.
For the record, the Regina Leader-Post likes to get opinions about a stadium from this David Seymour character. I looked into his qualifications, and he's not an economist. He has bachelors degrees in engineering and philosophy, and apparently that qualified him to teach economics in New Zealand. His economic opinion is something out of a very low level text book, is highly simplistic and general to what is traditionally viewed as an extreme right perspective.
Whatever the "Frontier Centre for Public Policy" is, they felt this guy was qualified to be a senior policy analyst. I've never heard of them as a serious think tank, and we tend to get job postings from most here at the university. They also don't disclose where their funding comes from... which makes you wonder...
I've already written to the Leader-Post complaining about the guy, but I guess they didn't listen.
Anyways, on to the article:
Regina needs partners for new stadium: Fiacco
[url=http://www.leaderpost.com/Regina+needs+partners+stadium+Fiacco/1321318/story.html]http://www.leaderpost.com/Regina+needs+ ... story.html[/url]
By Ian Hamilton, Leader-Post
February 23, 2009 8:01 PM
[i]REGINA -- Paying for a new or renovated stadium in Regina may end up being a political football.
The City of Regina is contemplating upgrades to Mosaic Stadium — home of the CFL’s Saskatchewan Roughriders, among others — that could cost up to $120 million. But instead of spending huge money and ending up with a renovated stadium, the city also is contemplating a new facility with a price tag that could reach $350 million.
No matter which project is chosen, the city is looking for a teammate or two to help pay the bills.
“We own the building, it’s our facility, so we have to be a major player,? says Mayor Pat Fiacco. “But we can’t do it alone. I’m not going to do it on the backs of property taxpayers alone.
“There are programs out there, provincially and federally, that allow us to access those funds so that everyone participates. We’ll certainly be looking at what those opportunities look like.?
The provincial government also will look at the matter — once it sees a proposal from the city.
Christine Tell, the minister of Tourism, Parks, Culture and Sport, says the government has yet to receive a formal request to participate in a stadium project. She notes the province will examine a proposal once it’s received, but a stadium venture of any kind isn’t “a high priority with our government.?
“We have many priorities right now such as a children’s hospital in Saskatoon, a Moose Jaw hospital and the highways issue that’s very expensive and needs to be done,? Tell says. “In relation to Mosaic Stadium, there has been no discussion in relation to building one or refurbishing what we have.?
Fiacco understands the state of the global economy, but he prefers to look at what a new stadium could do for the city’s bottom line.
“This becomes not only a stimulus to the economy for today but forever because of the economic activity that’s going to happen in that facility,? he says. “It is going to be a hub of major activity. It will be an economic generator if done properly.?
The idea of government involvement has generated some opposition.
David Seymour, the director of the Frontier Centre for Public Policy’s Saskatchewan office and a senior policy analyst at the think-tank, believes governments shouldn’t fund anything related to entertainment. That allows taxpayers “to make their own decisions and transfer their own revenue to funding something like a stadium.?
Seymour admits there are projects that call for government involvement, but this isn’t one of them.
“It may be true that the only way that Regina will end up with a stadium on that scale is through having a government injection or subsidy, but that very fact is telling you that people by their voluntary choices just don’t value it highly enough,? Seymour says.
“What they should do is look at what is the best stadium they can make a business case for and say, ‘Look, this is what the people apparently want. This is what they’re prepared to pay for,’ rather than ask others to pay on their behalf.?
The Saskatchewan director of the Canadian Taxpayers Foundation also has reservations about the idea.
Lee Harding would like to see the city hold a referendum featuring fully costed options and a set limit on taxpayer contributions. The option the public picks then would be constructed.
While some taxpayers will support a costly project like a domed stadium, Harding would like to see other financial backers get involved.
“Where is the corporate support? Where is the individual support?? he wonders. “The Riders could have a share drive. You could have your own name on your own seat. You could have a little nameplate on the back of your seat: ‘This seat was sponsored by . . .’
“There’s all sorts of things and these kinds of things should be done.?
The Roughriders certainly expect things to be done.
Jim Hopson, the team’s president and CEO, says the sale of personal seat licences — a money-raising tactic used in U.S. stadium projects — is a possibility with a new stadium and its expanded seating.
The private sector also could get involved through the sale of naming rights or luxury boxes, wealthy individuals could invest, and the Roughriders organization itself could contribute.
“If we talk in terms of pure dollars, I think the team could commit to 10 per cent of a project like that or maybe even 15 or 20 over a longer term,? says Hopson, whose club has accumulated a nest egg through such things as the sale of shares and a $3-per-ticket fee for stadium renewal.
“The reality is you can make a pretty strong business case if we go from a capacity of 28,000 to say 34,000 — and those are good seats — and you sell those seats for a good dollar. That’s revenue we can stream right back to the project.?
However, because Mosaic Stadium is owned by the city (as a new stadium would be), Hopson says the Roughriders’ involvement in any stadium project would focus solely on their needs — a new locker room, Green and White lounge, offices and so on — instead of major structural concerns.
“Improvements (to Mosaic Stadium) at the very least are necessary and if that’s the decision, we’re a player in this,? Hopson says. “We’re not driving the bus. We’re on the bus and we want to be able to contribute and lay out our needs.?
Fiacco is one of the driving forces behind a new stadium, primarily because of what it can offer Regina.
“We want a thriving community,? he says. “It’s about choice . . . It’s for the public good and we (on city council) have an obligation as an elected group of officials to do what’s right for the public good.?
If a new stadium is built, the city can redevelop the area around that facility along with the area surrounding Mosaic Stadium, which would be demolished. Fiacco says changes to that area would provide a “tremendous amount? of tax revenue the city didn’t have before.
He knows the city will have to invest in the project, but he expects to see a significant return on that investment. He points to the $50 million the city is pumping into the Global Transportation Hub, which Fiacco notes will pay for itself in eight to 10 years.
“This,? he says of a new stadium, “is an opportunity that comes to a community once every 50 years.?
ihamilton@leaderpost.canwest.com
© Copyright (c) The Regina Leader-Post[/i]