Argument in Favor of Proposition Two
Argument for "YES" requiring voter approval of major sport stadium facility projects, Proposition Two.
It is critical to vote “YES” on the proposition to require a public vote for any major sport stadiums proposed by the City of Boise for the following reasons:
- Great Financial Risk. Before committing taxpayer dollars to a major sport stadium, qualified electors of the City should vote on such a project because the bottom line is that these types of projects are not financially viable and will have to be supported forever by taxpayer dollars.
- No Transparency. There has been no transparency in the past with regard to the various plans of the City and affiliated entities for a sport stadium. By requiring a public vote, it will require the City to fully explain the financial feasibility of a project and defend the reallocation of tax dollars from other necessary public services and projects to a sport stadium.
- No BSU Support for Stadium. Boise State University has looked at participating in a City sport stadium twice and rejected participation both times.
- History of Failed Public Stadiums. Other sport stadiums supported by cities have failed such as in Stockton, Hartford, Newark, Pearl, Arlington, and Miami. Closer to home, the Ford Idaho Center in Nampa has been unsuccessful and Nampa has had to pay millions of taxpayer dollars to keep the stadium afloat.
- City Sports Stadium Unnecessary. Boise has multiple sports venues and the city is growing quickly and will continue to develop in an appropriate way without tax dollars being committed for decades to a sports stadium project.
- Too Expensive. The proposed sport stadium will cost a minimum of $50 million and by the time construction commences, the costs will undoubtedly be much more than currently projected. Public financing of sport stadiums is now disfavored because of the financial drain it has put upon cities who committed vast public resources to their stadiums.
- No Public Benefit. A report prepared by Initiative on Global Markets at Chicago Booth concluded that the benefits of stadiums to cities are outweighed by the cost to the taxpayers who fund these projects.
- Who Really Benefits? The real estate developers who propose that cities build a sport stadium to enhance the value of their surrounding property should be required to fund the construction of a sport stadium themselves rather than rely upon public money.
- Boise’s Property Taxes Are Already Too High. Boise is already over taxed. Over 50% of the property in Boise is already off the tax rolls and there is no reason why tax dollars should be used to fund a sport stadium by taking funds from school districts, police, fire and other public service providers.