his erection in Mid-Town? Well, let's see, $350 mil "donated" towards the stadium, another $60 mil "bonus" if the area "develops", another $6 mil in State money to tear down the now useless Joe Louis Arena. On top of that, a partially tax payer funded Blight Rail to transport fans in and out of the area, DPD crossing guards, and don't forget the afterglow cleanup. One heck of a deal. Who could say no? I wonder if L Brooks would let Ilitch wipe out part of Oakland County, and give him the fundage? But I know, the stadium will create thousands of jobs and the taxpayers will get every dime back through the tax monies it'll generate.

[Detroitnerd]

He's also ensured that no other events take place at Joe Louis Arena and that the city demolishes it ... much the same way he ensured no events took place at Tiger Stadium and the city demolished it. Must be sweet to be able to ensure there is zero competition even as you're handed hundreds of millions of dollars for a tax-free profit center ...

Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but the jobs at JLA were union and the jobs at We Paid For It Arena will be non-union. So those payroll taxes are going to be plenty thinner after all is said and done.

[ghettopalmetto]

He's also ensured that no other events take place at Joe Louis Arena and that the city demolishes it ... much the same way he ensured no events took place at Tiger Stadium and the city demolished it. Must be sweet to be able to ensure there is zero competition even as you're handed hundreds of millions of dollars for a tax-free profit center ...

Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but the jobs at JLA were union and the jobs at We Paid For It Arena will be non-union. So those payroll taxes are going to be plenty thinner after all is said and done.

But... Synergy!

[Detroitnerd]

Ah, start talking facts about the arena and everybody quiets down ... interesting ...

[rb336]

He's also ensured that no other events take place at Joe Louis Arena and that the city demolishes it ... much the same way he ensured no events took place at Tiger Stadium and the city demolished it. Must be sweet to be able to ensure there is zero competition even as you're handed hundreds of millions of dollars for a tax-free profit center ...

Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but the jobs at JLA were union and the jobs at We Paid For It Arena will be non-union. So those payroll taxes are going to be plenty thinner after all is said and done.

I think the latter remains to be seen. As for the former, it was a moot point - JLA hasn't been competitive with the Palace for years, and the city certainly didn't want to pay the expense for keeping up an outdated facility that would have to compete with two far superior venues. As far as Tiger Stadium was concerned, I don't think there was a no-event clause involved. Again, it was a decrepit, outdated facility not worth the upkeep for the, lets see, ZERO events per year it would attract.

[ghettopalmetto]

As far as Tiger Stadium was concerned, I don't think there was a no-event clause involved. Again, it was a decrepit, outdated facility not worth the upkeep for the, lets see, ZERO events per year it would attract.

And the City of Detroit did a marvelous job there, PAYING Mr. Ilitch to neglect the place and let it fall apart [[I don't even think he so much as allowed a sheep to graze in center field).

Once Ilitch had let the place go to shit, the City had no choice but to bring in George Jackson to declare it "structurally unsound", and spend EVEN MORE MONEY to demolish what Ilitch had neglected.

Good work, there! Look at all the redevelopment now!

[Detroitnerd]

I think the latter remains to be seen. As for the former, it was a moot point - JLA hasn't been competitive with the Palace for years, and the city certainly didn't want to pay the expense for keeping up an outdated facility that would have to compete with two far superior venues. As far as Tiger Stadium was concerned, I don't think there was a no-event clause involved. Again, it was a decrepit, outdated facility not worth the upkeep for the, lets see, ZERO events per year it would attract.

I've heard from at least one union JLA employee who has told me the new jobs will be non-union at We Paid For It arena. Maybe they're wrong, but I seriously doubt it.

As for Tiger Stadium, you're right: There was no no-event clause, but the city charged through the nose for the few events that were held there by Peter Comstock Riley and the Bud Bowl with Snoop Dogg. So, so much for it attracting ZERO events. I guess Mr. I didn't want the threat of any special events to show JLA as a still-viable venue.

[Detroitnerd]

And the City of Detroit did a marvelous job there, PAYING Mr. Ilitch to neglect the place and let it fall apart [[I don't even think he so much as allowed a sheep to graze in center field).

Once Ilitch had let the place go to shit, the City had no choice but to bring in George Jackson to declare it "structurally unsound", and spend EVEN MORE MONEY to demolish what Ilitch had neglected.

Good work, there! Look at all the redevelopment now!

They added a surcharge to every ticket to create a fund to "preserve" the stadium after it was vacated. Ilitch's organization essentially drained the fund while letting the place fall apart. When the money ran out he foisted it onto the city and all but demanded its demolition.

[ghettopalmetto]

They added a surcharge to every ticket to create a fund to "preserve" the stadium after it was vacated. Ilitch's organization essentially drained the fund while letting the place fall apart. When the money ran out he foisted it onto the city and all but demanded its demolition.

And DEGC, masters of getting Nothing for Something, have never met a charity case [[i.e. billionaire) that they could refuse.

Buddhists have shrines in their homes dedicated to their ancestors. George Jackson has a Mike Ilitch bobblehead Krazy-glued to a brick from Hudsons.

[rb336]

I guess Mr. I didn't want the threat of any special events to show JLA as a still-viable venue.

how many events do you think JLA would draw away from the new arena or the Palace? How many do you think it would take to maintain it, much less make it an attractive space for anything?

[erikd]

So then show us the Comerica figures. Show us where the cities tax money is being diverted to pay for Comerica.

The public financing for Comerica Park was funded by a 2% hotel tax increase and a 1% car rental tax increase.

TIF funding was not used to fund Comerica Park.

Regardless, we should be looking at the spinoff development and resulting increases in tax revenues that happened as a result of the construction of Comerica Park in order to determine the actual economic benefit of a new sports stadium.

I am not necessarily against any and all public funding for sports facilities, but we should do our due diligence to ensure that there is at least a strong possibility that the public's tax investment in the project will net a positive, or at least a break-even, return.

Every impartial economic study of publicly funded sports facilities says that the promised return on the public investment simply does not materialize. The anecdotal evidence seen with Comerica Park backs up the results of all the analysis and studies that have been conducted by economists.

How much additional spin-off tax revenue has been created by Comerica Park? I'm sure that there has been some tax revenue increase due to Comerica Park spin off development, but it certainly isn't anywhere near the $15 million a year that the taxpayers are on the hook for with the new hockey arena.

If Comerica Park has not generated any significant spin-off development and increase in tax revenues, what makes anybody think that the new hockey arena will?

[erikd]

erikd, you fundamentally misunderstand the issue

Please, if you can't add anything besides your own lack of knowledge about TIFs, etc. or the economic impact, just STFU. There hasn't been anything new or useful in this thread for ages

rb336,

Please explain exactly what you think that myself and Ghettopalmetto are incorrect about concerning TIF financing and economic impact.

Your assertion is that "There is NO OUTLAY OF CITY FUNDS. The money for the arena district can't be used for anything else because without the arena those funds are non-existent."

This may be the theory behind TIF financing, but that is not how it always plays out. If the project funded by TIF money doesn't create enough new tax revenue to cover the debt payments, the taxpayers are on the hook to cover the shortfall.

IF the new hockey arena creates enough spinoff development to increase tax revenues by at least $15 million per year, then you will be correct that there is no outlay of city funds, because the increase in tax revenues would not have materialized without the public financing of the new hockey arena.

However, if the new hockey arena fails to create an additional $15 million per year in new tax revenues, then there will be an outlay of tax dollars to cover the shortfall. Given the local experiences and numerous economic impact studies done on these types of projects, it is unlikely that the new hockey arena will pay for itself.

[Hermod]

Both proponents and opponents of building stadia and arenas for football, baseball, basketball, and hockey trot out their cherry picked numbers to justify their political/ideological bents. The real truth is difficult to determine.

The team owners want to get the maximum return which means being in a profitable city population and interest wise as well be in a venue at the lowest cost. The politicians and the elite want their city to be "major league". They have to negotiate. The team owners have the club in negotiation to pack up and go elsewhere [[as many have done). The cities have the club of withholding the money. Who blinks first?

[erikd]

Both proponents and opponents of building stadia and arenas for football, baseball, basketball, and hockey trot out their cherry picked numbers to justify their political/ideological bents. The real truth is difficult to determine.

I disagree with your assertion that the proponents/opponents of sports facilities are motivated by political/ideological bents. There is strong political support for these projects on both sides of the aisle. Spending tax dollars on pro sports arenas is one of the few things that the vast majority of Republicans and Democrats can agree on.

While it may seem [[based on my posts to this thread) that I am hell-bent against the new hockey arena, or public funding for it, that isn't the case at all. I am a huge Tiger fan, and I think that there are benefits from having our pro teams play in the city center. I didn't have a problem with the city and county spending tax dollars to reconfigure and upgrade the public infrastructure around Comerica Park and Ford Field, and I enthusiastically supported the hotel and car rental tax increases to support Comerica Park.

I was sold on the idea that Comerica Park would generate tons of spin-off development and be a major catalyst for downtown growth, but it just hasn't turned out that way. To be sure, there has been some spin-off development and growth because of the new ballpark, but it hasn't been significant.

Let me give you an example of how much I supported and believed in public funding for pro sports facilities:

Shortly after Comerica Park opened, the Metro Times ran an opinion piece written by Casey Coston that was titled "Ghost Bistros." In this column, Coston claimed that the promised spin-off development that was supposed to happen as a result of Comerica Park never materialized and wasn't going to happen. I was so confident that the new ballpark would ultimately generate the promised spin-off development, and so upset that Coston had the gall to claim that the spin-off development wasn't happening, that I cut out the article and saved it so that I could write a strongly worded rebuttal as soon as all of the spin-off development really started to kick in.

I still have that article saved for the day that the spin-off development really gets going, so that I can write a rebuttal and prove him wrong.

I held on to my strong belief that the stadium would generate significant spin-off development for many years. After 5 years without the spin-off happening, I started to have doubts about it. After 10 years without the spinoff development happening, I had to admit that the people who were doubtful of sports arenas as an effective development tool were correct.

Comerica Park was built in the midst of a huge nation-wide movement of sports teams moving back to downtowns that started in the mid 90s.. There wasn't that much economic impact data available before Comerica Park was funded and under construction in the late 90s. The theory that new pro sports facilities could be a major catalyst for downtown redevelopment was very popular at that time, and had not yet been disproven.

Now that we are 20 years into the downtown stadium movement, we have enough economic data, from cities around the country, to prove that the economic benefit of these projects simply does not justify the massive public funding for them. It might be worth it for the public to kick in a small portion of the funding, or maybe grant some tax breaks, but kicking in hundreds of millions of dollars is simply not worth it.

If anybody has data or evidence to prove me wrong, please present it. I argued in favor of these sports subsidies until I didn't have a leg to stand on and all of the available evidence contradicted my opinion. What you want and hope to be true doesn't always turn out that way.

[KJ5]

Why isn't the "entitlement" crowd not on here bitching? If a living wage for an honest days work is somehow an entitlement, how are massive handouts to Illitch somehow not?

[hortonz]

Why isn't the "entitlement" crowd not on here bitching? If a living wage for an honest days work is somehow an entitlement, how are massive handouts to Illitch somehow not?

That's because the "entitlement" crowd believes people who work for minimum wage are "parasites" who live off the wealth generated by millionaires and billionaires while "entrepreneurs" like Mike Illitich are victims of "big government" who want to "re-distribute" wealth from the top 1% of income earners to the other 99%. Just listen to GreenDay's "99 Revolutions" and you'll get the picture.

[rb336]

Why isn't the "entitlement" crowd not on here bitching? If a living wage for an honest days work is somehow an entitlement, how are massive handouts to Illitch somehow not?

This may be the stupidest comment in this thread full of stupid comments

[Hermod]

Why isn't the "entitlement" crowd not on here bitching? If a living wage for an honest days work is somehow an entitlement, how are massive handouts to Illitch somehow not?

It isn't an "entitlement" for Illitch. He has something that Detroit wants. The question is how badly [[in dollar terms) does Detroit want it. Detroit either wants it that badly or doesn't and tells Illitch to pound sand. Illitch then has to decide if he will walk.

[Wesley Mouch]

There should have been a community benefits agreement, formalized to include a cut of net revenue, prioritize consideration for current Detroit residents for the temp/construction contracts/jobs, and to hire at least a baseline percentage of current Detroit residents for permanent jobs.

Requiring local jobs is discriminatory. Why should we be divisive and creating walls between us and the suburbs? Don't we want all people to participate in Detroit? Time to stop us vs. them. We are we.

[ghettopalmetto]

Requiring local jobs is discriminatory. Why should we be divisive and creating walls between us and the suburbs? Don't we want all people to participate in Detroit? Time to stop us vs. them. We are we.

Relocating jobs to the suburbs, beyond the reach of public transportation, is discriminatory too. Thank goodness Detroit doesn't have *that* problem.

[canuck]

I just want to take a moment and have everybody appreciate the poetry in the title of this thread.

[hortonz]

It isn't an "entitlement" for Illitch. He has something that Detroit wants. The question is how badly [[in dollar terms) does Detroit want it. Detroit either wants it that badly or doesn't and tells Illitch to pound sand. Illitch then has to decide if he will walk.

The reason Detroit wants a new hockey arena is because it has been so thoroughly looted by corporate America that it can't afford to let any of its' sports teams leave the city. The owners of professional sports teams have become North Americas answer to the oligarchs that rule Russia.

[allhype101]

I think it's worth stressing that this was a deal engineered by the state. Most of the public money comes in the form of state school taxes. The city's role included expanding the Downtown Development Authority's footprint to accommodate the arena district through its tax increment financing plan, and the $1 land transfer. Even if Detroit City Council rejected those aspects of the deal, Kevyn Orr [[an employee of the state) could've approved them himself. To me, it was the Ilitches who really wanted the arena, and the organization found a partner in the state and the DEGC/DDA to make it happen.