811 replies to this topic

[The Escapists]

Good thing I just invested in a Soap Box store.

dbull75, on 31 January 2012 - 03:18 PM, said:

And here we go... It looks like the city of Charlotte will talk about possibly helping to fund the uptown Charlotte Knights stadium. Nothing is set as it's only going to be discussed at this point, but it's likely a short deadline to make a decision as the Knights have to hit certain "goals" in order to be able to move forward per previous lease agreements. This will without a doubt get the natives restless after being told no public dollars will be used other than reimbursement for the improvements around the site.

http://www.bizjourna...k.html?page=all

[cltbwimob]

I hope this idea falls flat instantly.  Citizens were promised that this thing would require no public money whatsoever save infrastructure improvements.

Edited by cltbwimob, 31 January 2012 - 03:45 PM.

[dbull75]

I'm not one for talking about politics very much, but if council does decide to help fund the stadium outside of what they already committed to they won't have a job come next election. It's an old wound that doesn't need to be re-opened.

[cltbwimob]

dbull75, on 31 January 2012 - 04:24 PM, said:

I'm not one for talking about politics very much, but if council does decide to help fund the stadium outside of what they already committed to they won't have a job come next election. It's an old wound that doesn't need to be re-opened.

Absolutely.  The Knights Ballpark (Southend) was part of the referendum that was voted down in 2001.

[Urbanity]

dbull75, on 31 January 2012 - 04:24 PM, said:

I'm not one for talking about politics very much, but if council does decide to help fund the stadium outside of what they already committed to they won't have a job come next election. It's an old wound that doesn't need to be re-opened.

Fine - I take that with a grain of salt, but my reaction is still a big pile of manure.  I'm sick of the politics of voting people put over changes in priorities or pragmatic fundamentals.  I personal;ly think its a great move for teh city to have the minor league ballpark downtown - not just for the Knights, but also for the NCAA baseball championships and the boost it will give that part of the Third Ward.

Taxpayer funds are not some kind of arc of the covenant either.  They are for the use of the city for funding city priorities.  

I'm not picking on you dbull btw but I'm just sick of this polarizing mentality in the whole country and certainly Charlotte where we vote people out of office over "A" vote

[dbull75]

Urbanity, on 31 January 2012 - 07:46 PM, said:

Fine - I take that with a grain of salt, but my reaction is still a big pile of manure.  I'm sick of the politics of voting people put over changes in priorities or pragmatic fundamentals.  I personal;ly think its a great move for teh city to have the minor league ballpark downtown - not just for the Knights, but also for the NCAA baseball championships and the boost it will give that part of the Third Ward.

Taxpayer funds are not some kind of arc of the covenant either.  They are for the use of the city for funding city priorities.  

I'm not picking on you dbull btw but I'm just sick of this polarizing mentality in the whole country and certainly Charlotte where we vote people out of office over "A" vote

I don't disagree that it would be a good thing for Charlotte. I never said "I" would vote these people out of office. I meant those that were so irate over some of the last taxpayer funded facilities (TWC Arena -- which we all love and use and the Nascar Hall) would raise a big stink that will never end (and it's their right if they choose). This is why I don't talk politics on this board. It's not something that's worth bickering about on the Internet IMO. It's also part of the reason I can't stand logging on to the CO with the comments "turned on". You can talk about something and politics ALWAYS gets dragged into it. And it comes from both sides.

Edited by dbull75, 31 January 2012 - 08:14 PM.

[dubone]

Even with the arena now being an obvious good investment for the city, I still hear or speak to people who boycott the place because of the 'old wounds'.    It is absolutely reasonable for the city to put up some tourism funds to fill a gap, but we need a baseball stadium far less than we needed an arena, so it is no where near enough of a value for the city to warrant paying for all of it.  I'm not sure what kind of amounts we are talking about, but sure hope it is something a minority of the costs, and can be done within the current tourism funds (like the arena).

[cltbwimob]

Urbanity, on 31 January 2012 - 07:46 PM, said:

Fine - I take that with a grain of salt, but my reaction is still a big pile of manure.  I'm sick of the politics of voting people put over changes in priorities or pragmatic fundamentals.  I personal;ly think its a great move for teh city to have the minor league ballpark downtown - not just for the Knights, but also for the NCAA baseball championships and the boost it will give that part of the Third Ward.

Taxpayer funds are not some kind of arc of the covenant either.  They are for the use of the city for funding city priorities.  

I'm not picking on you dbull btw but I'm just sick of this polarizing mentality in the whole country and certainly Charlotte where we vote people out of office over "A" vote

But betraying the public's trust is a major offense...especially for something as unimportant as a 10,000 seat minor league ballpark.

Edited by cltbwimob, 31 January 2012 - 09:31 PM.

[dubone]

This isn't direct democracy.  The public trusts our public officials to review options based on reason, which includes adapting to changing circumstances.  It would also be outside of the public trust if there funds approved to improve tourism, but no investments are made, yielding no return for the cost of the tax.  If this stadium is an appropriate public-private partnership to make something happen, then so be it.  

All this said, I'm not all that excited about this ball park.  But I think there are still merits that ought to be reviewed.

[cltbwimob]

But what is the changing circumstance here...Is it that the city realized that despite having close to 7 years, there has been absolutely no workable finance plan to complete such a project with only private sector funds and sees a need to step in?  Is it the sour economy?  It's been sour for years now and hasn't changed.  Even so the project had several years to get off the ground before the economy collapsed and yet it never came to fruition.  And what if it turns out like all of Charlotte's other great publicly funded tourist destinations that can't even remain marginally profitable even though all the "experts" said they would be economic boons.  Furthermore how would this provide a true boost to the tourism industry in Charlotte.  Who, aside from locals, will even make an attempt to see a minor league team play ball?  I will guarantee that the team will scarcely be able to pull people from outside Mecklenburg county to watch, much less regional visitors or those from adjacent metro areas.  Finally what guarantee does anyone have that public funds would be tourism dollars; what if it comes from a general fund?  I think this project is possibly the most backward thinking project undertaken by the city in decades.  If they are going to spend that kind of money, why wouldn't they renovate Memorial Stadium and begin pursuing an MLS team.  That would at least provide some ROI worthy of the initial investment and renovate a historical landmark in Charlotte all at the same time.

[Urbanity]

dbull75, on 31 January 2012 - 08:11 PM, said:

I don't disagree that it would be a good thing for Charlotte. I never said "I" would vote these people out of office. I meant those that were so irate over some of the last taxpayer funded facilities (TWC Arena -- which we all love and use and the Nascar Hall) would raise a big stink that will never end (and it's their right if they choose). This is why I don't talk politics on this board. It's not something that's worth bickering about on the Internet IMO. It's also part of the reason I can't stand logging on to the CO with the comments "turned on". You can talk about something and politics ALWAYS gets dragged into it. And it comes from both sides.

I apologize if I came off too gruff and I agree with you about not discussing politics on this board (as well as avoiding the CO comment section)..  

I am in favor of the stadium, but I do see the pragmatism of saying this is not the time for a tax-payer funded project of this nature.

[dbull75]

Urbanity, on 01 February 2012 - 05:46 AM, said:

I apologize if I came off too gruff and I agree with you about not discussing politics on this board (as well as avoiding the CO comment section)..  

I am in favor of the stadium, but I do see the pragmatism of saying this is not the time for a tax-payer funded project of this nature.

No worries. It will be interesting though to see how this all plays out now. I'm hopeful the Knights and the city can find a way that works for both parties with out dragging this out any more than they have (sans Jerry Reese lawsuits).

[ricky_davis_fan_21]

Looks like Jerry Reese has a whole new person to sue... the city

[ah59396]

I'd rather see this money go towards Memorial Stadium if at all possible.  I want an MLS team over a minor league ball team.

[Spartan]

Maybe I'm misreading, but it sounds like Councilmember Mitchell wants to set up a TIF district to provide some funds to the stadium. If that doesn't happen, the County is still contributing $8 million toward the project. IMO, this is a relatively minor issue.

DMann, on 12 September 2011 - 09:24 PM, said:

In basketball, the Hornets left here because the then current arena on Tyvola did not have luxury boxes, and only after they left did we build TWC Arena.  Do you think that the Bobcats would have come into existence to play out there?  Highly unlikely.
Please do not think that retrofitting is an option at the Major League level.

I'm a little late on the reply here, but the Hornets didn't leave just because of the arena. Although that was a central issue, a lot of people didn't want to do business with George Schinn. It's unfortunate that he was ever an owner of the Hornets.

[dbull75]

There's a write up in today's Charlotte Biz Journal that discusses the ballpark and the potential for some money from the city. Some of this article indicates that some developers may be interested in building apartments and a hotel adjacent to the stadium. David Furman who has already worked on some projects in uptown, including the Trademark, is one of those that is interested in "doing anything" near the site. I believe that if the ballpark does move forward this year, we'll hear about some new developments propping up. There's already one apartment tower set to be built next to the Catalyst building.

http://www.bizjourna...llpark-mix.html

Edited by dbull75, 03 February 2012 - 08:18 AM.

[dubone]

Ugh... I would far prefer TIF funding to go for Gateway Station (public-private development was always expected to contribute to building that station).  

The more time that passes, the more I do not want the Knights stadium.  And then approval of TIF doesn't even mean the development will come.  Look at First Ward Park where Levine's TIF expects all sorts of development, none of which is set to happen.  He paved over his key development spot.    Although in that case, it was all just a ruse to tear down those pesky old buildings.  

But seriously, where are the development spots that aren't already spoken for?  the blocks west of the stadium site are slated for the Greyhound/parking deck and Gateway station. East of the stadium would not be developed because of the stadium, they'd be developed because they're close to Tryon and an actual park.   If those plots haven't already been developed because of proximity to the NFL stadium, then they sure will not be developed for the ballpark in a causal relationship.   Isn't the causal relationship required as part of TIF?  That is, the development would not have happened but for the investment?

[Spartan]

The key difference between baseball and football is that baseball has many more games each season, thus generating more foot traffic during. Many other cities have seen a lot of redevelopment centered around their downtown baseball stadia. Greenville, SC is a prime example of it. Just the prospect of Charlotte developing more retail/restaurant space in the way that Greenville has is very exciting to me.

[ah59396]

Spartan, on 09 February 2012 - 05:23 PM, said:

The key difference between baseball and football is that baseball has many more games each season, thus generating more foot traffic during. Many other cities have seen a lot of redevelopment centered around their downtown baseball stadia. Greenville, SC is a prime example of it. Just the prospect of Charlotte developing more retail/restaurant space in the way that Greenville has is very exciting to me.

That's a great point Spartan.  Baseball culture is generally different as well.  People tailgate for football and thus, bring their own items (food, beer, inflatable castle) whereas a group of baseball fans are more likey to pop into a restaurant/watering hole/hot dog stand to eat and drink.  And hopefully purchase a hat with misting fan on it...

[dbull75]

Kind of surprised this wasn't mentioned yet, but the Knights are set to give a presentation to city council on March 15th to ask for help in funding the uptown stadium. No $ figures have been mentioned or where the $ would come from yet. They may perhaps tap into the existing entertainment/hotel taxes. The Knights are supposed to have two major sponsors lined up for the stadium by the end of March per their agreement with the city. From what I've heard that's "not a problem".

Edited by dbull75, 02 March 2012 - 11:50 AM.