I sent this Op-Ed to the Post Crescent
yesterday.
Is the proposal to build a new Bucks arena good for taxpayers
of Wisconsin and the Fox Valley? All things being equal, I want
the Bucks to stay in Wisconsin, but the devil is in the details.
The current concept includes the Bucks' owners' contribution
of $250 million in addition to other partners contributing $250
million. This includes Milwaukee County bonding $55 million, the
state bonding $55 million, the Wisconsin Center District bonding
$93 million, and Milwaukee providing $47 million. With interest,
taxpayer contributions will be close to $420 million.
My first concern is based on my belief in the free market
system: this means that I don't believe the state should
subsidize private enterprises with taxpayer money. That is why
in my 2012 campaign I said the the Wisconsin Economic
Development Corporation (WEDC) was a problematic idea. In this
case, I have a philosophical objection to seeing taxpayer money
go to millionaire basketball players and billionaire team
owners.
Second, this deal would set a precedent for major projects in
the future. Milwaukee County Executive Abele criticizes
lawmakers who oppose the stadium plan because he thinks the
state has a responsibility to be involved. It is ridiculous to
think that the state has any obligation to participate. Other
arenas, like Lambeau Field and Miller Park, were funded by an
increase in sales tax for the surrounding areas, not through
state aid. The state did not even contribute to the construction
of the Bradley Center.
Third, I am not convinced that every part of the deal is
solid. The Wisconsin Center District won't have any money to
make payments on their bonds until 2027, which will cost
taxpayers more interest in the long-run. I also call on the city
to contribute more to the deal. For example, the Appleton area
is proposing a $28 million Exhibition Center. The city of
Milwaukee, which is about 5 times larger, can only find $47
million? This doesn't even take into account the potential
ancillary development worth approximately $500 million. Why
would taxpayers in the Fox Valley want to be on the hook for the
state's portion of $55 million when Milwaukee will contribute
only $47 million?
Unlike some folks who would accept any deal to keep the
Bucks, I prefer a one that limits state involvement. A surcharge
could be applied to tickets for all events held at the new
arena, ensuring that those who benefit most also share in the
costs (an extra $1 charge on tickets could bring in over $1
million a year). A fraction of the revenue from naming rights
could replace the state's contribution (the Sacramento Kings and
the Memphis Grizzlies recently brought in $120 million and $90
million respectively for naming rights). There are options to
replace the state's contribution. Milwaukee also has the
capacity to contribute more to this plan.
Ideally, I'd like to see the Bucks stay in Wisconsin and the
state get out of the arena business. Milwaukee, and specifically
Mayor Barrett, needs to do more. I am pleased to see legislative
leadership say that the Bucks stadium will be taken up
separately from the budget, but if the state's level of
involvement remains the same, I cannot vote in favor of it. |