New Stadium Imminent?

[mu_hilltopper]

What is valid about their point?  It's an emotional appeal(note I'm not arguing for a new arena here), it's easy to SAY we don't have good enough facilities.

The Bucks say their facility isn't good enough, schools say their facilities aren't good enough, playgrounds aren't good enough.  What is the metric used to determine this?  What is the minimum threshold school facilities need to be at?

People are far to prone to throw money at something and say know it's better without empirically proving it is better

I don't think you can categorize it as "emotional" ..  It's about priorities.  The worst thing that could be said is that not everyone prioritizes education over entertainment.  (leading to our downfall.)

[Let's Go Warriors]

See above. CG isn't a lobbying group or a special interest group. They are an organizing group for local churches and civic organizations. So the 'someone' is largely the engaged citizens of Milwaukee. That line of thinking isn't as strong when it's the people paying the taxes agitating for the funding.

I say let taxing start.  I dont live in Milwaukee County and I would bet that all of the surrounding counties are going to pass referendum or policy that wont allow them to be involved in the tax.  I think a few are heading down that road already.  IE Racine.  Expect all the 5 county area to follow suit very soon.

http://journaltimes.com/news/local/opposed-to-an-arena-tax----resolution-on/article_3638835a-07b8-11e3-92ca-0019bb2963f4.html

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

I agree.  I'd also throw in some concept of "priorities" to that conversation.

If it's "just a $10 problem" for taxpayers, then how about that $10 for the schools?  For the parks?  For the bridges and roads?  How about some corporate welfare, maybe an airline to create a hub here, now that we've lost all others?    Et cetera.  

To have an honest conversation about new taxes, you need to have a real plan with all the priorities on the table, not just talk about the wonders of 10 guys on a court, entertaining you out of $100+ for a ticket, (and likely losing.)

Right, and I'm willing to concede that a sexy new arena might be more beneficial that a "sexy new freshwater sciences research grant" or airport infrastructure. I get it.

There is some civic/community needs and it's not just economics.

I just want to see the cost and benefits laid out in an honest and objective way. (not likely I suppose).

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

I don't think you can categorize it as "emotional" ..  It's about priorities.  The worst thing that could be said is that not everyone prioritizes education over entertainment.  (leading to our downfall.)

That's a tough one, because by it's nature, "education" is related to children, and it automatically evokes emotion from most.

It's technically not an emotional appeal, but anytime you talk about education or schools, it almost automatically becomes that way.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I agree, but keep in mind that this debate is being waged on a basketball fan message board. I would assume most people here over value sports considerably because it is an important part of their own lives. The reality is that losing the Bucks would have almost zero impact on a large majority of the people living in Milwaukee and the state of Wisconsin.

Yup, that's exactly my point.  Some people would cry the world is ending, but a bunch would have no problem with it at all.  Too many myopic viewpoints here colored in a sports lens....which is understandable.  That's why to me San Diego, Seattle, Louisville, are not any less of a city because they don't have the NBA.  A franchise can certainly help get people excited, etc, but people go overboard with overvaluing what it does for a community.

[mu_hilltopper]

Right, and I'm willing to concede that a sexy new arena might be more beneficial that a "sexy new freshwater sciences research grant" or airport infrastructure. I get it.

There is some civic/community needs and it's not just economics.

I just want to see the cost and benefits laid out in an honest and objective way. (not likely I suppose).

Another great point.  Imagine if a non-sexy business, say, meat packers or beer brewers came and asked for $200m to build a plant that'd be in business for generations, providing middle-income jobs for thousands.

It'd be laughed out of the newspaper.    

Meanwhile. $200m for 10 guys to bounce a ball, plus some restaurant workers .. NOW we're talkin!

[ChicosBailBonds]

Louisville is right on the river where the climate isn't winter 6 months of the year.

I get it, but we can substitute other cities if you wish.  Minneapolis had the Lakers, then they had no one.  They have the T-Wolves.  Cincinnati used to have the Royals, but no NBA team in a long time.  Cities like to have teams for civic pride, show how big their wiener is to other cities, etc.  Look, I love sports, made it my career, but I don't believe for a second that if a team leaves is kills a city or that a city gaining a team is suddenly enchanted.  For some individuals, that is certainly the case. For the city as a whole, the numbers don't support that view.  They are nice to have, I would rather have one than not have one, but to a degree.  Not at any cost.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Another great point.  Imagine if a non-sexy business, say, meat packers or beer brewers came and asked for $200m to build a plant that'd be in business for generations, providing middle-income jobs for thousands.

It'd be laughed out of the newspaper.    

Meanwhile. $200m for 10 guys to bounce a ball, plus some restaurant workers .. NOW we're talkin!

Well, that's actually why I think Milwaukee should build Google and facebook a $500million dollar campus (250m each) in downtown and make them sign a 30 years lease.

[humanlung]

What is valid about their point?  It's an emotional appeal(note I'm not arguing for a new arena here), it's easy to SAY we don't have good enough facilities.

The Bucks say their facility isn't good enough, schools say their facilities aren't good enough, playgrounds aren't good enough.  What is the metric used to determine this?  What is the minimum threshold school facilities need to be at?

People are far to prone to throw money at something and say know it's better without empirically proving it is better

We spend more per pupil on public education than any nation on Earth and our rankings continue to drop.  If we are going to bring up appropriate places to spend taxpayer money, I think those without sin should cast the first stone.  That puts people who allocate funds for public education way at the back of the line. 

[akmarq]

   

Meanwhile. $200m for 10 guys to bounce a ball, plus some restaurant workers .. NOW we're talkin!

This is another great point that has only been tangentially addressed. Is what MKE needs really more low-wage service jobs? Building your economy through minimum wage work isn't near as stimulative as bringing in jobs that pay solid, middle-class wages. The arena would likely give a nice bump to the bar/entertainment owners downtown, but those aren't the business owners providing family-supporting careers in the city.

[MUDPT]

http://www.fieldofschemes.com

Just go here and you can read all of the data why public funding is a terrible idea.

[ChicosBailBonds]

1) Obsolescence has sped up in the last 50 years.  Even more so in the last 20.  Still have your same phone from 5 years ago?

You're talking technology...and I actually go about 4 years before replacing my phone.  Four years later, the phone still makes phone calls.  It may not run the apps as fast as the new ones, but for what I use it for, that is fine. 

Let's not confused WANT with NEED.  Everyone WANTS something new, that doesn't mean you need it.  I have to have these conversations with my kids.  There is a significant difference.  The BC can still hold that 94' piece of wood just fine along with 19.5K fannies in the seats.  They have suites.  They don't have some of the other revenue sources that others have.  Question I have is if they build the new playground for millionaires and the team still blows, are corporations, people, etc going to be able to afford these new amenities anyway?  Are you pricing the average guy out of the market?

2) You are right.  They want more revenue so they can compete with all of the franchises in the NBA that have venues that generate revenue and profit that make it possible for the owners to invest in the franchise.  This is called competition.  If you can't compete, you go away.  See:  Circuit City, Linens and Things, American TV, etc...

Not a good comparison.  Circruit City, American TV, Linens and Things don't have revenue sharing or salary caps in place like the NBA does.  The vast majority of the Bucks revenue comes from television and ticket sales.  Ticket sales are a product of the team sucking.

3) This is related to #2.  The Bucks are terrible now just like the Brewers were.  The Brewers got a new stadium and, lo and behold, attendance goes up as excitement around the park brings people out.  With extra $$$ flowing in, ownership is able to upgrade aspects of the organization that were lacking pre-Miller Park (like the scouting department and the minor league organizations -this comes from someone who was there, by the way).  These investments pay off in a few years and the Brewers no longer suck and, in fact, they are able to compete from time to time.

Interesting.  Miami Marlins got a new stadium...how is there attendance doing?  Doesn't always work out the way you are stating.  There is a halo effect with new stadiums that people want to come down and check out the new digs, that lasts for awhile, but ultimately they have to win. 

4) Who knows but if the Brewers can make the playoffs once in a while in a sport where there is no real salary cap then it is within the realm of possibility that the Bucks can compete at the highest level if they are smart and invest in the organization like the Brewers did (because of the $$$ from Miller Park) in a sport with a salary cap.

The Bucks problem is that too many NBA players don't want to live the majority of their prime earning years in Milwaukee.

 

[ChicosBailBonds]

I can't speak for every tax payer, but for me personally, it's just about ROI.

If the Bucks and the city can show me a plan that would make a new arena a good investment (from a civil and economics standpoint), then I'll get on board.

That's it.

Not complicated.

Exactly how I view it.  I'm fine with stadiums, pro sports, etc, but at what cost, what options, etc.  What's the plan, who is paying, who benefits, who doesn't benefit (opportunity costs), etc.  Agree, its not complicated.....politics makes it very complicated.

[Skatastrophy]

http://www.fieldofschemes.com

Just go here and you can read all of the data why public funding is a terrible idea.

Don't care.

I want to get drunk in a nicer building, and I think that taxpayers should help pay for that since I didn't use up their resources sending me to University.

Shut down public transportation if they have to, I don't use it anyway.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Another great point.  Imagine if a non-sexy business, say, meat packers or beer brewers came and asked for $200m to build a plant that'd be in business for generations, providing middle-income jobs for thousands.

It'd be laughed out of the newspaper.    

Meanwhile. $200m for 10 guys to bounce a ball, plus some restaurant workers .. NOW we're talkin!

Ding ding ding....winner

[ChicosBailBonds]

We spend more per pupil on public education than any nation on Earth and our rankings continue to drop.  If we are going to bring up appropriate places to spend taxpayer money, I think those without sin should cast the first stone.  That puts people who allocate funds for public education way at the back of the line. 

Agree with this also....you are right...there are reasons for this, however, which shall shut the thread down....

[Benny B]

Question though. What happens to MU if the Bucks do move? Do they just play at the BC until the end of time? Plus you also have to consider the Admirals arent going anywhere either.

If the Bucks move, the fiscal reality of the situation will force the razing US Cellular arena as the city/district will not be able to justify keeping up two aging arenas next door to each other.

Admirals, MU and UWM will then share the BC for as long as the building is able to keep the ice frozen.  From where I stand, I would estimate the BC has perhaps 10-15 of economic life remaining before the infrastructure replacement and operating costs will simply become too much.

At some point - be it 1, 5, 10, 15 or 50 years from now - the city and the tenants are going to be forced to deal with the aging building... not another lipstick on the pig refurbishment, but an actual "tear-the-walls-out" renovation.  The MMAC estimated $300M to renovate the BC, but this was to supposed NBA standards.  Standards for the AHL and NCAA are much less, but by how much is unknown.  It will be certainly be more than the $80M short-term fix that was discussed a decade ago, but it won't be $300M.  If it's $100M, then I can see that getting done via a combination of private financing with little need for any public money... which means that yes, MU will be at the BC until the end of time (or at least the distantly foreseeable future).  However, if that number is $250M, then I don't see how MU, the Admirals, the city, UWM and taxpayers are going to be able to put that kind of cash together... if perhaps MU was asked to foot a 10% share of that, then they'll have a decision of their own to make as $25M is already 1/4 to 1/3 of the way towards the cost of building their own arena.

IMO - Bottom line is this: If the Bucks leave town, an on-campus (or near-campus) arena for Marquette is inevitable.  That doesn't mean it gets built right away, but the economics of the situation will likely force MU's hand into a massive fundraising effort.

If I had to take a stab at it, I would imagine a groundbreaking near 16th and Canal sometime between 2025 and 2030.

[ThatDude]

This is another great point that has only been tangentially addressed. Is what MKE needs really more low-wage service jobs? Building your economy through minimum wage work isn't near as stimulative as bringing in jobs that pay solid, middle-class wages. The arena would likely give a nice bump to the bar/entertainment owners downtown, but those aren't the business owners providing family-supporting careers in the city.

I look at it like this

If Wisconsin is a democratic state as statistics proves it to be, then a new arena will indeed get built.  Leave it up to the citizens to vote!

[spartan3186]

I'm about 4 pages late with this, but I think some people underestimate Milwaukee's desirability as a convention location.

Some anecdotal evidence-- Milwaukee won a bid to host the USA Triathlon Age Group National Championships for both 2013 and 2014. All accounts I have read have praised Milwaukee as the host. They actually saw a 22% increase in the number of athletes for 2012 to 2013. Part of this can be attributed to growing interest in the sport, but I think some can also be attributed to Milwaukee as the host city. The economic impact for the event was estimated at $8-$10 million.


Year Site # of Athletes
1999....... St. Joseph, MO............ 1,000
2000 ....... St. Joseph, MO ........... 1,050
2001 ....... Coeur d’Alene, ID ........ 1,025
2002 ....... Coeur d’Alene, ID ........ 1,125
2003....... Shreveport, LA............ 1,200
2004....... Shreveport, LA............ 850
2005....... Kansas City, MO.......... 1,230
2006....... Kansas City, MO.......... 900
2007....... Portland, OR................ 1,200
2008....... Portland, OR................ 1,100
2009....... Tuscaloosa, AL............. 1,100
2010....... Tuscaloosa, AL............. 1,700
2011....... Burlington, VT............. 2,500
2012....... Burlington, VT............. 3,500
2013....... Milwaukee, WI............ 4,300

[humanlung]

Ok...see Seattle Supersonics.  Or New Jersey Nets.  Or Los Angeles Rams.  All moved from antiquated arenas.  All became better franchises after the move.

The Marlins have royally ticked off the fan base by twice building World Series winners and then doing massive salary dumps that landed the team in the cellar.  I think that's a different set of circumstances, even with the new stadium.

[akmarq]

Ok...see Seattle Supersonics.  Or New Jersey Nets.  Or Los Angeles Rams.  All moved from antiquated arenas.  All became better franchises after the move.

The Marlins have royally ticked off the fan base by twice building World Series winners and then doing massive salary dumps that landed the team in the cellar.  I think that's a different set of circumstances, even with the new stadium.

Minnesota Twins aren't much better with Target Field
Detroit Lions still aren't setting the world on fire

It's easy to cherry pick examples to prove one's point. I think the point that most people are making is that where you come down on the issue shouldn't be contingent on how good the Bucks might get. When you're playing with other people's money, you ought to be able to demonstrate the positive return you're going to give them. So far no one from the NBA/Bucks/MMAC has done that.

[humanlung]

Another great point.  Imagine if a non-sexy business, say, meat packers or beer brewers came and asked for $200m to build a plant that'd be in business for generations, providing middle-income jobs for thousands.

It'd be laughed out of the newspaper.    

Meanwhile. $200m for 10 guys to bounce a ball, plus some restaurant workers .. NOW we're talkin!

Yet another example of the probable stupidity of the local politicians in this area.

[swoopem]

I was just out to lunch and saw on the news that Virgina Beach wants to build a stadium hoping that a NBA or NHL team will move there in the near future. That strikes me a weird city for a team to move to considering the other cities that are available.

[humanlung]

Minnesota Twins aren't much better with Target Field
Detroit Lions still aren't setting the world on fire

It's easy to cherry pick examples to prove one's point. I think the point that most people are making is that where you come down on the issue shouldn't be contingent on how good the Bucks might get. When you're playing with other people's money, you ought to be able to demonstrate the positive return you're going to give them. So far no one from the NBA/Bucks/MMAC has done that.

We are talking about antiquated facilities and the impact on the franchise.  The Twins and Lions do not fit the category.  Plus, the Lions have revenue sharing as part of the NFL.

I don't doubt that a new arena is a "push" at best.  Losing the Bucks, however, is a negative for the area economically.  That is almost certain.

[MU Fan in Connecticut]

I was just out to lunch and saw on the news that Virgina Beach wants to build a stadium hoping that a NBA or NHL team will move there in the near future. That strikes me a weird city for a team to move to considering the other cities that are available.

They should ask Kansas City how that worked out.