posted 05-19-99 11:56 AM ET     

Hey Goob did you vote on Rio Salado?

posted 05-19-99 02:54 PM ET            

I would have voted yes for both.

I tried to do some campaigning at the work place but I kept running into "I don't want to pay new taxes idiots."

Greasy Pig if you are a "no new taxes" idiot I apologize, today however I think that Mesa is full of... it.

I do know that some people had some real concerns, but the amount of misinformation that I ran into was amazing.

It just goes to show that Stupidity Rules!

posted 05-19-99 03:07 PM ET            

Open question to anyone...

If your civic leaders came to you and said we have some business men here that want to invest $1.3 Billion in your community, to build a state of the art Convention center with hotels, restaurants, store, golf courses, parks, lakes, and a state of the art retractable roof Football stadium. And all you need to do to get this to happen is raise the sales tax by .25% for a maximum of 20 years to pay $500 million of this (about 1/4 of the project). Best estimates put this at about $12.00 to $15.00 a year per person (or household) max. This facility will be placed on mainly dirt and barren acreage (we have some of that in Arizona) replacing one existing park and is in a shatter zone at the edge of two cities, and every business owner in the area is drooling over the increase in land values. Wouldn't that sound somewhat appealing?

Sorry I had to get that off my chest.

I realize that I probably should take that over to the Simcity 3K forums.

posted 05-19-99 03:20 PM ET            

I used to live in Tucson, so Arizona is still near and dear to my heart. But one of the things that burns me up about the politics of the state is the tendency for the public treasury to finance the profit of the construction industry and land developers.

If the venture is sound and potentially profitable, let the businessmen get loans to finance construction. Why should the public foot the bill? Especially if there is any chance that it may not succeed.

Another point is that once government gets its hands onto a revenue stream, it is quite difficult to get them to let go! Temporary sales tax or not.

A classic example is the property tax revenue that the state gets from Pima County. The amount of property taxes per capita there is much higher than in Maricopa County. But all efforts to achieve equity have hit political dead ends. Maricopa doesn't want to pay an equitable share and the state administration won't reduce expenditures to allow a reduction for Tucson. Even if they did, the Maricopa County dominated legislature could use the "windfall" revenue to reduce taxes for their constituents, making the problem even worse!

Sorry to rant ... but politics is an interest of mine.

posted 05-19-99 03:42 PM ET            

revenue streams can be let go.

I don't jump and down about city/county/state gov'ts giving tax breaks to big business for them to move in, I do recognise the fiscal sense but it still make me grit my teeth.

Now I know that this is similar, but the expanse of the project, the benefits to the community, new jobs, new revenue streams, new recreation, new visibility on the national level. Not to mention more and potentially better football. The price that was being asked is in my opinion minor.

To me taxes are spent to improve the quality of life, be it more police, better roads, new parks and recreation, to improve the economic viability of the area... and so on.

The final thing is that those business men who were involved with this, are going to make their money wether it is here or someplace else. If in their making money the smaller business and other local interests profit as well then it is still a positive.

posted 05-19-99 03:46 PM ET            

If it is really that good (and your pitch makes it very initially attractive) then the consortium should get outside financing from the big boys and capital venturists, sell bonds, whatever... if they aren't that confident, then getting the tax payers to pay for it won't guarantee its success. And how does a mere .5% sales tax cover a 1.3 Billion ESTIMATE (and keep in mind the average construction estimate is publicly only 1/8th to 1/4th of the actual construction) COST? What happens when construction overruns and noone wants in on the completed complex because the financial world has changed due to different economics? How long was that going to take again (and keep in mind that only about 5% of construction was completed on schedule for most of the last 5 years...) ?

Sorry, but anything that is too good to be true generally is. Are those figures and estimates based on Publicly Acceptable, Low Ball, or just Idiots Expectations? Or are they truly reputable?

Questions questions questions... (Note, I will be a REAL idiot and vote my own taxes up, WHEN I believe that such a thing is needed. But that is pretty rare...)

posted 05-19-99 04:17 PM ET            

The Plan did have legitimate holes, and in a few days I may be able to respect those in Mesa who don't want to raise taxes for a projet of this nature.

The problem is that, many residents of Greater Phoenix will not allow taxes for new schools, new roads, new police, etc., it is a very stronge no tax culture here.
There was also a ton of misinformation out there and that is frustrating to me too.
Phoenocians and other locals have for years complained about the lack of big time culture facilities and events in the area, this was an opportunity to sacrifice a minor amount to take a big step towards having those facilities.

Football=Culture did I just say that...

I must be losing it. I need to go and SMAC more. Where is Morgan when you need him?

posted 05-19-99 05:54 PM ET            

Each one has a different take on how much public money should be raised and on what it should be spent.

I know that a lot of the reluctance to raise taxes in Pima County is based upon the tendency (I'll say it again) of public money to end up in the bank accounts of crony contractors and developers.

No doubt sales tax rates can go up and down, but I wonder if there was any corresponding increase in other taxes and fees when the sales tax went down. Maybe? I can't say for certain.

As for people unwilling to spend money on roads: I hear ya. Tucson is in the mess that Maricopa County was in 10+ years ago.

posted 05-20-99 01:10 AM ET         

Like you I didn't vote. I live near Queen Creek and to be quite honest, The project wouldn't have effected me either way. I really feel for both sides, however, had I voted.... It would had probably been no...

I (think) I understand your point of view. Your talking progress.

I love progress within the city. I L O V E football. I love my kids.. evil monsters that they are .. so I would love the idea of any "community" improvements like the parks.
But one thing I think folks have SUDDENLY forgotten during this voting period is that Mesa, one of the fastest growing cities in this great U.S., will, with or with out the project, grow and it will grow tremendously like it has for the last 7/8 years, even WITHOUT more taxes.

I guess I'm an idiot But for this .... this ... sports stadium / civic center / golf course... I simply don't feel right paying (any) more taxes, no matter how small.

Do you REALLY think an over priced stadium selling over priced tickets for a team that can't even fill the side-line seats at Sun Devil stadium is going to help the average guy in Mesa?

Do you really think another golf course in a place where there are more golf courses per square mile then any where else on the ENTIRE planet is going to help the average tax payer?

And Civic centers.... hehe ... WERE DO I BEGIN. Just in general.... Mesa Civic center just a few miles south, Tempe has one (can't recall the name) just a few miles west. Phoenix has more than a couple just and I mean just a few more miles west, and Scottsldale, the KING of civic centers has'em a couple miles north. This isn't counting all the private centers.

As far as the stadium goes, the SUPER BOWL and FIESTA BOWL has been dangled over Arizona's head so long long now that every time I think of it I picture the little kid dangling a carrot tied on a stick in front of his donkey so it will pull the plow.

Its simple. ARIZONA IS A RESORT. Beleive me, the NFL is manipulative but not stupid. Pulling out of Arizona will be the last thing FOOTBALL whether professional or collegic will ever... ever... do.

I'm not against the project. I just would not like to be taxed for it period. If this is such a sure money thing why aren't they footing the bill completely and privately. Instead they have all these stings attached where if anything happens, MESA and its tax payers take the fall. Like you said before Goob, there is alot of right and not so right info out there so I completely refrain from specifics.

Now realize the vote was to turn down the tax money. It's still VERY possible it will be funded and continue to go in.

Remember the location too. You made it sound like it was worse than dirt. NOT TRUE! NO WAY TRUE. Just two points...

1) Its a crossing of two MAJOR freeways 101/102. No offense Goob, Only a fool would say its worthless land. HELL, ITs A HUB!
You can bet something BIG will go in there.

2) Its also the sight of a future.. HUGE HUGE urban lake project early next century. I mean huge Goob. I've got friends working in SRP and the are telling me that they are already are having problems projecting where the water will come from. Surrounding it will be of course more Hotels and resorts and more golf.

I hope you see my little point. I mean, I could have easily voted the other way had they sweet'n the deal but from the sound of it we are betting on a sure thing but have no right to the pot.

GreasyPig

posted 05-20-99 01:52 AM ET            

As you can tell I wanted the bill to pass (duh, no joke Goob).

I am frustrated by the lack of willingness to "raise taxes" for any reason in this state/county/city, and chose to vent about the poor people of Mesa.

There were many valid reasons to vote against this measure, not the least of which no tenants other than the Cardinals had actually been named. (( , I didn't mention that in my earlier vent did I?)

GP, you are right about the land of course (though it is currently mostly barren dirt, and there are no other publicly stated plans for its use.) And it is precisely because of Tempe's Town Lake that I think this is the perfect spot for just such a facility as proposed. Just think how cool that would be.

Then there is the anti-growth side of me, the one that is sick of all the growth in the Northeast valley (and since there is none in Mesa, Gilbert, and Queen Creek. )I thought the best idea would be to focus it all down there.

The best idea that I can think of is a coalition with the Salt River Indian reservation, (not the Gila River one because that is too far south)

I would love to take my son(soon to be sons) to a football game at a cool new statium.
Someday, it will happen. As you say the NFL/NCAA would be fools to allow football to leave, and I honstly think that the Bidwells have little interest in leaving at this point, no matter what the doom and gloom sayers on the radio are preaching.