The original question is the first paragraph. The response is needed from the students post below.
course text and lesson for this unit discusses strategies that local governments and cities employ to promote economic development. Prominent strategies include the courting of professional sports franchises and the financing of new sports facilities (stadiums, arenas, etc.). Do you think that building new sports facilities is a good strategy for promoting economic development? Should taxpayers be responsible for paying for the construction costs, for example, tax increases that are earmarked for facility construction? Why, or why not?
Response to this students post.
Overall, I do not think constructing new sports facilities is the answer for promoting economic development. For one, I think this strategy is geared more towards larger metropolitan cities. These cities are well-known and can offer more than just a sport. For instance, the City of Miami – they are a metropolitan city which offers many tourist attractions such as beaches, museums, parks, zoos, and so much more. So adding another attraction for tourists such as a sports facility makes sense. The facility will drive tourist to the location, but it will further drive tourists in conjunction with all the other attractions they have to offer. These facilities are in areas that are surrounded by local population as well as tourist populations which will equally contribute to its success through attending various sporting events. If you consider using this strategy in a smaller city that is surrounded by other smaller cities you will have a small population of people attending sporting events that live locally. Additionally, if these smaller cities don’t have as much to offer for tourists, they are less desirable for travelers to come out to the area. Therefore, in smaller cities, they are more likely to fail than succeed in the sporting industry.
Should taxpayers be the ones responsible for the costs associated with construction of the facilities through increased taxes? In my personal opinion, I do not see how this is a fair option without being voted on by the taxpaying community. Additionally, if this route is sought after, there should be substantial surveys and studies done that can contribute to ensuring the success of the establishment. I think the proper way of paying for the construction costs is through the utilization of investing funds and/or guaranteed loans from the local agency. Or better yet, maybe a combination of these funding strategies. However, the most important conclusion is that any surtax from citizens should be by referendum.
