Johns Bass Posted June 9, 2010 Share Posted June 9, 2010 Santa Clara has just approved the building of a 70,000 seat stadium. Did not see this posted yet. http://content.usatoday.com/communities/thehuddle/post/2010/06/santa-clara-voters-approve-plan-for-new-park-for-san-francisco-49ers/1 Sorry if you thought they were really moving from the Bay area Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitman21ST Posted June 9, 2010 Share Posted June 9, 2010 You might want to rename your thread. I got a 10 day ban a while back for having a similarly vague-titled thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johns Bass Posted June 9, 2010 Author Share Posted June 9, 2010 I am too sure how to do that. But I did lead it off with the source. Is it possible that that is why you got the ban? I do not know the particulars of your situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted June 9, 2010 Share Posted June 9, 2010 I am too sure how to do that. But I did lead it off with the source. Is it possible that that is why you got the ban? I do not know the particulars of your situation. It is good form to have the title be descriptive of the story, so that we don't have to click on the story to know what it is about. As for changing it, I think clicking by the title when in the forum will give you the opportunity to change your title. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johns Bass Posted June 9, 2010 Author Share Posted June 9, 2010 Thank You. I did get it changed, thank you for the advice and to Hitman21ST. I am much more of a reader than a poster so I appreciate the assistance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACW Posted June 10, 2010 Share Posted June 10, 2010 Great, another fanbase OK with being extorted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yeen80 Posted June 10, 2010 Share Posted June 10, 2010 They needed a new Stadium. Candlestick Park is deteriorating Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
method man Posted June 15, 2010 Share Posted June 15, 2010 Great, another fanbase OK with being extorted. Wrong. I took a class at Stanford studying this issue for which Jed York came to talk to our class. The public contribution for the stadium would not come from the residents, but from tax revenue captured in a redevelopment zone near the stadium, surcharges on hotels close to the stadium, and other related sources. Furthermore, only about 8% of the funding is coming from these public sources. The City of Santa Clara is getting a great deal out of this. Unemployment in California is high and this will really help to create new jobs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted June 16, 2010 Share Posted June 16, 2010 Funny that when a city needs a new stadium, the fans want it, but don't want to pay for it. I mean, does a 1/2 cent really break your budget? But as Methodman said, most of the time they raise the tax on Cigaretts, Beer or Hotels. I know when I lived in Florida, they wanted to give the Marlins a new stadium so they taxed the one cash cow they can- tourism. There's no state tax in FL and they didn't want to raise the sales tax, so the stadium will be paid by other people visiting FL. Thanks to the rest of the US. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johns Bass Posted June 16, 2010 Author Share Posted June 16, 2010 When QWest got in at Seattle fans whined. But the city did not. Bonds got paid off early with interest plus they are still collecting money from the excise taxes on taxi's and motels and parking. So, basically the visitors and investors get to pay for the stadium. Gee, that really sucks. Taxpayers really need to look at who is paying for what. So if you are a 'local' and you want to spend the weekend in the city and watch the 'hawks play (gawd only knows why) and it costs a bit more, at least you have the choice that you could commute to the game if it really bothered you that much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueTalon Posted July 6, 2010 Share Posted July 6, 2010 When QWest got in at Seattle fans whined. What the bleep are you talking about? Seattle fans didn't whine, Seattle fans were ecstatic! As a Skins fan, I don't fault you for not keeping up on Seahawks goings-on, but you couldn't be more wrong about this. Before Qwest, the team had been owned by Ken Behring, a California real estate mogul. It was the most miserable period in Seahawks history for a variety of reasons. Within the year preceding the stadium vote, Paul Allen bought a purchase option for the Seahawks and committed a huge chunk of change toward construction of a new stadium, conditioned upon voter approval. The vote passed, Allen bought the team, and Seahawks fans danced in the streets singing hallelujah. The day the stadium vote passed represented the end of the Behring era -- the darkness was gone, and there was hope once more for Seahawks fans. There was indeed a vocal minority who were opposed to the stadium, but they were decidedly NOT Seahawks fans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RFKFedEx Posted July 6, 2010 Share Posted July 6, 2010 I'll wait to see the Yorks break ground with their silver ceremonial shovels before I'll be convinced the Niners are moving to SC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.