patching...
Update: Like Norcross Patch on Facebook! »
Welcome back, Patch Blogger!
Local Voices

A Stadium with a Retractable Roof

The community voiced an emphatic "no." The legislators are unsure of the unbinding deal between the concerned parties. Curiously then, where is the political pressure coming from? High stake discussion on a new stadium all point towards misplaced priorities of the current legislature. These discussions camouflage issues of substance.

A case in point, a new stadium with a retractable roof for the Atlanta Falcons has become a toy of the powerful and a discussion topic. Instead of designing policies that favor citizens and promote long term sustainable economic growth, the legislature is sabotaged.

It is certainly not a straightforward construction proposal. The high stake murmurs seem to be taking place between the triad ̶ owner of the Falcons, Governor Nathan Deal and the Mayor of Atlanta, Kasim Reed. When these prominent players are involved in a deal, naturally, the murmurs reverberate within the hallways of the domes, conference rooms and the Georgia World Congress Center Authority (GWCCA). The discussions on the proposal for a new stadium have also taken over dinner tables and happy hours. Within the past several weeks, this stadium construction has received extensive media coverage with the Fox news discussing possible sell out of the Falcons to the city of Los Angeles. So much for the loyalty factor towards Atlanta and the State of Georgia by placing our beloved Falcons at the center of the negotiations!

We love our Falcons. However, this love will not blind sight the whims and fancies of sport franchises included with a bargaining clause. Is there any public interest in discussing this private business enterprise? The community spoke in December 2012, when an overwhelming majority of 72 percent opposed to public financing of a $1 billion stadium with a retractable roof for the Atlanta Falcons.

Back in December, the Falcon owner Arthur Blank struck a deal with the GWCCA proposing to reconstruct a new stadium. The GWCCA is a state owned agency and its Board members are appointees of the Governor. This construction beckons $300 million in bonds backed through the hotel-motel tax revenue from the city of Atlanta and the Fulton County. If the deal goes through, the ownership of the stadium will be retained by GWCCA. The existing Georgia Dome would be demolished. If all moves forward, the infrastructure is projected to be up and running by 2017 National Football League season.

Upon completion, the GWCCA would lease the stadium to the Falcons under a 30-year license agreement for a specified annual rental income. The Falcons would retain all the revenue. However, among other environmental and economic concerns, at the core of these plans is the contention on the use of $300 million hotel-motel tax.

For the deal to go through, the lawmakers must vote on several components supporting the construction and feasibility of the proposed project. These are: first, extension of the hotel-motel tax. Second, authorize using these funds for stadium construction. Third, approve raising the debt limit ceiling. The current borrowing limit of GWCC is $200 million. This ceiling requires to be raised to accommodate the shortfall amount to $300 million. Fourth, approving the financial architecture, such as the bond framework, routing, tax breaks, and incentives.

It is apparent that the political pressure for a new stadium is coming from an existing private business seeking additional subsidy. Why then is legislative energy diverted towards this discussion rather than addressing Georgia’s core problems?

Georgia has the 5th highest poverty rate in the Nation. Over 2 million of Georgians are without health insurance. Unemployment rate remains well above 9.2 percent. With the depressing economy and surrounding poverty, hotel-motel tax could be put to better use instead of on pet project with a retractable roof.

Nathan Horton

10:05 am on Wednesday, January 30, 2013

Well Said. While I disagree with the writer's proposed uses for the funds, like healthcare, There are some really good points. I believe the funds would be better used to reduce taxes, entice new businesses to Atlanta, repair the failing infrastructure, etc.

Reply
Comment_arrow

David Womack

6:56 am on Thursday, January 31, 2013

I agree, Atlanta needs infrastructure! Personally i want an open air stadium built either at the old GM site in Doraville or even further north up 85. Why build a covered football stadium in the South?????

David Womack

6:51 am on Thursday, January 31, 2013

I loved the arguement that we won't/can't get a SuperBowl until we get a new dome. New Orleans Superdome was completed in 1974! It's 40 years old, referbished in 2006, Georgia Dome 20 years old, referbished in 2007, what gives? . How are we making a 30 year deal, when the last one didn't last 20 years?

The ONMI, 25 years, was around longer than they want to keep the dome? Fulton county statium 30 years? I just don't understand getting rid of the dome yet.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Jimmy

1:01 pm on Friday, February 1, 2013

Great point about the Superdome! This year will be the 7th Super Bowl at the Superdome...
Why do we need a retractable roof for the Super Bowl here? Last time we had the Super Bowl here, we had an ice storm! Not to mention a double murder!
Tell Roger Goodell he can have his Super Bowl...And tell Arthur Blank that if he moves the Falcons to LA, he might as well move Home Depot too, cuz a bunch of us will become Lowe's shoppers.

Mayank Dhakal

10:32 pm on Friday, February 1, 2013

Here lies the problem:
If we are to move the Atlanta Falcons to LA, Georgia will suffer greatly. LA is one of the "Must See Places" in the United States. Pursuing this further, LA was also the "Most Must Go to Places" in 2011. Not only that, but LA is currently the 2nd most populated city in the US, which has its advantages. Georgia will suffer because of the shortage of income that Georgia will be getting due to the fact that people will no longer come to Georgia to get a glimpse of the Falcons; instead they will be heading to LA.
Here is a heartfelt note to the Atlanta Falcons:
STOP COMPLAINING AND ACTUALLY WIN A GAME THAT COUNTS. If you are a Falcon's fan, you don't say IF they lose you say WHEN they lose because they always manage to lose. If you can't win a game in your arena, with the majority of your fans filling the stadium, what makes you think that you’re going to win with a retractable roof? Plus, you won't need it; you won't make it to the Super Bowl anytime soon if you keep doing what you’re doing now

Reply

David Womack

11:24 pm on Friday, February 1, 2013

@mayank=troll.... LA must really be suffering when the last two NFL teams left for Oakland and St. Louis...especially if they want the Falcons.

Reply

David Womack

11:29 pm on Friday, February 1, 2013

Many teams use the threat of moving an existing team to LA during negotiations for new or renovated stadiums, The NFL likes not having a franchise there to help the rest of the league.
The threat of moving a team to LA is more valuable for the NFL than actually placing a team there! It's the perfect bargaining chip for the league: Why would a franchise stay in, say, cold-weather, small-market Minnesota without a new stadium when big-market, celebrity-studded L.A. beckons?

Whenever there is a stadium issue in another city, that team suddenly ends up on a list of franchises that could relocate to sunny Southern California. Convenient.

Always the brides-maid, never the bride...

Reply

David Womack

11:36 pm on Friday, February 1, 2013

Besides, just like Atlanta, many residents of LA are originally from elsewhere in the US and tend to support teams from their previous cities

Reply

David Womack

11:48 pm on Friday, February 1, 2013

The Falcons deserve better than LA, like El Paso

Reply

Leave a comment