6/15 News

AreliusIV · 06-15-2006, 07:54 AM

RSL's growing list of injuries probably won't affect lineup

No public funds for stadium

Talley is up to the attack

Deuce · 06-15-2006, 08:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AreliusIV

I am not going to go off on a rant about this...
It really is a well written piece... I think it is misguided and full of fear mongering but it is a well written piece of misguided, fear mongering!

But the following quote bothers me...

Quote:

Originally Posted by desnews

Even if Sandy accepts the risk for the publicly funded portion of the stadium, taxpayers countywide would be losing their ability to use hotel taxes for their rightful purposes, which are to promote tourism and to cover the cost of providing services to visitors.

RSL is not promoting tourism?
So the USMNT match last year didn't help tourism?
The Real madrid match is not gonna help tourism?

Having an MLS stadium in a city like Sandy is not going to promote tourism?
I am befuddled!

Aero · 06-15-2006, 09:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deuce

But the following quote bothers me... RSL is not promoting tourism?
So the USMNT match last year didn't help tourism?
The Real madrid match is not gonna help tourism?

Having an MLS stadium in a city like Sandy is not going to promote tourism?
I am befuddled!

I'm also befuddled how taxpayers countywide would be losing this money. Last time I checked Sandy was in Salt Lake County. I am I just imagining that?

Another interesting piece of information is that the very paper that this is written in received millions of dollars in public money to build their printing facility in WVC. I certainly don't remember them calling for a vote on that. Does that make the Deseret News the pot or the kettle?

Jose Luis Luviano · 06-15-2006, 09:33 AM

Quote:

"The world’s politicians seem to be unable to engage people in the great political issues of the day, whereas millions across the planet will endlessly debate tactics and team selections for the next month."

The problem being?

dysko · 06-15-2006, 09:52 AM

Duece and Aero... can I steal your thoughts and write an editorial repsonse to the DesNews?

Aero · 06-15-2006, 10:23 AM

Feel free. I'm thinking about writing something myself if I get the time today, but the more the merrier.

Deuce · 06-15-2006, 10:25 AM

If you like...
Just be nice!

Burninator · 06-15-2006, 11:17 AM

Concerning the Deseret Morning News Editorial published 15 June, 2006:

The principal reason why voters do not support using public funding for the proposed soccer stadium in Sandy is because media outlets such as the Deseret News and Salt Lake Tribune insist on muddying the issue and pushing their agenda, as opposed to actually reporting on the issue. If these two newspapers would help people to understand the true nature of the proposal, many more people would support it.

1) Hotel Tax: Mayor Corroon has said that any tax money for the stadium project should come from non-utahns, and thus, we have the hotel tax, also called a transient tax, because it is designed to tax transients, people staying in hotels in Salt Lake County, and generally speaking, people from outside of Utah. Utahns will not be paying for this stadium!
2) Uses for Hotel Tax: you write that the proper use of hotel taxes, one of which is promoting tourism. Have you ever heard of Real Madrid? Real Salt Lake is already bringing in attractions as big as the greatest Olympic events (World Cup qualifiers, major international exhibition games; also, soccer is an Olympic sport, possible bid for summer Olympics?) and they don’t have a stadium yet. Imagine what Real Salt Lake could do for Salt Lake City and Utah (in regards to tourism) with a stadium of their own, dedicated to soccer. Real Salt Lake made $13 million for Salt Lake County last year through the World Cup qualifier that was held here. The Real Madrid game this summer may bring in similar revenues, but probably a little less. If we assume that these special games that Real Salt Lake brings to Salt Lake are worth $5 million per year, that’s 7 years to cover the $35 million investment in hotel taxes. That’s a pretty good ROI on a conservative estimate.
3) $45 million vs. $100 million: Sandy officials obviously want $100 million in private investment for their city and played their cards well in order to compete with and ultimately beat Salt Lake City for the stadium bid. There is a group of investors with $100 million dollars that they want to spend in Sandy and this investment will be beneficial to both Sandy and Salt Lake County.
4) Public Money Enriching a Private Business Owner: Real Salt Lake, once profitable, may make $2-3 million a year in profit. That’s 30-50 years in order to break even on the initial $100 million private investment that Checketts has brought to the negotiating table. The planned hotel, broadcast studio, and commercial real estate should help recoup that initial investment faster, but this is not a “get rich quick” scheme for Dave Checketts. This is a private-public, long-term relationship that can be beneficial to all involved.
5) Larry Miller vs. Dave Checketts: Larry Miller, when he wanted to start building the Delta Center, asked for the same public financing help that Dave Checketts is requesting: Miller asked for help with buying/leasing the land, and then asked the public to foot the bill for public infrastructure improvements (roads, sewers, sidewalks, etc.). Does Salt Lake County believe in fairness? Let the County help Dave Checketts like they helped Larry Miller.
6) Argentina Taxes vs. Utah Taxes: taxes are levied with the purpose of being spent on things that benefit the public, as well as for things like public infrastructure. In Argentina, if you were to live on an unpaved road, you and your neighbors would have to foot the bill for paving that road if you so desired. I’m glad that I don’t live in Argentina and that my taxes can go towards public projects like building roads and sewers.
7) Dave Checketts’ Other Projects: Dave Checketts recently purchased a hockey team and also pitched in $7.5 million to help build a youth soccer complex in northwest Salt Lake County, and some have wondered why he would do this if he is asking for public money for another project. See #5 above: Dave Checketts should not have to pay for sewers, roads, and other public infrastructure improvements that directly benefit the public, no matter how much money he has to spend on other projects. Taxes should cover these costs. Dave Checketts should cover the costs of actually building the stadium (like labor and materials) and this is exactly what he wants to do. He has $100 million to do so. Does Salt Lake County really want to reject $100 million in private investment for the county?
8) E-Center/Franklin Covey Field vs. Real City: both Franklin Covey Field and the E-Center were built entirely with public funds. Real City will not be.
9) Real Salt Lake vs. Microsoft: what would we all be saying if Microsoft wanted to build a new employment center near Jordan Commons? I think the funding would go through a lot faster and Microsoft would probably get an even sweeter deal that Real Salt Lake is asking for. Although Real Salt Lake’s stadium probably wouldn’t generate as many jobs as Microsoft could, the commercial potential of the stadium and its planned commercial real estate options make for a rather enticing opportunity for Sandy, Salt Lake County, and their residents.
10) Dave Checketts vs. Deseret News/Salt Lake Tribune: the parent company of the Deseret News and Salt Lake Tribune received $10 million in public funds to relocate a printing facility to the west side of Salt Lake County. According to your editorial, shouldn’t there have been a public referendum on that issue? What private business owner was “enriched” by this money?

So where are the journalistic integrity, the transparent language, and the unbiased reporting? Why don’t you put away your agenda and understand how bad it looks to be calling for a public referendum on an issue that you have failed to properly report on, even an issue that you have directly tried to influence? Please bring some impartiality and integrity back to this debate.

AreliusIV · 06-15-2006, 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Burninator

Concerning the Deseret Morning News Editorial published 15 June, 2006:

The principal reason why voters do not support using public funding for the proposed soccer stadium in Sandy is because media outlets such as the Deseret News and Salt Lake Tribune insist on muddying the issue and pushing their agenda, as opposed to actually reporting on the issue. If these two newspapers would help people to understand the true nature of the proposal, many more people would support it.

1) Hotel Tax: Mayor Corroon has said that any tax money for the stadium project should come from non-utahns, and thus, we have the hotel tax, also called a transient tax, because it is designed to tax transients, people staying in hotels in Salt Lake County, and generally speaking, people from outside of Utah. Utahns will not be paying for this stadium!
2) Uses for Hotel Tax: you write that the proper use of hotel taxes, one of which is promoting tourism. Have you ever heard of Real Madrid? Real Salt Lake is already bringing in attractions as big as the greatest Olympic events (World Cup qualifiers, major international exhibition games; also, soccer is an Olympic sport, possible bid for summer Olympics?) and they don’t have a stadium yet. Imagine what Real Salt Lake could do for Salt Lake City and Utah (in regards to tourism) with a stadium of their own, dedicated to soccer. Real Salt Lake made $13 million for Salt Lake County last year through the World Cup qualifier that was held here. The Real Madrid game this summer may bring in similar revenues, but probably a little less. If we assume that these special games that Real Salt Lake brings to Salt Lake are worth $5 million per year, that’s 7 years to cover the $35 million investment in hotel taxes. That’s a pretty good ROI on a conservative estimate.
3) $45 million vs. $100 million: Sandy officials obviously want $100 million in private investment for their city and played their cards well in order to compete with and ultimately beat Salt Lake City for the stadium bid. There is a group of investors with $100 million dollars that they want to spend in Sandy and this investment will be beneficial to both Sandy and Salt Lake County.
4) Public Money Enriching a Private Business Owner: Real Salt Lake, once profitable, may make $2-3 million a year in profit. That’s 30-50 years in order to break even on the initial $100 million private investment that Checketts has brought to the negotiating table. The planned hotel, broadcast studio, and commercial real estate should help recoup that initial investment faster, but this is not a “get rich quick” scheme for Dave Checketts. This is a private-public, long-term relationship that can be beneficial to all involved.
5) Larry Miller vs. Dave Checketts: Larry Miller, when he wanted to start building the Delta Center, asked for the same public financing help that Dave Checketts is requesting: Miller asked for help with buying/leasing the land, and then asked the public to foot the bill for public infrastructure improvements (roads, sewers, sidewalks, etc.). Does Salt Lake County believe in fairness? Let the County help Dave Checketts like they helped Larry Miller.
6) Argentina Taxes vs. Utah Taxes: taxes are levied with the purpose of being spent on things that benefit the public, as well as for things like public infrastructure. In Argentina, if you were to live on an unpaved road, you and your neighbors would have to foot the bill for paving that road if you so desired. I’m glad that I don’t live in Argentina and that my taxes can go towards public projects like building roads and sewers.
7) Dave Checketts’ Other Projects: Dave Checketts recently purchased a hockey team and also pitched in $7.5 million to help build a youth soccer complex in northwest Salt Lake County, and some have wondered why he would do this if he is asking for public money for another project. See #5 above: Dave Checketts should not have to pay for sewers, roads, and other public infrastructure improvements that directly benefit the public, no matter how much money he has to spend on other projects. Taxes should cover these costs. Dave Checketts should cover the costs of actually building the stadium (like labor and materials) and this is exactly what he wants to do. He has $100 million to do so. Does Salt Lake County really want to reject $100 million in private investment for the county?
8) E-Center/Franklin Covey Field vs. Real City: both Franklin Covey Field and the E-Center were built entirely with public funds. Real City will not be.
9) Real Salt Lake vs. Microsoft: what would we all be saying if Microsoft wanted to build a new employment center near Jordan Commons? I think the funding would go through a lot faster and Microsoft would probably get an even sweeter deal that Real Salt Lake is asking for. Although Real Salt Lake’s stadium probably wouldn’t generate as many jobs as Microsoft could, the commercial potential of the stadium and its planned commercial real estate options make for a rather enticing opportunity for Sandy, Salt Lake County, and their residents.
10) Dave Checketts vs. Deseret News/Salt Lake Tribune: the parent company of the Deseret News and Salt Lake Tribune received $10 million in public funds to relocate a printing facility to the west side of Salt Lake County. According to your editorial, shouldn’t there have been a public referendum on that issue? What private business owner was “enriched” by this money?

So where are the journalistic integrity, the transparent language, and the unbiased reporting? Why don’t you put away your agenda and understand how bad it looks to be calling for a public referendum on an issue that you have failed to properly report on, even an issue that you have directly tried to influence? Please bring some impartiality and integrity back to this debate.

Wow!!!!

Deuce · 06-15-2006, 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Burninator

Concerning the Deseret Morning News Editorial published 15 June, 2006:

The principal reason why voters do not support using public funding for the proposed soccer stadium in Sandy is because media outlets such as the Deseret News and Salt Lake Tribune insist on muddying the issue and pushing their agenda, as opposed to actually reporting on the issue. If these two newspapers would help people to understand the true nature of the proposal, many more people would support it.

1) Hotel Tax: Mayor Corroon has said that any tax money for the stadium project should come from non-utahns, and thus, we have the hotel tax, also called a transient tax, because it is designed to tax transients, people staying in hotels in Salt Lake County, and generally speaking, people from outside of Utah. Utahns will not be paying for this stadium!
2) Uses for Hotel Tax: you write that the proper use of hotel taxes, one of which is promoting tourism. Have you ever heard of Real Madrid? Real Salt Lake is already bringing in attractions as big as the greatest Olympic events (World Cup qualifiers, major international exhibition games; also, soccer is an Olympic sport, possible bid for summer Olympics?) and they don’t have a stadium yet. Imagine what Real Salt Lake could do for Salt Lake City and Utah (in regards to tourism) with a stadium of their own, dedicated to soccer. Real Salt Lake made $13 million for Salt Lake County last year through the World Cup qualifier that was held here. The Real Madrid game this summer may bring in similar revenues, but probably a little less. If we assume that these special games that Real Salt Lake brings to Salt Lake are worth $5 million per year, that’s 7 years to cover the $35 million investment in hotel taxes. That’s a pretty good ROI on a conservative estimate.
3) $45 million vs. $100 million: Sandy officials obviously want $100 million in private investment for their city and played their cards well in order to compete with and ultimately beat Salt Lake City for the stadium bid. There is a group of investors with $100 million dollars that they want to spend in Sandy and this investment will be beneficial to both Sandy and Salt Lake County.
4) Public Money Enriching a Private Business Owner: Real Salt Lake, once profitable, may make $2-3 million a year in profit. That’s 30-50 years in order to break even on the initial $100 million private investment that Checketts has brought to the negotiating table. The planned hotel, broadcast studio, and commercial real estate should help recoup that initial investment faster, but this is not a “get rich quick” scheme for Dave Checketts. This is a private-public, long-term relationship that can be beneficial to all involved.
5) Larry Miller vs. Dave Checketts: Larry Miller, when he wanted to start building the Delta Center, asked for the same public financing help that Dave Checketts is requesting: Miller asked for help with buying/leasing the land, and then asked the public to foot the bill for public infrastructure improvements (roads, sewers, sidewalks, etc.). Does Salt Lake County believe in fairness? Let the County help Dave Checketts like they helped Larry Miller.
6) Argentina Taxes vs. Utah Taxes: taxes are levied with the purpose of being spent on things that benefit the public, as well as for things like public infrastructure. In Argentina, if you were to live on an unpaved road, you and your neighbors would have to foot the bill for paving that road if you so desired. I’m glad that I don’t live in Argentina and that my taxes can go towards public projects like building roads and sewers.
7) Dave Checketts’ Other Projects: Dave Checketts recently purchased a hockey team and also pitched in $7.5 million to help build a youth soccer complex in northwest Salt Lake County, and some have wondered why he would do this if he is asking for public money for another project. See #5 above: Dave Checketts should not have to pay for sewers, roads, and other public infrastructure improvements that directly benefit the public, no matter how much money he has to spend on other projects. Taxes should cover these costs. Dave Checketts should cover the costs of actually building the stadium (like labor and materials) and this is exactly what he wants to do. He has $100 million to do so. Does Salt Lake County really want to reject $100 million in private investment for the county?
8) E-Center/Franklin Covey Field vs. Real City: both Franklin Covey Field and the E-Center were built entirely with public funds. Real City will not be.
9) Real Salt Lake vs. Microsoft: what would we all be saying if Microsoft wanted to build a new employment center near Jordan Commons? I think the funding would go through a lot faster and Microsoft would probably get an even sweeter deal that Real Salt Lake is asking for. Although Real Salt Lake’s stadium probably wouldn’t generate as many jobs as Microsoft could, the commercial potential of the stadium and its planned commercial real estate options make for a rather enticing opportunity for Sandy, Salt Lake County, and their residents.
10) Dave Checketts vs. Deseret News/Salt Lake Tribune: the parent company of the Deseret News and Salt Lake Tribune received $10 million in public funds to relocate a printing facility to the west side of Salt Lake County. According to your editorial, shouldn’t there have been a public referendum on that issue? What private business owner was “enriched” by this money?

So where are the journalistic integrity, the transparent language, and the unbiased reporting? Why don’t you put away your agenda and understand how bad it looks to be calling for a public referendum on an issue that you have failed to properly report on, even an issue that you have directly tried to influence? Please bring some impartiality and integrity back to this debate.

Excellent...
I hope they print it!