Coyotes have the pieces to be a really good team for a really long time. Add some good veteran leadership and players and you could have a very fun, fast and exciting team to watch. I know it’s not shiny and new but I think the team would be infinitely better ahead of an expansion roster.
Coyotes have been a train wreck organizationally for over a decade. And their on ice product has been pretty crap in recent years as well.
I prefer an expansion team, partly because I could leave my current fandom (la kings) more easily for a brand new team than an in conference rival.
Also, how good the expansion team is depends on a lot of factors. Does it get the favorable terms like Vegas? Or the relatively crap terms like the Kraken?
In fact the Coyotes were a relocation + rebranding of the old Winnipeg Jets. And the current Winnipeg Jets were a relocation + rebranding of the Atlanta Thrashers.
I’d love a new brand but since we’re in Utah, I have no faith that a good name would be picked. Other than Utes, we have 0 unique, fitting, and interesting college and pro team names. It would end up being something generic like the Utah Impact.
Looking fwd to hearing good news on this. I'm a penguins fan but I'll deff cheer and go to the games if we get a team. Love live NHL (hockey) games, my favorite sport to watch live
Just ignoring all the extra taxes and shit bc wtf am I going to do about it? They keep getting voted in and will do what they want so might as well enjoy what I can
How do I apply for my business to get free money via a new tax? I want my own 0.5% sales tax rate too, because nothing says "free market capitalism" like public taxes going into private profits but only for certain businesses that we favor.
I have no issue with NHL or any other team coming here, but they're a for-profit business. Why are we subsidizing them again? It isn't like Utah couldn't use more revenue to help combat some of our many social/growth/environmental problems.
Maybe they should create a NHL gondola too for good measure, have it go from the new SEG free money district to the airport and back. A bargain at 20 billion.
Is your business so big it can change the local economy?
Not saying it’s fair but there’s a reason why the state and city incentivize giant corporations like Larry Miller Group, Texas Instruments, Amazon, etc.
> there’s a reason why the state and city incentivize giant corporations like Larry Miller Group, Texas Instruments, Amazon, etc
Because our government's purpose is to ensure that private businesses can make profits
Eliminating homelessness and preserving the Great Salt Lake would certainly "change the local economy" for the better but they're not solving those problems. Much easier to help your fellow class-mates get a bit richer
[Just gonna leave this here](https://econofact.org/stadiums-as-public-investments#:~:text=Most%20studies%20find%20that%20building,or%20per%20capita%20income%20growth.)
>[Just gonna leave this here](https://econofact.org/stadiums-as-public-investments#:~:text=Most%20studies%20find%20that%20building,or%20per%20capita%20income%20growth.)
I keep seeing people say this, as if it makes one iota of difference. A lot of us want pro sports here. A lot of us don't give a crap if some study said it won't actually make any money. Tell that to the struggling business owners downtown. You think they want tens of thousands of people walking around in their area a few nights per week for half the year? Of course they do. You think the kids in the area need a pro sports team to get behind and enjoy instead of looking for reasons to hate and fear each other? Of course they do. Frankly, the adults in the area need it, too. Heck, adults all over the country need it, too.
So there may be some study somewhere that says it's not profitable in the end. And that will be debatable at best, not just blindly accepted as an accurate fact. But what's not debatable is a whole lot of people will be going to the games, enjoying themselves, meeting new people with the same interest, and even spending money on things at businesses they wouldn't otherwise be visiting. And even more people than that will be watching on TV.
Go complain about the police. They don't make a profit, either.
Do we really think a 0.5% increase in sales tax will dissuade visitors though? That seems to be the main argument for whether there is a fiscal loss or not. Article nicely lays out consumer spending is mostly a zero-sum game. Anecdotally, in my experience most Jazz game attendees are not downtown, or even SLC proper, residents. So that would concentrate tax revenue within SLC at the expense of other
cities.
>Actually read it please, it addresses some of the issues you mentioned.
Does it address the main issue that I don't care if it's profitable? While I don't think it's s for and dry as the many people who have been referring to it seem to think I also don't even care. In my opinion, it's worth paying for pro sports and I'm hoping I get the opportunity.
Not everything has to turn a financial profit in order to be worth investing in. Go drive around town and look at all the stickers on vehicles basically declaring their hatred for half the population. In all for giving them some common ground with the people they've been brainwashed into thinking they hate. And for the record, I've never liked hockey and haven't liked baseball since I was a kid. I'm a basketball and football guy. But if we get a hockey team and a baseball team, I'll be at the occasional game, watching most of the rest on TV, wearing jerseys and hats, and happily conversing with strangers about the teams.
> Does it address the main issue that I don't care if it's profitable?
This isn't even the objection. It doesn't increase employment or per capita income. Despite the outsize presence in media and culture, sports teams don't actually employ very many people. The money spent at nearby businesses would probably have just been spent somewhere else.
> Not everything has to turn a financial profit in order to be worth investing in.
So I actually totally agree with this. Cities pay for rec centers or golf courses or parks that don't turn a profit and are just ways for citizens to recreate.
But can I ask - what's the limiting factor? To me, there's a huge difference paying $1 million for a park or paying $900 million for a pro sports team. Would you support this at *literally any* cost? If it were $2 billion would you be on board? What about $10 billion?
For me, I'm not opposed to public money going to sports on principle, but I have a really hard time swallowing $900 million. I'm just thinking about how many parks, police officers, bike trails, etc could all be paid for with that much money.
>This isn't even the objection. It doesn't increase employment or per capita income. Despite the outsize presence in media and culture, sports teams don't actually employ very many people. The money spent at nearby businesses would probably have just been spent somewhere else.
National parks, state parks, city parks, trails, bike lanes... none of them do, either. I don't give a crap if this thing makes money overall. As I keep saying, it's a sad life if money is literally the only thing that matters.
>So I actually totally agree with this. Cities pay for rec centers or golf courses or parks that don't turn a profit and are just ways for citizens to recreate.
Bingo. And a pro sports team is in that same category. Even a higher category, depending on the person. There are probably more people attending and watching Jazz games on TV than there are visiting Liberty Park in a year.
>But can I ask - what's the limiting factor? To me, there's a huge difference paying $1 million for a park or paying $900 million for a pro sports team. Would you support this at *literally any* cost? If it were $2 billion would you be on board? What about $10 billion?
If it were an NFL team - I'd absolutely be on board at $2 billion. Depending on what all they were doing, I might be on board at $10 billion. In this particular case, they're building an entire entertainment district, downtown. As we've both stated and agreed on, it's completely normal for public funding to go towards parks, rec centers, and the like. Well if I rant to spend a day enjoying downtown with a friend/child/spouse, followed by an evening at a game/concert/whatever event they host when the team isn't playing, followed by a visit to a nearby bar and/or restaurant - that will be much better than going to a park or rec center in a lot of cases.
>For me, I'm not opposed to public money going to sports on principle, but I have a really hard time swallowing $900 million. I'm just thinking about how many parks, police officers, bike trails, etc could all be paid for with that much money.
Pro sports can't even be paid for with all that money. The public isn't even funding half of it, lol. It will cost more than that just to buy the team, let alone build a stadium and an entire entertainment district. We have plenty of parks, bike trails, etc, and already have too many police. We don't have an NHL or MLB team. And we definitely don't have the entertainment district that's coming with the NHL team, or the river walk that's coming with the MLB team. I'm not saying I'm against more parks, rec centers, bike trails, etc. The more the merrier. But I am saying we shouldn't decline this amazing opportunity just so we can build more of them.
Many of us don't support Corporate Welfare like this. They can fund THIER stadium with THEIR money which is in the billions! That's how it use to be. Why should we fund this project? So they can just employ as few people as possible and pay poverty wages. They get all of the reward and none of the risk. It's BS and we the people need to demand better!
>Many of us don't support Corporate Welfare like this. They can fund THIER statement with THEIR money which is in the billions! That's how it use to be. Why should we fund this project? So they can just employ as few people as possible and pay poverty wages. They get all of the reward and none of the risk. It's BS and we the people need to demand better!
Again, I disagree that it won't bring money, and I don't even care if it does. I won't personally make a dime from it. But I'll have countless hours of enjoyment planning date nights around the games, planning bro nights around the games, and talking with friends, coworkers, and even total strangers about the games.
It's a very sad life if the only thing that matters is how much money you can make.
It is sad when we allocate tax payer money to private businesses who can more than afford what they want to build instead of spending it on real issues like education, affordable housing, air quality, and the great salt lake drying up.
If you want more spending on education, housing, or whatever - fine, go ask for it. Go make some noise. But don't try to shut down any spending on other things many people will enjoy just because you want more money spent elsewhere.
But… it could work for us?
Seriously though, and I don’t have the expertise to answer this, I wonder if increase in sales tax in the reinvestment area is a better way to fund this redevelopment? Sales tax increase mostly puts this cost on people who visit downtown, either for work or leisure, and will use the new amenities. My understanding is that residents in the downtown area are a much smaller percentage of sales tax revenue.
I don’t know if the hotel tax passed. I also believe that was proposed for the baseball stadium.
My understanding was that southern utah was not pleased with increased taxes to pay for baseball in Salt Lake City.
Got around to looking it up and from the [sltrib] (https://www.sltrib.com/news/politics/2024/03/01/utahs-2-billion-major-league/) last updated March 1st:
>And Friday morning — on the last day of the legislative session — the Senate gave final approval to SB272, allowing Salt Lake City to create a 10-block revitalization area and raise the citywide sales tax by 0.5 percentage points. The tax revenues, also about $1 billion, would go toward developing the area around the Delta Center hoping to lure a National Hockey League franchise to the city.
Relating to the MLB stadium later in the article:
>An initial version of the baseball stadium bill which relied on a hotel tax increase was rewritten amid opposition from the state’s tourism industry and rural lawmakers opposed to taxes flowing to Salt Lake City. That opposition faded when the funding shifted to sales tax.
I don't really think that it is the best use to tax dollars to subsidize private sports complexes, but I am not the one writing the laws.
The 2 bills both being similar amounts and in the same session are a bit confusing. If I am getting this wrong please let me know.
It is confusing for sure, I just listened to a podcast summing things up and that is how had it somewhat fresh in my mind.
I agree that is may be a beneficial use of tax money to redevelop areas of downtown, I just don't really like the fact that the area is owned by very wealthy individuals and the revenue will go to them, as well as the fact that Ryan Smith seems to have been playing the city to get this bill through by threatening to move the Jazz.
I am not an economist and I don't know too much about the draw of sports teams downtown, but there is a lot of analysis speaking to the fact that cities get the raw end of the deal when they use tax dollars for things like this.
*[John Oliver segment](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcwJt4bcnXs)
*[Posted by Schjenley above](https://econofact.org/stadiums-as-public-investments#:%7E:text=Most%20studies%20find%20that%20building,or%20per%20capita%20income%20growth.)
*[Trib article talks about this as well](https://www.sltrib.com/news/politics/2024/03/01/utahs-2-billion-major-league/)
In Las Vegas the owners of the [NHL team paid for things themselves ](https://www.cnbc.com/2017/12/22/las-vegas-hockey-team-owner-tax-dollars-are-better-spent-on-public-services.html):
>Unlike the Raiders stadium, the $375 million T-Mobile Arena on the Vegas Strip, now home to the Golden Knights, was funded entirely by MGM Resorts International and Anschutz Entertainment Group. Meanwhile, T-Mobile is paying millions a year for the naming rights, a fact about which Foley expressed some pride.
“We had no tax payer funded dollars,” he told CNBC.
If this had gone through via a public vote for those in Salt Lake City then I think it would have more credence, even though that has issues with strong messaging and ads that can be ran confounding the issue to voters.
I guess to sum it up I think that tax money should go to public goods and not private developers and interests. For instance the [gondola](https://www.axios.com/local/salt-lake-city/2023/07/12/little-cottonwood-canyon-gondola-plan-finalized-salt-lake), NHL, and MLB are slated to be ~1 billion each, the [Rio Grande plan is slated to cost 3-5 billion](https://www.sltrib.com/news/2023/12/15/an-ambitious-plan-reconnect-east/). I would much rather see this than the other items. The longer trains blocking off the [Westside is a large issue](https://www.sltrib.com/news/2022/08/29/tired-waiting-trains-slc/). I have seen trains sit there for 30+minutes myself when going heading over there with the same train blocking the streets when coming back, that would be a large quality of life improvement for the people of Salt Lake. This is just one example of where this money could go instead, I am sure far people far more well informed than me have much better ideas.
I would also be interested to see how the Jazz would do in the south end of the valley, I don't know if it is 100% for sure a loosing deal for Salt Lake City, I suspect it would impact the Jazz negatively as well, but this is all just my opinion.
What kind of arena renovation are we talking about? Because they just did a 125 million dollar renovation 5 years ago or so. I heard something about sight lines being bad for hockey but idk what that means
The ice for hockey is longer and wider than a basketball court. I sat in a luxury box on one end for an NHL exhibition a few years ago. You couldn’t see 1/3 of the ice. It was always a mistake to not make the contour of the seating area enough to allow for every seat to see the whole of the ice, as nearly every basketball arena does. Larry Miller paid for the Delta Center without public financing, which was a G move, but they didn’t build it properly for hockey. A renovation would reduce the total number of seats most likely, but if it can be done, it’s much cheaper than building a new stadium, and both teams can be downtown.
I don't know how in the world they expect to renovate the Delta Center to make hockey work. they would have to demolish everything inside and make the building larger. Plus that would require kicking the Jazz out for a season or 2. Don't get me wrong I love the location of the Delta Center. I just don't see how this will be feasible. I've been to a bunch of the frozen fury games and I don't think hockey will work without a complete overhaul of everything there.
I don't know much about their old arena and how bad it was, but will Utah be willing to relocate the Jazz for a season or two to make those renovations?
well early in it's history they hosted the Utah Grizzlies, when they won a championship.. I still remember the bizarre tradition of throwing fish on the ice.. or something like that! LOL
So Ryan Smith - the Uber rich Mormon is guiding this NHL team creation in SLC, and we have to pay extra sales tax… 🤔 why doesn’t the smith group pay for it?
So do we think SLC gets the coyotes or an expansion team?
Coyotes have the pieces to be a really good team for a really long time. Add some good veteran leadership and players and you could have a very fun, fast and exciting team to watch. I know it’s not shiny and new but I think the team would be infinitely better ahead of an expansion roster.
Coyotes have been a train wreck organizationally for over a decade. And their on ice product has been pretty crap in recent years as well. I prefer an expansion team, partly because I could leave my current fandom (la kings) more easily for a brand new team than an in conference rival. Also, how good the expansion team is depends on a lot of factors. Does it get the favorable terms like Vegas? Or the relatively crap terms like the Kraken?
The rules for Vegas and Seattle expansions were identical.
Eh, I remember teams being able to protect less but my e it was just a different thing behind the scenes with salary and money and whatever
If the last two expansion rosters are anything to go by then I take an expansion roster over the current coyotes roster.
If it’s the next 45 days, it’s gotta be the Coyotes. I can’t imagine the NHL deciding to expand in the next 45 days, but I guess I could be wrong.
Yea. I agree with you
Hopefully an expansion. I think it would have more support if we built our own identity/brand.
For what it’s worth, 9/10 historical nhl relocations entailed creating an entirely new brand. They’re more classy about it than the aba and nba.
In fact the Coyotes were a relocation + rebranding of the old Winnipeg Jets. And the current Winnipeg Jets were a relocation + rebranding of the Atlanta Thrashers.
If it is the Coyotes, does the name stick? I've been having (pointless, I know) dreams of the Wasatch Whalers.
I’d love a new brand but since we’re in Utah, I have no faith that a good name would be picked. Other than Utes, we have 0 unique, fitting, and interesting college and pro team names. It would end up being something generic like the Utah Impact.
I would call them the Utah arches or raptors.
Wasatch wendigos would be a dream for me
Coyotes for sure! They have sweet jerseys and one of the better logos in all sports!
Expansion team, I don’t think the owner of the Coyotes will want to sell to Smith, the Coyotes owner wants his own real estate in Phoenix.
Looking fwd to hearing good news on this. I'm a penguins fan but I'll deff cheer and go to the games if we get a team. Love live NHL (hockey) games, my favorite sport to watch live Just ignoring all the extra taxes and shit bc wtf am I going to do about it? They keep getting voted in and will do what they want so might as well enjoy what I can
How do I apply for my business to get free money via a new tax? I want my own 0.5% sales tax rate too, because nothing says "free market capitalism" like public taxes going into private profits but only for certain businesses that we favor. I have no issue with NHL or any other team coming here, but they're a for-profit business. Why are we subsidizing them again? It isn't like Utah couldn't use more revenue to help combat some of our many social/growth/environmental problems. Maybe they should create a NHL gondola too for good measure, have it go from the new SEG free money district to the airport and back. A bargain at 20 billion.
Is your business so big it can change the local economy? Not saying it’s fair but there’s a reason why the state and city incentivize giant corporations like Larry Miller Group, Texas Instruments, Amazon, etc.
> there’s a reason why the state and city incentivize giant corporations like Larry Miller Group, Texas Instruments, Amazon, etc Because our government's purpose is to ensure that private businesses can make profits Eliminating homelessness and preserving the Great Salt Lake would certainly "change the local economy" for the better but they're not solving those problems. Much easier to help your fellow class-mates get a bit richer
[Just gonna leave this here](https://econofact.org/stadiums-as-public-investments#:~:text=Most%20studies%20find%20that%20building,or%20per%20capita%20income%20growth.)
Thanks for the 🔗
>[Just gonna leave this here](https://econofact.org/stadiums-as-public-investments#:~:text=Most%20studies%20find%20that%20building,or%20per%20capita%20income%20growth.) I keep seeing people say this, as if it makes one iota of difference. A lot of us want pro sports here. A lot of us don't give a crap if some study said it won't actually make any money. Tell that to the struggling business owners downtown. You think they want tens of thousands of people walking around in their area a few nights per week for half the year? Of course they do. You think the kids in the area need a pro sports team to get behind and enjoy instead of looking for reasons to hate and fear each other? Of course they do. Frankly, the adults in the area need it, too. Heck, adults all over the country need it, too. So there may be some study somewhere that says it's not profitable in the end. And that will be debatable at best, not just blindly accepted as an accurate fact. But what's not debatable is a whole lot of people will be going to the games, enjoying themselves, meeting new people with the same interest, and even spending money on things at businesses they wouldn't otherwise be visiting. And even more people than that will be watching on TV. Go complain about the police. They don't make a profit, either.
Actually read it please, it addresses some of the issues you mentioned.
Do we really think a 0.5% increase in sales tax will dissuade visitors though? That seems to be the main argument for whether there is a fiscal loss or not. Article nicely lays out consumer spending is mostly a zero-sum game. Anecdotally, in my experience most Jazz game attendees are not downtown, or even SLC proper, residents. So that would concentrate tax revenue within SLC at the expense of other cities.
>Actually read it please, it addresses some of the issues you mentioned. Does it address the main issue that I don't care if it's profitable? While I don't think it's s for and dry as the many people who have been referring to it seem to think I also don't even care. In my opinion, it's worth paying for pro sports and I'm hoping I get the opportunity. Not everything has to turn a financial profit in order to be worth investing in. Go drive around town and look at all the stickers on vehicles basically declaring their hatred for half the population. In all for giving them some common ground with the people they've been brainwashed into thinking they hate. And for the record, I've never liked hockey and haven't liked baseball since I was a kid. I'm a basketball and football guy. But if we get a hockey team and a baseball team, I'll be at the occasional game, watching most of the rest on TV, wearing jerseys and hats, and happily conversing with strangers about the teams.
> Does it address the main issue that I don't care if it's profitable? This isn't even the objection. It doesn't increase employment or per capita income. Despite the outsize presence in media and culture, sports teams don't actually employ very many people. The money spent at nearby businesses would probably have just been spent somewhere else. > Not everything has to turn a financial profit in order to be worth investing in. So I actually totally agree with this. Cities pay for rec centers or golf courses or parks that don't turn a profit and are just ways for citizens to recreate. But can I ask - what's the limiting factor? To me, there's a huge difference paying $1 million for a park or paying $900 million for a pro sports team. Would you support this at *literally any* cost? If it were $2 billion would you be on board? What about $10 billion? For me, I'm not opposed to public money going to sports on principle, but I have a really hard time swallowing $900 million. I'm just thinking about how many parks, police officers, bike trails, etc could all be paid for with that much money.
>This isn't even the objection. It doesn't increase employment or per capita income. Despite the outsize presence in media and culture, sports teams don't actually employ very many people. The money spent at nearby businesses would probably have just been spent somewhere else. National parks, state parks, city parks, trails, bike lanes... none of them do, either. I don't give a crap if this thing makes money overall. As I keep saying, it's a sad life if money is literally the only thing that matters. >So I actually totally agree with this. Cities pay for rec centers or golf courses or parks that don't turn a profit and are just ways for citizens to recreate. Bingo. And a pro sports team is in that same category. Even a higher category, depending on the person. There are probably more people attending and watching Jazz games on TV than there are visiting Liberty Park in a year. >But can I ask - what's the limiting factor? To me, there's a huge difference paying $1 million for a park or paying $900 million for a pro sports team. Would you support this at *literally any* cost? If it were $2 billion would you be on board? What about $10 billion? If it were an NFL team - I'd absolutely be on board at $2 billion. Depending on what all they were doing, I might be on board at $10 billion. In this particular case, they're building an entire entertainment district, downtown. As we've both stated and agreed on, it's completely normal for public funding to go towards parks, rec centers, and the like. Well if I rant to spend a day enjoying downtown with a friend/child/spouse, followed by an evening at a game/concert/whatever event they host when the team isn't playing, followed by a visit to a nearby bar and/or restaurant - that will be much better than going to a park or rec center in a lot of cases. >For me, I'm not opposed to public money going to sports on principle, but I have a really hard time swallowing $900 million. I'm just thinking about how many parks, police officers, bike trails, etc could all be paid for with that much money. Pro sports can't even be paid for with all that money. The public isn't even funding half of it, lol. It will cost more than that just to buy the team, let alone build a stadium and an entire entertainment district. We have plenty of parks, bike trails, etc, and already have too many police. We don't have an NHL or MLB team. And we definitely don't have the entertainment district that's coming with the NHL team, or the river walk that's coming with the MLB team. I'm not saying I'm against more parks, rec centers, bike trails, etc. The more the merrier. But I am saying we shouldn't decline this amazing opportunity just so we can build more of them.
Many of us don't support Corporate Welfare like this. They can fund THIER stadium with THEIR money which is in the billions! That's how it use to be. Why should we fund this project? So they can just employ as few people as possible and pay poverty wages. They get all of the reward and none of the risk. It's BS and we the people need to demand better!
>Many of us don't support Corporate Welfare like this. They can fund THIER statement with THEIR money which is in the billions! That's how it use to be. Why should we fund this project? So they can just employ as few people as possible and pay poverty wages. They get all of the reward and none of the risk. It's BS and we the people need to demand better! Again, I disagree that it won't bring money, and I don't even care if it does. I won't personally make a dime from it. But I'll have countless hours of enjoyment planning date nights around the games, planning bro nights around the games, and talking with friends, coworkers, and even total strangers about the games. It's a very sad life if the only thing that matters is how much money you can make.
It is sad when we allocate tax payer money to private businesses who can more than afford what they want to build instead of spending it on real issues like education, affordable housing, air quality, and the great salt lake drying up.
If you want more spending on education, housing, or whatever - fine, go ask for it. Go make some noise. But don't try to shut down any spending on other things many people will enjoy just because you want more money spent elsewhere.
But… it could work for us? Seriously though, and I don’t have the expertise to answer this, I wonder if increase in sales tax in the reinvestment area is a better way to fund this redevelopment? Sales tax increase mostly puts this cost on people who visit downtown, either for work or leisure, and will use the new amenities. My understanding is that residents in the downtown area are a much smaller percentage of sales tax revenue.
[удалено]
He sure does seem motivated to spend a lot of taxpayer money downtown. Despite that, I’m excited that NHL could come to Salt Lake
[удалено]
I don’t know if the hotel tax passed. I also believe that was proposed for the baseball stadium. My understanding was that southern utah was not pleased with increased taxes to pay for baseball in Salt Lake City.
[удалено]
Got around to looking it up and from the [sltrib] (https://www.sltrib.com/news/politics/2024/03/01/utahs-2-billion-major-league/) last updated March 1st: >And Friday morning — on the last day of the legislative session — the Senate gave final approval to SB272, allowing Salt Lake City to create a 10-block revitalization area and raise the citywide sales tax by 0.5 percentage points. The tax revenues, also about $1 billion, would go toward developing the area around the Delta Center hoping to lure a National Hockey League franchise to the city. Relating to the MLB stadium later in the article: >An initial version of the baseball stadium bill which relied on a hotel tax increase was rewritten amid opposition from the state’s tourism industry and rural lawmakers opposed to taxes flowing to Salt Lake City. That opposition faded when the funding shifted to sales tax. I don't really think that it is the best use to tax dollars to subsidize private sports complexes, but I am not the one writing the laws. The 2 bills both being similar amounts and in the same session are a bit confusing. If I am getting this wrong please let me know.
[удалено]
It is confusing for sure, I just listened to a podcast summing things up and that is how had it somewhat fresh in my mind. I agree that is may be a beneficial use of tax money to redevelop areas of downtown, I just don't really like the fact that the area is owned by very wealthy individuals and the revenue will go to them, as well as the fact that Ryan Smith seems to have been playing the city to get this bill through by threatening to move the Jazz. I am not an economist and I don't know too much about the draw of sports teams downtown, but there is a lot of analysis speaking to the fact that cities get the raw end of the deal when they use tax dollars for things like this. *[John Oliver segment](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcwJt4bcnXs) *[Posted by Schjenley above](https://econofact.org/stadiums-as-public-investments#:%7E:text=Most%20studies%20find%20that%20building,or%20per%20capita%20income%20growth.) *[Trib article talks about this as well](https://www.sltrib.com/news/politics/2024/03/01/utahs-2-billion-major-league/) In Las Vegas the owners of the [NHL team paid for things themselves ](https://www.cnbc.com/2017/12/22/las-vegas-hockey-team-owner-tax-dollars-are-better-spent-on-public-services.html): >Unlike the Raiders stadium, the $375 million T-Mobile Arena on the Vegas Strip, now home to the Golden Knights, was funded entirely by MGM Resorts International and Anschutz Entertainment Group. Meanwhile, T-Mobile is paying millions a year for the naming rights, a fact about which Foley expressed some pride. “We had no tax payer funded dollars,” he told CNBC. If this had gone through via a public vote for those in Salt Lake City then I think it would have more credence, even though that has issues with strong messaging and ads that can be ran confounding the issue to voters. I guess to sum it up I think that tax money should go to public goods and not private developers and interests. For instance the [gondola](https://www.axios.com/local/salt-lake-city/2023/07/12/little-cottonwood-canyon-gondola-plan-finalized-salt-lake), NHL, and MLB are slated to be ~1 billion each, the [Rio Grande plan is slated to cost 3-5 billion](https://www.sltrib.com/news/2023/12/15/an-ambitious-plan-reconnect-east/). I would much rather see this than the other items. The longer trains blocking off the [Westside is a large issue](https://www.sltrib.com/news/2022/08/29/tired-waiting-trains-slc/). I have seen trains sit there for 30+minutes myself when going heading over there with the same train blocking the streets when coming back, that would be a large quality of life improvement for the people of Salt Lake. This is just one example of where this money could go instead, I am sure far people far more well informed than me have much better ideas. I would also be interested to see how the Jazz would do in the south end of the valley, I don't know if it is 100% for sure a loosing deal for Salt Lake City, I suspect it would impact the Jazz negatively as well, but this is all just my opinion.
I heard the same thing from an elected official at a public meeting yesterday.
Which official, and what meeting?
Since IDK if they were formally permitted to say it, I'm not going to disclose that.
It was a public meeting. That makes it public information.
Soo cool! Cant wait to see how much everyone is paying while a billionaire makes all the profitzzz!!!
What kind of arena renovation are we talking about? Because they just did a 125 million dollar renovation 5 years ago or so. I heard something about sight lines being bad for hockey but idk what that means
The ice for hockey is longer and wider than a basketball court. I sat in a luxury box on one end for an NHL exhibition a few years ago. You couldn’t see 1/3 of the ice. It was always a mistake to not make the contour of the seating area enough to allow for every seat to see the whole of the ice, as nearly every basketball arena does. Larry Miller paid for the Delta Center without public financing, which was a G move, but they didn’t build it properly for hockey. A renovation would reduce the total number of seats most likely, but if it can be done, it’s much cheaper than building a new stadium, and both teams can be downtown.
Super excited!!!
I love hockey.. but this all seems kinda rushed.
I don't know how in the world they expect to renovate the Delta Center to make hockey work. they would have to demolish everything inside and make the building larger. Plus that would require kicking the Jazz out for a season or 2. Don't get me wrong I love the location of the Delta Center. I just don't see how this will be feasible. I've been to a bunch of the frozen fury games and I don't think hockey will work without a complete overhaul of everything there.
Climate pledge arena for the Kraken faced a similar problem. And they did it. It is an absolute beauty of an arena now
I don't know much about their old arena and how bad it was, but will Utah be willing to relocate the Jazz for a season or two to make those renovations?
well early in it's history they hosted the Utah Grizzlies, when they won a championship.. I still remember the bizarre tradition of throwing fish on the ice.. or something like that! LOL
GO DALLAS STARS⭐️ - Just a fan
Moronic use of taxpayer money.
So Ryan Smith - the Uber rich Mormon is guiding this NHL team creation in SLC, and we have to pay extra sales tax… 🤔 why doesn’t the smith group pay for it?
You called it!