Proponents (of taxpayer funded stadiums) claim that sports facilities improve the local economy in four ways. First, building the facility creates construction jobs. Second, people who attend games or work for the team generate new spending in the community, expanding local employment. Third, a team attracts tourists and companies to the host city, further increasing local spending and jobs. Finally, all this new spending has a “multiplier effect” as increased local income causes still more new spending and job creation. Advocates argue that new stadiums spur so much economic growth that they are self-financing: subsidies are offset by revenues from ticket taxes, sales taxes on concessions and other spending outside the stadium, and property tax increases arising from the stadium’s economic impact.

Unfortunately, these arguments contain bad economic reasoning that leads to overstatement of the benefits of stadiums. Economic growth takes place when a community’s resources—people, capital investments, and natural resources like land—become more productive. Increased productivity can arise in two ways: from economically beneficial specialization by the community for the purpose of trading with other regions or from local value added that is higher than other uses of local workers, land, and investments. Building a stadium is good for the local economy only if a stadium is the most productive way to make capital investments and use its workers.

The group’s intention is to support a stadium without a tax increase and encourage city council to support the taxpayers.  A sample of their initiative.

Taxpayers need relief and not the burden of additional debt for a luxury endeavor.

I believe the city’s priorities at this time, and always, should be providing and
maintaining adequate public facilities, infrastructure and services, such as public safety,
roads and sidewalks, solid waste, parking and drainage.

A new baseball stadium is not a necessity nor should it be a priority.

The city’s top priority should be keeping the tax rate down and supporting policies and
initiatives that improve the stake of every citizen and every business, large or small.

During the past several years here at the Southeastern coastal area we have seen how they operate. The Stop Titan Action Network made up of local, regional and national groups has mobilized to prevent Carolinas Cement from building a plant in a rural area north of Wilmington, N. C. (link)

It all starts innocently enough—even seemingly well intended. A mother in West Virginia bent on stopping strip-mining coal in Appalachia passes environmental zealotry to her daughter who moves to Boone, N. C. to organize Appalachian Voices (link) advocating to stop mining, then becomes deputy director of the Sierra Club’s subversive Beyond Coal campaign. (link)

The radical activists use gullible citizens to front their agenda. Behind the apparent “grass roots” movements, strategies by foundations, community organizers, public health advocates, leftist academics, greedy law firms and political operatives’ fund, promote and legislate environmentalist’s demands. This cabal of anti-capitalists and utopian visionaries uses forceful and deceptive tactics. Consider the Beyond Coal campaign, for instance.

An article titled, “Emissions Impossible,” in the May/June 2012 Mother Jones magazine (motto: “smart, fearless journalism”) by Mark Hertsgaard describes how people (and their money) supporting these groups have “cancelled, legally barred, or otherwise stopped” 166 proposed coal-fired power plants across the U. S. How did they do this? (link)

The author calls it “retail politics”—“talking with friends and neighbors, pestering local media, packing regulatory hearings, protesting before state legislatures, filing legal challenges and more.” Sounds familiar.

Watch for more of this right here in River City brought to us by the Stop Titan Network.

One would think the City of Wilmington’s leaders would be concerned about the ACTUAL role of government.  Maybe, they should focus their attention, their energies, their abilities to making the streets safer, the roads better and fire protection more efficient.  Why should the city be giving baseball a higher degree of city haste, than any of the aforementioned issues?

(StarNews) Tony Caudle, asst. city manager, said the city faces a “compressed timeline” to review locations and funding options. Next week, the city council is expected to receive proposals for locations and financing models from a development team organized by the Braves and Mandalay, which will seek private financing in a public-private partnership with the city. National Sports will review the development team’s proposals and let city officials know which ones would work for Wilmington.  . . . Caudle said the city is early in its process even with the tight deadlines.. . . he explained that the Braves and Mandalay are on one track of planning while National Sports, the city’s consultant, was on another track with determining the feasibility of proposals.

Folks, pay attention, there is NO discussion of PRIVATE FUNDING, only PRIVATE FINANCING which means taxpayer funded!  They are being forced to at least be somewhat honest that there is NO private funding being sought.  And the folks doing the FINANCING will make money on the interest they charge the taxpayers.  Shame, shame!

It is also NOT the role of the city to work for Mandalay or the Braves, but they sure are giving them a great deal of time.  Meanwhile you have to wonder if Caudle is being paid by TAXPAYERS that he is supposed to serve or the people wanting him to use $40m or more to build them a stadium with taxpayer money?

As of yet, not ONE city council member has expressed disdain at the prospect of bilking the taxpayers on this.  But there is still hope and it’s in the hands of taxpayers who are now facing a 20% increase in their property tax rate even without a stadium!

(StarNews) – Instead of showing attendees the video of Tuesday night’s meeting, which was attended and led by National Sports representatives, Deputy City Manager Tony Caudle presented information about the proposed stadium’s potential economic benefits, funding sources and – the main reason for the meeting – general areas where it could be built.

Notice the interesting use of language, profound lack of economic honesty and the illusion that people actually have lots of money to spend on entertainment that they’re not spending now.  Come on Tony, be honest with citizens!  1) People don’t have a lot of extra money that they’re just dying to spend on another baseball team.  2) What they will spend will be money that would otherwise go to businesses that are already here and now will be spending their taxes to support a business that is trying to put them out of business.  3) The funding is going to be TAXES!

At any rate, last night didn’t really answer any additional questions.  We’re still awaiting the “plan” by Mandalay, the Braves or the city.  The ONLY thing we really know is that the city wants to build a taxpayer funded stadium.  They might even be willing to avoid any kind of competitive process by letting the insiders build it and then “sell” it to the city to avoid any property tax issues.

Here’s hoping that city will not balk at private funding and ownership of a stadium.  Thus far the Chamber of Commerce is against private funding as is Wilmington Downtown Inc.   You have to wonder why two groups that say they support businesses would be so entrenched in spending taxes over private money.

Few here would benefit from being annexed, but the totalitarians in control of city government arbitrarily seized the property.

State senators Thom Goolsby and David Rouzer, courageously and thankfully representing the citizens, plan to stop the takeover with legislation aptly titled “Wilmington Annexation Suspension.” Arrogant city officials “continued to fight us all the way,” observed Sen. Goolsby. (link)

This municipal reign-of-terror is ending, much to the consternation of North Carolina cities that, with their politically powerful League of Municipalities lobby, have previously usurped property outside city limits unhindered by law or petitions for grievance—not to provide better services, but to prop up crumbling downtowns with heavily subsidized social projects.

Before the ink was dry on a legislated moratorium, the city police force took over the area and the central planners have begun to establish “zoning districts.” Monkey Junction residents don’t need more police or socialist planners—imposing reviews and permits required to build and operate private development (even the amount of window space business people could use would be controlled by bureaucrats). (link)

But city planners “must move forward” with their meddling “nonconformities…conditional use permits” and “appropriate” zoning categories for 1,365 private properties—unnecessary and unwanted by the owners.

The annexation of property by government force, in this case, isn’t the most egregious of historical totalitarianism, but it’s another onerous form leading to absolute and centralized control over our lives, unacceptable to free people.

Percentages on Marriage Amendment by county?  New Hanover – in favor by 329 votes, Brunswick – 65%/35%, Pender – 68%/32%, Bladen – 83%/17%, Columbus 85%/15%  (all in favor)

In December, how many incumbents will leave the New Hanover County Commission?  3 out of 5, and it’s possible that only 1 (Brian Berger) might be the ONLY incumbent.  Jason Thompson lost the primary, Ted Davis is running for NC House as is Rick Caitlin and Jonathan Barfield still faces re-election in November as the current lone democrat on the board.

How many coastal counties did Sen. David Rouzer win in the newly drawn 7th GOP congressional district primary against Ilario Pantano?  None, Pantano won New Hanover, Brunswick and Pender decisively.  It will be interesting to see if the GOP comes together on this front in the fall against current incumbent Mike McIntyre (who doesn’t live in the district).

There are hundreds of interesting questions to consider when looking through the minutia, but these were just a few that popped into my sleep deprived head.

Mecklenburg (Charlotte), Guilford (Greensboro), Durham-Orange-Chatham (RTP-Chapel Hill), New Hanover (Wilmington), Wake (Raleigh), Watauga (Boone, the oddity here) and Buncombe (Asheville) all favored the amendment.  For a while Forsyth (Winston-Salem) was in the “against” column, but shifted.    Another note, Fayetteville, with a large minority population, did NOT vote against the amendment.

This will be the most discussed race of the night.

Their favorite answer of the night when asked about taxes, costs, locations, and almost every other aspect of this was, “it depends.”

This isn’t personal, but it is problematic.  The city should have had more sense than to hold this meeting on an election night.  It also should have had more sense than to force people to watch the film of tonight’s meeting if they attend a meeting tomorrow night.  For $200k the consultants could have given the presentation again.

Let’s also quit talking about the other sites and focus on the single site all insiders want which is the northern waterfront adjacent to the PPD building.  Mandalay, the Braves, the City and all insiders connected to it know it and, when pressed, will admit in an honest moment.

Let’s also quit pretending that the city is interested in privately owned stadium.  What appears to be happening is that private folks might build it and then turn it over to the city to be maintained. Truth is, nobody wants to pay taxes on the stadium and it can’t make money.  And, to date, the Chamber, Wilmington Downtown Inc. and the city have not openly supported a privately owned stadium at all.

What we are looking at is a stadium, built on the northern waterfront, that will require a tax increase.  It will take business away from theaters and other entertainment facilities.  Economically, there isn’t “new” money to be spent, but only a certain amount that people spend on entertainment and that will be taken away from private establishments to a taxpayer supported one.

It will also take money away from downtown restaurants and businesses. How can that be?  Well, people will go to the stadium, pay for parking, par for tickets and expensive beer and hotdogs and that will soak up a pretty penny just as it does in Durham and other areas.  It also does nothing for retail establishments either.

A stadium is nice, but it isn’t a necessity.  The city has some serious issues, their annexation is going to be reversed, they’re about to pass a 20% increase in the tax rate and that doesn’t include the stadium.  They are understaffed with police, who haven’t received a raise in three years. And now they’re blaming the county for their money woes.

At some point they will have to accept responsibility for their own fiscal issues and focus on actual vision, rather than a stadium pipe dream thrown at them by a baseball franchise that wants taxpayers to build “their” stadium.

Tuesday, May 8, Baseball Informational Meeting, City Council Chambers, at 6:30 p.m.
On Tuesday, the city will hold a meeting to provide information and get citizen input about general areas of where a publically owned baseball stadium might be located. The meeting will be held at 6:30 p.m. at City Hall in City Council chambers.

At the meeting, National will:
•                     Provide information about why other cities have pursued publically owned baseball stadiums;
•                     Provide information about options for ways to finance the construction and operations of a publically owned stadium;

Just VERY funny that they can’t even spell PUBLICLY in their own press release.  They may be looking for “public ally” but they don’t have many!!!

Just pathetic that the $200k can’t even generate a press release without typos and that they also are so against the private sector owning a baseball stadium.